Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited January 19, 2017, 11:54 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Statistically Speaking - QP's and PP's

Topic closed. 1161 replies. Last post 6 years ago by Todd.

Page 66 of 78
54
PrintE-mailLink
visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
Posted: August 18, 2010, 1:33 am - IP Logged

see joker,  unlike you,  i accept facts when they ARE shown to me, 

The word "Facts" and you have no place in the same sentence. Are you kidding me?

You believe in things that can't be proven. Even you can understand that logic, can't you? You are a smart individual, but have a major bias in your equations. Sorry, but the integrity is corrupted.

Flip Flops are only for the feet....lol

unfortunately for you,  the world has access to pre recorded history.  not just me,  and completely outside of "me"

history that was around long before your wishful thinking heart wishing it wasn't true

true recorded history is outside "my bias",    when a person actually peruses it with ambivilance. 

  something you have never truthfully done. 

   your first move when coming at this is to make it go away INSTEAD OF disproving it.

therein lies the difference.

it's like me and systems play. 

 i want to see if it's real,  so that i CAN change my opinion about it,  and my push in here is to get people to come to the table so that we all can see whether or not it's true.  i am not afraid of it,  so my deal is NOT to make it "untrue"

that's YOUR GAME

the other difference in a guy like you and "your push",  and a guy like me and mine,  is i stay the course to see it thru to the end.  65pages worth.     you michael jackson'ed after a couple of trading of posts the last go around

there is no way you are remotely interested in what might be true,  and that precludes any "proof"  even before it's offered.

you can't replicate george washingtons life accurately/truthfully,  and all that he did as being "integrity corrupted",   just because you may not have liked his politics,  but yet you apply that feloniously thinking bias on aspects of recorded history for which you wish weren't true.

you love the selective history game,   but ultimate truth doesn't

 

death decides a mans "selective"  process,  and that is a final grade.    passing or failing

i will take $500 for history,  alex.   pre recorded history

 

 

            "i am .........."meant to"       

P.S.,  that RJoH  is a stand up guy.  thanks,  vision

         until further notice,  it's  france everyday

    visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
    light on my feet
    United States
    Member #356
    May 20, 2002
    2744 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: August 18, 2010, 1:44 am - IP Logged

    Why don't you just address the issue right here and now? You want proof, but don't follow your own regulations. That's called hypocrisy. You can't demand proof of one thing and just accept the other without proof.

    Show me the beef...!....lol

     

    300 fulfilled pre recorded in history before He was ever born - prophecies by one man.

    right to the "T" on every single one.

    no man in history has ever come close to that replication vs claims of Himself and others post birth,   especially by "others"  before He was ever born

     

    we will start there,  an we will go until you back out of the room again.

     

    now that you asked me,  don't pull your sideshow/sidetrack antics you always do when you can't refute something,  and change the subject or redirect the conversation into something else.

    that's a man that can't handle what he brought upon himself,  and that's been your previous methodology before.

    redirectitis

    you asked me to give you proof,  and i opened the door,  so stay the course this time on the subject presented

    well?

                "i am .........."meant to"       

    P.S.,  that RJoH  is a stand up guy.  thanks,  vision

             until further notice,  it's  france everyday


      United States
      Member #75358
      June 1, 2009
      5345 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: August 18, 2010, 10:19 am - IP Logged

      300 fulfilled pre recorded in history before He was ever born - prophecies by one man.

      right to the "T" on every single one.

      no man in history has ever come close to that replication vs claims of Himself and others post birth,   especially by "others"  before He was ever born

       

      we will start there,  an we will go until you back out of the room again.

       

      now that you asked me,  don't pull your sideshow/sidetrack antics you always do when you can't refute something,  and change the subject or redirect the conversation into something else.

      that's a man that can't handle what he brought upon himself,  and that's been your previous methodology before.

      redirectitis

      you asked me to give you proof,  and i opened the door,  so stay the course this time on the subject presented

      well?

      You call that proof? Give me a break. I already debunked that failed attempt by you to show that as proof, but you never addressed the issues because you probably didn't take the time to read it. You won't read it because you're afraid to hear the truth.

      I'm not going down that road all over again. It's futile to argue with the likes of you. You have horse blinders on and will never take them off.

      Now read what I posted the first time and maybe you can address the issues this article points out, and not write 17 paragraphs of an attempted witty response that has no ties with the article below.

      Can you do that? I doubt it, but I'm reposting it anyways.

      According to you, If it's not written in the Bible, then it's not proof. You've got to do a lot better than that Joe......

       

      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Bible apologists love to use probability arguments, and most readers have undoubtedly encountered them in apologetic literature. Some situation perceived to prove either the existence of God (life developing from nonlife) or the inspiration of the Bible (prophecy fulfillment) is analyzed in terms of likeliness or probability. Most of these arguments, of course, are based on purely arbitrary factors selected to make the theistic or biblical position look good. I have yet to see one that can survive careful scrutiny.

      At the debate in Portland, Texas, that Earle Beach referred to in the foregoing article, my opponent applied probability to the prophecy-fulfillment argument. He mentioned several times how truly amazing it was that so many Old Testament prophecies had been fulfilled precisely and exactly in the life of Jesus of Nazareth. His premise was that over 300 such prophecies were made and later fulfilled. At one point when he was under cross-examination, he stated that the probability of any 50 of these prophecies being precisely fulfilled was 11 sextillion 250 quintillion to one. The figure written out would look like this: 11,250,000,000,000,000,000,000. Since the statement was made under cross-examination, I could not respond directly to it without calling for a resumption of time, and at the moment I was pursuing a line of questioning that I wanted to continue. In reviewing the tapes, I was reminded that I forgot to return to this issue to show the absurdity of the statement, so I will do that now. If Mr. Dobbs wishes to respond to my comments, we will gladly publish his statement in the next issue. My prediction is that he won't respond. If he doesn't, I wonder what he would say the odds are that I could make a prophecy like this and have it fulfilled.

      The major problem with Mr. Dobbs's argument is that it simply assumes that prophecies were both made and fulfilled, but he has no real evidence to support those assumptions. As I did point out in the debate, when these fulfillment claims are studied within their original contexts, one can easily see that most of them had nothing at all to do with the applications that New Testament writers arbitrarily gave to them. An excellent example would be the one that Earle Beach cited in his article. Jeremiah 31:15 is a statement that in the original context was referring to the Jews who had been scattered abroad during the Diaspora. Jeremiah figuratively referred to this as Rachel weeping for her children, but within the context of the statement, there was a promise in the very next verse that these children would "come back from the land of the enemy." Obviously, then, Jeremiah was in no sense talking about a brutal massacre of Jewish children, so to twist the passage and give it the application that Matthew did can only be seen as an act of desperation on the part of someone, with no real evidence on his side, trying to prove that his man Jesus had fulfilled Jewish prophecies of the coming Messiah. When we add to that the complete lack of reference in contemporary secular histories to Herod's slaughter of the innocents, we have compelling reason to believe that this event that Matthew claimed was a prophecy fulfillment never even happened.

      In his article, Earle Beach mentioned that the dangerous-child myth on which this story was obviously based is a common theme in pagan religions that antedated Christianity. Space won't allow a review of all these myths, but the Hindu version is worth looking at, because it is strikingly parallel to Matthew's story. According to Hindu literature, when Krishna, the eighth incarnation of the god Vishnu, was born to the virgin Devaki, he was visited by wise men who had been guided to him by a star. Angels also announced the birth to herdsmen in the nearby countryside. When King Kansa heard about the miraculous birth of this child, he sent men to "kill all the infants in the neighboring places," but a "heavenly voice" whispered to the foster father of Krishna and warned him to take the child and flee across the Jumna river. (In this Hindu legend, we recognize many other parallels to the infancy of Jesus other than the dangerous-child element.) In Bible Myths and Their Parallels in Other Religions, author T. W. Doane cited a work by Thomas Maurice, Indian Antiquities, vol. 1, pp. 112-113, which described an "immense sculpture" in a cave-temple at Elephanta that depicts the Indian children being slaughtered while men and women apparently representing their parents are standing by pleading for the children (p. 167).

      A study of pagan mythology would establish similar parallels in the stories of Zoroaster (Persian), Tammuz (Babylonian), Perseus and Adonis (Greek), Horus (Egyptian), Romulus and Remus (Roman), Gautama (the founder of Buddhism), and many others, because various elements of the dangerous-child myth can be found in the stories of all these pagan gods and prophets. All of these myths antedate, usually by many centuries, Matthew's account of the massacre of the children at Bethlehem. Krishna, for example, was a Hindu savior who allegedly lived in the sixth century B. C., so when a study of ancient world literature shows that an unusual event like the slaughter of the innocents seemed to have happened everywhere , reasonable people will realize that it probably happened nowhere or, at best, that it happened only once and was thereafter plagiarized. Since the story occurs many times before Matthew's version of it, we can only conclude that no such event happened in Bethlehem as Matthew--and only Matthew--claimed. Just like that, then, Mr. Dobbs finds one of his fifty amazing prophecy-fulfillments vaporizing right before his eyes.

      If space permitted, I could easily establish that many of the other alleged prophecy fulfillments in the life of Jesus have their parallels in ancient mythology. Mr. Dobbs alleged that the miracles of Jesus had been prophesied in Isaiah 53:4-5, his crucifixion in Psalm 22:16, his resurrection in Psalm 16:10, and his ascension in Psalm 68:18. Examination of these passages in context, however, reveal the same problem that Earle Beach and I discussed above relative to Jeremiah 31:15. The statements are notoriously obscure and become prophecies only through the arbitrary claims of the New Testament writers who lifted them out of context and applied them to situations that the original writers were not referring to. So there is no way that anyone can establish that these "prophecies" were originally intended to be prophecies. All we have is the mere unsubstantiated word of the New Testament claimants that they were meant to be prophecies, and that is not a good enough foundation to build a probability argument on.

      To that problem must be added the one cited above. Christianity is not the only religion to claim that its savior performed miracles, was crucified, was resurrected from the dead, and ascended into heaven. Hindu writings attributed all of these to Krishna. In fact, the lives of Jesus and Krishna, as related in the respective literatures of their followers, are so strikingly parallel that reasonable people can only conclude that the New Testament gospel writers borrowed many of their ideas from a savior mythology that had evolved long before the first century. In fact, virgin-born, crucified and resurrected saviors were as common as dirt in pagan mythology, and if that does not destroy probability arguments (as they pertain to prophecy fulfillment) in the minds of Mr. Dobbs and all others who see merit in them, then they are obviously determined to believe the folly of the Christian myth no matter how compelling the evidence to the contrary.

      Another fallacy in this probability argument is that it completely discounts the possibility of deliberate contrivance. At one point when I was the cross-examiner, I pressed Mr. Dobbs to tell the audience if it would be at all possible for someone to study the Old Testament scriptures, interpret a number of obscure passages as prophecies, and then write a biography of a fictional character to make it appear that all of these "prophecies" had been fulfilled in his life. The tapes will show that Dobbs desperately evaded answering the question, even though I presented it to him three times.

      In a letter to fundamentalist writer Chuck Missler, Jim Lippard very effectively addressed this same issue in commenting on a probability argument that Missler applied to prophecy fulfillments:

      (Y)ou estimate the probability of a Messiah claimant entering Jerusalem on a donkey based on how many candidate Messiahs have done this, assuming (without evidence) that it is less than one in a hundred. Not only is this probably wrong, the correct question to ask is, "How many prospective Messiahs, knowing of the existence of this prophecy, would bother taking the trouble to fulfill it?" It's not as though entering Jerusalem on a donkey is beyond the capacity of a human being to intentionally fulfill. I'd assess the probability as on the order of one in one (June 8, 1993, p. 2).

      My purpose in questioning Dobbs was to show that these alleged prophecy fulfillments never even happened, that the gospel writers simply went through the Old Testament looking for statements that they could construe as prophecies and then wrote the biographies of their Messiah to make it appear that all of the prophecies had been wonderfully fulfilled. Lippard's approach was to show that, even if the acts of "prophecy-fulfillment" actually did happen, they could have been done deliberately in order to give the pretending Messiah occasion to claim that he had indeed fulfilled the Jewish prophecies. Either way of looking at it, there would be nothing exceptional to claim, in this case, about a man riding into Jerusalem on a donkey. How many Jews descended from Abraham through David can we suppose rode into Jerusalem on a donkey at one time or another? Any one of them could have claimed that he had fulfilled this "prophecy."

      With this background established, I can now demonstrate the absurdity of Dobbs's probability argument. I have not had an expert on probability factors check the argument to verify that the probability against the fulfillment of "any fifty" of the "more than 300" prophecies about Jesus would be over 11 sextillion to one. For the sake of argument, I will simply assume that the math is correct. If the figures are correct, all that Dobbs has accomplished is to show that the odds against his being able to prove that 50 Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled in the life of Jesus would be 11 sextillion to one.

      To show why this is so, let's return to the slaughter of the innocents. The claim was made that this event was prophesied in Jeremiah 31:15, so we will let this "prophecy" be number one on the list of fifty. To begin proving his probability argument Dobbs would have to demonstrate ABSOLUTELY, beyond any question, that Jeremiah intended the statement as a prophecy of Herod's slaughter of the innocents. If there is any doubt at all that Jeremiah so intended the statement, then no fact of prophesy utterance has been established. Since I dispute that this was what Jeremiah meant and since there are hundreds, even thousands of others like me, who also dispute it, this is positive proof that Dobbs has not yet established beyond even reasonable doubt, much less absolute doubt, that Jeremiah's statement meant what it must mean in order to be a prophecy. Let's assume, however, just for the sake of argument that Dobbs could prove that Jeremiah did mean for the statement to be a prediction of the slaughter of children at some time in the prophet's future. After he has done that, Dobbs must then prove ABSOLUTELY that Herod's massacre of the children at Bethlehem can be established as a historical fact. The complete absence of any reference to such an event by any other New Testament writer or any secular historian contemporary to the times makes this an impossible task for Dobbs or anyone else. However, if an event that is allegedly a prophecy fulfillment cannot be factually established, how can any rational person contend that it was a prophecy fulfillment?

      Again, for the sake of argument, let's assume that Dobbs could somehow prove that Herod's massacre of the innocents did in fact occur. At that point, all he would have accomplished is to prove that ONE--just one--prophecy was fulfilled in the life of Jesus. Now he would have to take the 49 others and go through the same process, one by one, painstakingly proving in each case that (1) the original statement was indeed intended as a prophecy of something that would happen in the life of the Messiah and that (2) the event prophesied did in fact happen to Jesus. This would necessitate taking the prophecy claims about the virgin birth of Jesus, the miracles he performed, his triumphal entry, his betrayal, his crucifixion, his treatment during the crucifixion, his resurrection, his ascension, and forty-one other alleged prophecy fulfillments and proving what was hypothetically proved about the slaughter of the innocents. No reasonable person can believe that Dobbs or anyone else could possibly do this, because the very moment that the least element of doubt arose in any one of the 49 remaining steps (after proving prophecy fulfillment in the massacre of the innocents), the entire probability argument would collapse like a house of cards.

      So if Mr. Dobbs's math is correct in his calculation of probability, the odds against his proving that Jesus fulfilled 50 different prophecies would be over 11 sextillion to one. So much for probability and prophecy fulfillment!

        visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
        light on my feet
        United States
        Member #356
        May 20, 2002
        2744 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: August 18, 2010, 4:52 pm - IP Logged

        whoever it was that you jacked your "excuse" from,   you need to get his email address,  because you are going to need his "help" (seeing how you originally couldn't "debunk it" yourself).

        you can apologize to the board in advance,  for unnessarily causing this thread to go down an unrelated road.

        i sure don't mind taking the time it takes to defend my claims,  but you pull this stuff at LP all the time unnecessarily.

        i will come back later tonight and easily handle what you thought was an excuse.

        in the meantime,  remember that you can throw out "biased interpretive"  aspects of prophecy,  and even the "self fulfillment"  arguement and there would still be enough pre recorded history on both sides of the qualification scale that no reasonable thinking man can explain away.

        just 8.

        some mathematicians eveidently calculated the odds of one man fulfilling just 8 prophecies in history,  would be akin to covering the state of texas 2 feet deep in silver dollars.  taking 1 silver dollar and painting it RED.  blind folding someone and asking them to pick that 1 RED silver dollar out of the pile on the FIRST TRY.

        just 8.

        tonight,  i will pick 8 out of the pile myself,  ones that no one can write off,   and i will display them so you can go cull another 'excuse"  off the internet

         

        if a man actually has a strong position,  it's defensible,  it just takes time and effort.

        at least no one can accuse me of being "unwilling"

                    "i am .........."meant to"       

        P.S.,  that RJoH  is a stand up guy.  thanks,  vision

                 until further notice,  it's  france everyday


          United States
          Member #68002
          December 10, 2008
          477 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: August 18, 2010, 5:04 pm - IP Logged

          JOKER17

          Your  wasting your time I already been down this road with this  individual people of faith don't wanna hear the real truth they wanna live in there religious fantasy world it might be best too address this with him in private that  way you don't have too hold back  and say what you  want without offending anyone  on the board that may agree with his views (that's what I did)


            United States
            Member #75358
            June 1, 2009
            5345 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: August 18, 2010, 5:16 pm - IP Logged

            whoever it was that you jacked your "excuse" from,   you need to get his email address,  because you are going to need his "help" (seeing how you originally couldn't "debunk it" yourself).

            you can apologize to the board in advance,  for unnessarily causing this thread to go down an unrelated road.

            i sure don't mind taking the time it takes to defend my claims,  but you pull this stuff at LP all the time unnecessarily.

            i will come back later tonight and easily handle what you thought was an excuse.

            in the meantime,  remember that you can throw out "biased interpretive"  aspects of prophecy,  and even the "self fulfillment"  arguement and there would still be enough pre recorded history on both sides of the qualification scale that no reasonable thinking man can explain away.

            just 8.

            some mathematicians eveidently calculated the odds of one man fulfilling just 8 prophecies in history,  would be akin to covering the state of texas 2 feet deep in silver dollars.  taking 1 silver dollar and painting it RED.  blind folding someone and asking them to pick that 1 RED silver dollar out of the pile on the FIRST TRY.

            just 8.

            tonight,  i will pick 8 out of the pile myself,  ones that no one can write off,   and i will display them so you can go cull another 'excuse"  off the internet

             

            if a man actually has a strong position,  it's defensible,  it just takes time and effort.

            at least no one can accuse me of being "unwilling"

            I don't need his help to help me prove anything to you. I just posted this because you obviously don't take anything i say and respond without your jibberish. I've done that with pages and pages of proof yet you still come back with nonesense.

            Your beliefs are just that. ....beliefs. Nothing founded or grounded on evidence. You claim historical evidence, but other religions have supposed historical evidence. So what?....Everyone has a story to tell....Big freakin deal !

            You're right, I should'nt have ever started this with you again, but I had no choice to point out your hypocrisy involving PROOF. You talk out of the two sides of your mouth, and when it's advantageous to you to satisfy your delusional belief in fairytales, then those same standards you uphold in this thread don't count.

            Bottom line, there is no proof, there has never ever been any proof, because if there was, debates would not have gone this far by the greatest minds for the last 1000 years. But you'll never get it cause your mind is totally numb to any facts presented, and GOD only knows the long laundry list of facts I presented in the other thread.

            Don't accuse me of running away. I'm just sick and tired of arguing with someone who doesn't have a freakin clue. Go ahead and believe in your fairytales. Maybe the tooth fairy will leave you a quarter in the morning.

            And go ahead and demand proof that Personal picks are better than QPs....Yeah...keep demanding proof. Keep digging your own hole everytime you demand proof. It won't matter If someone provides proof that Self picks are better. It simply won't matter. Your mindest won't allow proof to enter. It's simply impossible for your brain to do this.


              United States
              Member #75358
              June 1, 2009
              5345 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: August 18, 2010, 5:38 pm - IP Logged

              JOKER17

              Your  wasting your time I already been down this road with this  individual people of faith don't wanna hear the real truth they wanna live in there religious fantasy world it might be best too address this with him in private that  way you don't have too hold back  and say what you  want without offending anyone  on the board that may agree with his views (that's what I did)

              I know, but he demands proof in this thread and I thought that was kind of ironic....lol

              I'm in no way trying to change his faith based beliefs cause that's all it is. That's why it's called a "faith based" belief, because there is no evidence. I merely demanded proof, as he did with the subject of this thread. A Double standard If you ask me.

               I even uploaded a few Youtube vids showing how ALL of the major religions were derived from the Astrological signs, and how the Jesus stories were plagiarised. Those stories are ubiquitous throughout a lot of religions prior to Christ's time, among a hundred other tid bits of proof like the light from distant galaxies billions of light years reaching our eyes today, proving the universe CANNOT be only 6 or 10 thousand years old. Plus many other reasons, but you're right. It's like talking to a brick wall because he just comes back with Bible quotes, not addressing the issues I just listed.

              Oh well....there's only so much one man can do. And I don't want to keep repeating myself.

              The most entertaining aspect of this is that he really believes there is historical proof. Events that happened, thus proving the prophecies were fullfilled...Yeah, self-fulfilling prophecies.

              If that's his best defense, then it's simply faith based and nothing more.


                United States
                Member #68002
                December 10, 2008
                477 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: August 18, 2010, 5:45 pm - IP Logged

                JOKER17

                I'm on no way trying to change his faith based beliefs cause that's all it is.

                 

                And that's the difference between religious  and  non-religious  folks they  wanna try and change the beliefs  of others forgetting that  FREE WILL says we can believe  whatever we want so anyone that claims they have absolute truth over other beliefs and if we don't follow along  we're doomed is WRONG!!!  (But anyway back too the lottery games)

                  truecritic's avatar - PirateTreasure
                  Michigan
                  United States
                  Member #22395
                  September 24, 2005
                  1583 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: August 18, 2010, 6:11 pm - IP Logged

                  JOKER17

                  I'm on no way trying to change his faith based beliefs cause that's all it is.

                   

                  And that's the difference between religious  and  non-religious  folks they  wanna try and change the beliefs  of others forgetting that  FREE WILL says we can believe  whatever we want so anyone that claims they have absolute truth over other beliefs and if we don't follow along  we're doomed is WRONG!!!  (But anyway back too the lottery games)

                  It is entirely too funny that someone can accept God without any proof but cannot accept that a self-pick lottery ticket can be better than a quick-pick.  They accept God based on what they hear or read, from what people say.  They don't accept self-picks based on what they hear or read, from what we have said.

                    four4me's avatar - gate1
                    MD
                    United States
                    Member #1701
                    June 18, 2003
                    8393 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: August 18, 2010, 6:47 pm - IP Logged

                    Those stories are ubiquitous throughout a lot of religions prior to Christ's time, among a hundred other tid bits of proof like the light from distant galaxies billions of light years reaching our eyes today, proving the universe CANNOT be only 6 or 10 thousand years old.

                    They will tell you it's because he made it that way put the bones of our millions of year old ancestors in the ground the dinosaurs and everything else too.


                      United States
                      Member #75358
                      June 1, 2009
                      5345 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: August 18, 2010, 7:17 pm - IP Logged

                      It is entirely too funny that someone can accept God without any proof but cannot accept that a self-pick lottery ticket can be better than a quick-pick.  They accept God based on what they hear or read, from what people say.  They don't accept self-picks based on what they hear or read, from what we have said.

                      Go figure huh?


                        United States
                        Member #75358
                        June 1, 2009
                        5345 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: August 18, 2010, 7:41 pm - IP Logged

                        Those stories are ubiquitous throughout a lot of religions prior to Christ's time, among a hundred other tid bits of proof like the light from distant galaxies billions of light years reaching our eyes today, proving the universe CANNOT be only 6 or 10 thousand years old.

                        They will tell you it's because he made it that way put the bones of our millions of year old ancestors in the ground the dinosaurs and everything else too.

                        I've heard of that one too. I guess God is a prankster....lol

                        Yup, he's testing our faith by planting old bones in the ground and making it look like the galaxies are really that far out. But, he gave us brains to analyze, problem solve, invent, and have free will to use those tools to better understand our universe. Yet once we use those tools to prove that it's impossible, all of a sudden it becomes taboo to use those tools when it comes to religion.

                        You can't have it both ways. Either give us just enough brain power to eat, work and blindly follow rules, or give us unlimited brain potential and don't condemn us for using it to it's fullest.

                        Then after all is said and done, throw us in some fiery pit to burn forever and ever because we didn't pick the correct rules from a list of a thousand types of religions....ha ha ha ha ha ha ha....yeah...that makes a lot of sense.

                        We're allowed to think rationally but somehow we must also be lucky enough to pick the correct religion or face dire consequences. It's a crap shoot I guess.

                        Also, isn't it funny how they refute science as a reliable source, yet use it in some instances when it benefits them in a debate? I wish they'd make up their minds.

                        It's not rocket science folks. First.... All religions can't be correct at the same time. Second....A loving God wouldn't allow all that confusion to exist, and then condemn the ones for eternity, who just happened to be born in the wrong place on Earth. It's really that simple, and they make it more complicated than it has to be.

                         

                          jarasan's avatar - new patrick.gif
                          Harbinger
                          D.C./MD.
                          United States
                          Member #44103
                          July 30, 2006
                          5587 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: August 18, 2010, 9:49 pm - IP Logged

                          Praise be upon you,  self pickie! May blessings of self pickedness humble and luck us all up in that thing you do so good.

                             OHHHHH.........AHLLIWANNAISABIGWINNer!

                             OHHHHH.........AHLLIWANNAISABIGWINNer!

                            OHHHHH.........AHLLIWANNAISABIGWINNer!

                          rinse repeat 3x every day facing Gail Howard wherever she may be!

                            visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
                            light on my feet
                            United States
                            Member #356
                            May 20, 2002
                            2744 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: August 18, 2010, 10:20 pm - IP Logged

                            joker,  i knew you would pull your throw everything at me at one time methodology,  because you can't stick on point and see one thing thru to the end.

                            bomb and overwhelm them is what you think.

                            it's your weak smokescreen tactic

                            either way,  i already called you on it before you pulled it,  because you reveal the weakness of your position.

                            i will be back later to give this it's due,  and make sure you face replicated history,  instead of an anything goes "faith based" debate.

                            unfortunately you cannot argue with prerecorded history,  you can only attempt to white out it's presence.

                            not with me around to remind you about it

                            see who else will jump on the ship with you,  as i don't mind being all alone in this matter

                                        "i am .........."meant to"       

                            P.S.,  that RJoH  is a stand up guy.  thanks,  vision

                                     until further notice,  it's  france everyday


                              United States
                              Member #75358
                              June 1, 2009
                              5345 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: August 18, 2010, 10:25 pm - IP Logged

                              joker,  i knew you would pull your throw everything at me at one time methodology,  because you can't stick on point and see one thing thru to the end.

                              bomb and overwhelm them is what you think.

                              it's your weak smokescreen tactic

                              either way,  i already called you on it before you pulled it,  because you reveal the weakness of your position.

                              i will be back later to give this it's due,  and make sure you face replicated history,  instead of an anything goes "faith based" debate.

                              unfortunately you cannot argue with prerecorded history,  you can only attempt to white out it's presence.

                              not with me around to remind you about it

                              see who else will jump on the ship with you,  as i don't mind being all alone in this matter

                              Prerecorded history?....You mean what MEN wrote in books thousands of years ago?

                              Don't bother me with bronze age scribblings by illiterate folks who didn't have a clue about anything, as proof. Your wasting your time.

                                 
                                Page 66 of 78