17 replies to this topic

[micksherlock]

I just wanted to mindlessly rant for the moment about debating with Christian apologists. I have just been involved in a debate which went round and round and round and I think I am beginning to feel a little dizzy. The bible has many problems! No, it doesn't! Ok, let's look at some of the interpolations and forgeries that made their way into the texts of the NT. That is just nonesense! Everything that is in the bible is the innerant word of God! If you read it again and listen to your heart, you will realize this! Ok, but I haven't begun to discuss these problems yet! Do you want to hear the first forgery! There are no forgeries! May I at least present one for you to consider. What is the point, your mind is corrupted by the 'father of lies,' this is why you think there are mistakes in the bible! (bible verse after bible verse on Satan's wiley ways!) Ok, let us look at the issue of Satan! Wasn't the word Satan originally a Hebrew term used to describe a person who opposed another. David used it in that way, and in so doing was not referring at all to the devil, and also wasn't the Devil a Persian addition to Second Temple Judaism? You have no proof! (Proof submitted), Proof rejected. You will end up joining Lucifier in the pit! Ok, can we discuss Lucifier, and the origin of this term. As far as I am aware, Lucifer means light bearer, coming from the Latin Lux Ferre, which comes from the Hebrew Ben Shachar, Hylel, and wasn't Jesus called Lucifer in 1 Peter? Peter was called a Satan by the Lord! Yes, I wasn't referring to Peter, but the book, 1 Peter! I can see I am just waisting my time on you Michael! Have a nice time in Hell!

Please direct me to the nearest toilet!

[mcdaddy]

I hope you've learned your lesson and, in the future, never again embarrass yourself by striving against the Lard of Hosts and his vast army of angels. Let this day be a reminder to all those that visit this unholy website that no matter how tight your arguments, bullet-proof your logic, and non-fallacious your cognitive offerings, Yahweh Sabaoth will never be mocked, even though it may appear he is clearly mocked.
Daily.
The world over.

I could never do a formal debate with a fundy like that. Not bc I couldnt rip their arguments to shreds, but bc I would be lead of in cuffs for beating his head in with a microphone in surely less than the first 15 minutes due to sheer unadulterated rage.

They are, LITERALLY, impossible to work with. But don't worry, in time they'll die off with the dodo thanks to the accumulating body of evidence against their claims. Skepticism is on the rise, and the invention of the interwebz will be the number one factor in sending religion to its watery grave.

[micksherlock]

I hope you've learned your lesson and, in the future, never again embarrass yourself by striving against the Lard of Hosts and his vast army of angels. Let this day be a reminder to all those that visit this unholy website that no matter how tight your arguments, bullet-proof your logic, and non-fallacious your cognitive offerings, Yahweh Sabaoth will never be mocked, even though it may appear he is clearly mocked.
Daily.
The world over.

I could never do a formal debate with a fundy like that. Not bc I couldnt rip their arguments to shreds, but bc I would be lead of in cuffs for beating his head in with a microphone in surely less than the first 15 minutes due to sheer unadulterated rage.

They are, LITERALLY, impossible to work with. But don't worry, in time they'll die off with the dodo thanks to the accumulating body of evidence against their claims. Skepticism is on the rise, and the invention of the interwebz will be the number one factor in sending religion to its watery grave.

Thanks. Needed to vent!!!!! Ahhh, that is better! I think I might start posting small excerpts of some of my debates with apologists, on this forum. It might make for good entertainment. The best response I have ever received was; "you son, need your tongue cut out!" To which I responed, But then how could I defame your ridiculous superstition, oh, yeh, I can just write books! Go ahead!

[mcdaddy]

That would provide many a lulz

[florduh]

I gave it up a long time ago. Arguing with theists is fruitless irritation.

As I posted in another thread:

One might as well argue about the moon.

"The Magical Book of Everything tells me the moon is made of green cheese."

"No, we actually have samples of the moon's surface that our scientists have examined. It's not cheese."

"The book says green cheese, so your scientists must be lying to discredit the book."

[freeasabird]

Did you really think you were going to win a debate with a brainwashed person? Maybe you should have your own head checked.

[3DollarBill]

To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. -Thomas Paine

You will never win a debate with an opponent who holds his own position to be unfalsifiable no matter the evidence against it. DO NOT get suckered into any formal debates with these people. They will set up the terms so that you cannot win...see this thread:
http://www.ex-christ...contradictions/
There's a link in there to debate.org where you can see exactly what the jackass fundy did to an unsuspecting ApostateDave (although he called him out and recovered nicely).

[3DollarBill]

And another damn thing...if they're losing then they just shut the whole thing down by playing the "you're gonna burn in hell!" card. It's the mother of all scare tactics and while it doesn't serve to convince you of anything it sure can kill your momentum in an argument.

[tothemorning]

Faith is there evidence...it is so difficult to get through to them for this very reason. They are excused from intelligence by way of faith.

[mcdaddy]

Faith is EVIDENCE of things unseen right!??

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAA

[micksherlock]

I gave it up a long time ago. Arguing with theists is fruitless irritation.

As I posted in another thread:

One might as well argue about the moon.

"The Magical Book of Everything tells me the moon is made of green cheese."

"No, we actually have samples of the moon's surface that our scientists have examined. It's not cheese."

"The book says green cheese, so your scientists must be lying to discredit the book."

I know this, yet I enjoy bashing my head against walls, for some reason. I think I may have been dropped on my head as a child, I don't know!

Anyway, I find some comfort in the words of Social-Psychologist, Leon Festinger, who said:

A man with a conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point.

We have all experienced the futility of trying to change a strong conviction, especially if the convinced person has some investment in his belief. We are familiar with the variety of ingenious defenses with which people protect their convictions, managing to keep them unscathed through the most devastating attacks. But man’s resourcefulness goes beyond simply protecting a belief. Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart; suppose further that he has a commitment to this belief, that he has taken irrevocable actions because of it; finally, suppose that he is presented with evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence, that his belief is wrong: what will happen? The individual will frequently emerge, not only unshaken, but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed, he may even show a new fervor about convincing and converting other people to his view.


Festinger, L., Riecken, H. W., & Schachter, S. When Prophecy fails. University of Minnesota Press. (1956). p. 3.

[micksherlock]

You are giving them the field.
I prefer a more radical critique of the bible itself. I could care less about the content of the text and the philosophical arguments.
We have plenty of solid well-documented texts from 0 AD and before.
But with the bible we remove all critical considerations and just let our emotions and feelings run wild.
Why can we prove beyond doubt that Plato wrote the Republic, that Xenophon, Livy, Tacitus, Josephus, Arian, Thucydides, and Confucius wrote their texts, but with the bible we can't even prove who wrote the books or what the original text is....???

Some of my writing on this:
http://www.ex-christ...christian-bible

and also

Bart Ehrman on Original Biblical Text Alterations and the Dubious Authenticity of the King James Bible:

1. The doctrine of the Trinity doesn't appear in any intelligible forms in the original biblical texts and was tacked on sometime between 200 AD and 400 AD by the Romans (who were by then governed directly by the military). Next time you invoke the trinity, remember that it is not an original Christian idea, but a Roman one. The 12 final verses of modern Mark are absent from the two oldest and best manuscripts of Mark's Gospel. They were hatched later and added by different authors. "The story of The Woman Taken in Adultery" is not found in the oldest and best manuscripts of the Gospel of John. Again, added later.

2. The King James (published 1611) is translated directly from Greek texts collected by Erasmus around 1500. And these Greek texts were written by Christian scholars around 1200 AD. Yes - that is 1200 AD - more than a millennium after most of the earliest Christian happenings - which is plenty of time for all kinds of ideological fetishes to be added or subtracted. So, in case you didn't know already, the texts of the definitive English translation of the Bible actually go back just about 800 years.

Fairly astonishing facts from Bart Ehrman - University of North Carolina professor and respected authority on Biblical manuscripts in his book: Misquoting Jesus

______________________________



Do not give these punks the field. They have no water to swim in. Drain what's left of their pool, put their arguments into a black box, run it through with swords and pitchforks and helicopter it out and drop it into the deepest recesses of the Mariana Trench never to be seen nor heard of again.

Cheers

thanks. Yeh, I have studied Ehrman's works, both popular and academic, along with Metzger, and quite a few others. On occaision I present these to my accuser, or 'Satan' and more often than not, I get the following response; They are liberal scholars, whose works are influenced by the devil, then, from there, I sometimes travel into epistemological waters, only to have my Christian brother call me a 'Post-Modernist' and flee the scene of the debate. If they stick around long enough to arrive with me, back to the 4th century BCE (Plato), they usually call him a Pagan demon lover, to which I respond with Justin Martyr's comments re: Plato, as a righteous and wise man, inspired by the light. Sometimes I go into Bible errors and inconsistencies, other times, as menitoned, textual criticism, and other times, historical arguments, based on the historical method, and other times still, comparative mythology. Failing all of this, I move into psychology and sociology, my academic areas of comfort, and when all of this fails, I come to Ex-C and rant, to avoid going cross-eyed!

[FeelHappy]

I have only one question to ask you.....who are you going to believe? THE ALMIGHTY GOD CREATOR OF THE HEAVENS AND EARTH AND YOUR CREATOR or simple fallible weak ignorant man, heck man couldn't even create a blade of grass out of the air yet god created this world out of nothing! Get your facts straight, and get back to the inerrant and infallible good book.

[mcdaddy]

I have only one question to ask you.....who are you going to believe? THE ALMIGHTY GOD CREATOR OF THE HEAVENS AND EARTH AND YOUR CREATOR or simple fallible weak ignorant man, heck man couldn't even create a blade of grass out of the air yet god created this world out of nothing! Get your facts straight, and get back to the inerrant and infallible good book.

I'm sorry to have ever questioned my Lord.

Scourge me.

[ficino]

Faith is there evidence...it is so difficult to get through to them for this very reason. They are excused from intelligence by way of faith.

hey tothemorning, haven't seen you on here before, so welcome! Are you in the Armed Forces (as your avatar suggests)?

[midniterider]

I just wanted to mindlessly rant for the moment about debating with Christian apologists. I have just been involved in a debate which went round and round and round and I think I am beginning to feel a little dizzy. The bible has many problems! No, it doesn't! Ok, let's look at some of the interpolations and forgeries that made their way into the texts of the NT. That is just nonesense! Everything that is in the bible is the innerant word of God! If you read it again and listen to your heart, you will realize this! Ok, but I haven't begun to discuss these problems yet! Do you want to hear the first forgery! There are no forgeries! May I at least present one for you to consider. What is the point, your mind is corrupted by the 'father of lies,' this is why you think there are mistakes in the bible! (bible verse after bible verse on Satan's wiley ways!) Ok, let us look at the issue of Satan! Wasn't the word Satan originally a Hebrew term used to describe a person who opposed another. David used it in that way, and in so doing was not referring at all to the devil, and also wasn't the Devil a Persian addition to Second Temple Judaism? You have no proof! (Proof submitted), Proof rejected. You will end up joining Lucifier in the pit! Ok, can we discuss Lucifier, and the origin of this term. As far as I am aware, Lucifer means light bearer, coming from the Latin Lux Ferre, which comes from the Hebrew Ben Shachar, Hylel, and wasn't Jesus called Lucifer in 1 Peter? Peter was called a Satan by the Lord! Yes, I wasn't referring to Peter, but the book, 1 Peter! I can see I am just waisting my time on you Michael! Have a nice time in Hell!

Please direct me to the nearest toilet!

Debate tactics:

Non-xians use logic, reasoning, critical thinking and evidence to support their conclusions
Xians make stuff up spur of the moment and pass it along as fact

Why would you debate with someone who just makes stuff up? You'll never win. :-) They will never concede. They will continue to make up baloney to defend their position.

[micksherlock]

I just wanted to mindlessly rant for the moment about debating with Christian apologists. I have just been involved in a debate which went round and round and round and I think I am beginning to feel a little dizzy. The bible has many problems! No, it doesn't! Ok, let's look at some of the interpolations and forgeries that made their way into the texts of the NT. That is just nonesense! Everything that is in the bible is the innerant word of God! If you read it again and listen to your heart, you will realize this! Ok, but I haven't begun to discuss these problems yet! Do you want to hear the first forgery! There are no forgeries! May I at least present one for you to consider. What is the point, your mind is corrupted by the 'father of lies,' this is why you think there are mistakes in the bible! (bible verse after bible verse on Satan's wiley ways!) Ok, let us look at the issue of Satan! Wasn't the word Satan originally a Hebrew term used to describe a person who opposed another. David used it in that way, and in so doing was not referring at all to the devil, and also wasn't the Devil a Persian addition to Second Temple Judaism? You have no proof! (Proof submitted), Proof rejected. You will end up joining Lucifier in the pit! Ok, can we discuss Lucifier, and the origin of this term. As far as I am aware, Lucifer means light bearer, coming from the Latin Lux Ferre, which comes from the Hebrew Ben Shachar, Hylel, and wasn't Jesus called Lucifer in 1 Peter? Peter was called a Satan by the Lord! Yes, I wasn't referring to Peter, but the book, 1 Peter! I can see I am just waisting my time on you Michael! Have a nice time in Hell!

Please direct me to the nearest toilet!

Debate tactics:

Non-xians use logic, reasoning, critical thinking and evidence to support their conclusions
Xians make stuff up spur of the moment and pass it along as fact

Why would you debate with someone who just makes stuff up? You'll never win. :-) They will never concede. They will continue to make up baloney to defend their position.

This is true. But, something inside me, won't give up. Our world is suffering, and it is my opinion that we need all hands (minds) on deck. I could be wrong!