crazy-tiger Posted November 3, 2005 Author Share Posted November 3, 2005 What I find incredible is how he's AGREEING with us... He's going so far as to help us prove that neither geneology can result in a Messiah, mainly because he's not managing to read what is being posted. Daniel... if you read what we've said you'll notice that WE'RE saying that the geneologies don't match, that Jeconiah HAD offspring, that those offspring would NOT sit on the throne of David, that the Messiah was of David's line THROUGH Solomon, that the bloodline was through the MALE ONLY, that you cannot adopt the bloodline, that if you can adopt the bloodline you are also adopting the bloodlines curse... You have said yourself that the geneologies don't match, that Jeconiah HAD offspring, that those offspring would NOT sit on the throne of David... You have DENIED the word of God and said that the Messiah didn't have to go through Solomon, DENIED the word of God and claimed that the bloodline was through females as well, DENIED the word of God and claimed that the bloodline could be adopted, DENIED the word of God and made the claim that the bloodline could be transfered through marriage from wife to husband, and insisted that adopting the bloodline would not include adopting the bloodlines curse... What does it say about your belief when you have to DENY your belief to defend it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Neil Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 What was that old argument that Manata used to try? It was something about holding one's worldview by assuming that it is false. It was amazingly hypocritical, for sure. I think we can apply that here, as well. Don't you think? We see that in order for Daniel to claim that Jesus was the messiah, he has to deny the rules for messiahship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkepticOfBible Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 Thank you by the way, for making such a long post with scriptural reference. I'm accused of trolling, while (at least) 50% of people that respond to my simply do just that. 100964[/snapback] I have moved the debate to Colleseum so that you may avoid the slandering http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?show...ndpost&p=101273 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Neil Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 What I find incredible is how he's AGREEING with us...Well, he has to, to some extent. He's locked into a nonsensical worldview that says "all or none", which means that anything we bring up out of the Bible, he has to say, "Yes, that's true." But therein also lies the problem, because even when the verses are shown to be incompatible, he has no choice but to assume that both are true, even when they cannot be. This is why I laugh at the presups who say that God accounts for logic (or, more accurately, that logic is God's nature), because the Biblical worldview must necessarily betray logic in order to be considered true. Daniel is a tool. I mean that in the most literal sense, because Daniel is the kind of apologist whose antics are so embarrassingly bad, that other Christians take notice and begin to re-evaluate their worldview. And many of them deconvert, even if the tool himself does not. The longer Daniel stays here, the more he betrays his own faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazy-tiger Posted November 3, 2005 Author Share Posted November 3, 2005 What was that old argument that Manata used to try? It was something about holding one's worldview by assuming that it is false. It was amazingly hypocritical, for sure. I think we can apply that here, as well. Don't you think? We see that in order for Daniel to claim that Jesus was the messiah, he has to deny the rules for messiahship. 101268[/snapback] I wonder if he'll notice that he's backed into a corner and, if he does, if he'll admit it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazy-tiger Posted November 3, 2005 Author Share Posted November 3, 2005 What I find incredible is how he's AGREEING with us...Well, he has to, to some extent. He's locked into a nonsensical worldview that says "all or none", which means that anything we bring up out of the Bible, he has to say, "Yes, that's true." But therein also lies the problem, because even when the verses are shown to be incompatible, he has no choice but to assume that both are true, even when they cannot be. Nice weakspot he's got there... Such a shame that it's so obvious and easy to reach.Daniel is a tool. I mean that in the most literal sense, because Daniel is the kind of apologist whose antics are so embarrassingly bad, that other Christians take notice and begin to re-evaluate their worldview. And many of them deconvert, even if the tool himself does not.While the rest of us can have a good laugh about him The longer Daniel stays here, the more he betrays his own faith. 101276[/snapback] All the more reason to keep him talking... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vulgaris Prime Posted November 3, 2005 Share Posted November 3, 2005 What was that old argument that Manata used to try? It was something about holding one's worldview by assuming that it is false. It was amazingly hypocritical, for sure. I think we can apply that here, as well. Don't you think? We see that in order for Daniel to claim that Jesus was the messiah, he has to deny the rules for messiahship. 101268[/snapback] I wonder if he'll notice that he's backed into a corner and, if he does, if he'll admit it? 101277[/snapback] You are an example of the triumph of hope over experience. Well done! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazy-tiger Posted November 4, 2005 Author Share Posted November 4, 2005 I wonder if he'll notice that he's backed into a corner and, if he does, if he'll admit it? 101277[/snapback] You are an example of the triumph of hope over experience. Well done! 101280[/snapback] I'm a realist... it's not impossible that it'll happen, just incredibly unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asuryan Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 I'm a realist... it's not impossible that it'll happen, just incredibly unlikely. 101287[/snapback] Of course. Something very traumatic and painful could happen to him overnight, and completely destroy all of his hope for the world and belief in a god. Then he could just admit that he's backed up in a corner, because he won't care anymore about what we say and do. Or maybe he'll slip in the shower, beat his head real hard against the wall, lose a good third of his neurons and then come back here, his effective IQ unchanged but maybe his remaining neurons could be the good ones. Who knows? It would be more desirable if these things weren't necessary to enlighten his mind and destroy that wall of reinforced shit he keeps surrounding himself with, though... But I'm realistic too and I find that the probabilities of that are just too low for me to keep hoping. And His Imaginary Friend knows I've tried to reason with the guy. *sighs* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vixentrox Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Or maybe the nagging doubts in the back of his mind will start the cracks that will eventually crumble the foundation of his faith like many of us experienced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel_1012 Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Thank you by the way, for making such a long post with scriptural reference. I'm accused of trolling, while (at least) 50% of people that respond to my simply do just that. 100964[/snapback] I have moved the debate to Colleseum so that you may avoid the slandering http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?show...ndpost&p=101273 101274[/snapback] Oh ok, now I see. I was curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asuryan Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Or maybe the nagging doubts in the back of his mind will start the cracks that will eventually crumble the foundation of his faith like many of us experienced. 101373[/snapback] We had those doubts - that's why we're here. I'm not so sure that he has those doubts. Lo, he seemeth, indeed, as strong in his faith as he's skilled in his trolling! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TruthofChrist (Rameus Spoof) Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Since he was born of the virgin birth, he never recieved the royal blood from Joseph Geez, you guys seriously need help if that's how you convince yourselves to dismiss the virgin birth. Yes God helped Mary to miraculously conceive...and you know how he did it? Gee I don't know maybe he used Joseph's seed to do it? If God planted Joseph's seed in Mary's womb then obviously that explains how Jesus is both the divine son of God, and also heir to the throne of David. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Silent One Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Since he was born of the virgin birth, he never recieved the royal blood from Joseph Geez, you guys seriously need help if that's how you convince yourselves to dismiss the virgin birth. Yes God helped Mary to miraculously conceive...and you know how he did it? Gee I don't know maybe he used Joseph's seed to do it? If God planted Joseph's seed in Mary's womb then obviously that explains how Jesus is both the divine son of God, and also heir to the throne of David. 101469[/snapback] Seems like you're stretching to try to find any answer that fits, no matter how ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asuryan Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Since he was born of the virgin birth, he never recieved the royal blood from Joseph Geez, you guys seriously need help if that's how you convince yourselves to dismiss the virgin birth. Yes God helped Mary to miraculously conceive...and you know how he did it? Gee I don't know maybe he used Joseph's seed to do it? If God planted Joseph's seed in Mary's womb then obviously that explains how Jesus is both the divine son of God, and also heir to the throne of David. 101469[/snapback] Was there a virgin birth, or not? Did Joseph jerk off looking at Mary's nakedness, and then he spewed his load on Mary's snatch? Well, uh, that seems indeed... miraculous. Thus we could have both a virgin birth and a blood descendance from Joseph to Jesus... ALL HAIL THE HOLY WHITE RAIN OF JOSEPH! Oh, and, TruthofChrist? Tone it down before someone here decides that your "gee I don't know" and "you guys need help" deserve a really heated answer or a permaban. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Checkmate Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Since he was born of the virgin birth, he never recieved the royal blood from Joseph Geez, you guys seriously need help if that's how you convince yourselves to dismiss the virgin birth. Yes God helped Mary to miraculously conceive...and you know how he did it? Gee I don't know maybe he used Joseph's seed to do it? If God planted Joseph's seed in Mary's womb then obviously that explains how Jesus is both the divine son of God, and also heir to the throne of David. 101469[/snapback] Sigh. Here we go again. Is this shit for real, or do we have yet ANOTHER prankster in our midst? It says "Trinty Broadcasting" in the avatar slot. WTF? Who put THAT there? I refuse to take THIS poster seriously (whatever THAT is supposed to mean!), until I can determine the TRUE depth of their idiocy. (Off to a sterling beginning, I must admit. Never have I heard such moronic teaching since I last heard Kenneth Copeland say that "god" is a "man", about 6'3", and 190 pounds!) Can we get a mod to vouch for this retard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TruthofChrist (Rameus Spoof) Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Was there a virgin birth, or not?Did Joseph jerk off looking at Mary's nakedness, and then he spewed his load on Mary's snatch? Well, uh, that seems indeed... miraculous. Thus we could have both a virgin birth and a blood descendance from Joseph to Jesus... ALL HAIL THE HOLY WHITE RAIN OF JOSEPH! That's disgusting. You guys said that the virgin birth is impossible if Jesus is the son of Joseph. I've shown you how God did it so that both were fulfilled. It's not my fault that you can't deal with being wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Silent One Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Was there a virgin birth, or not?Did Joseph jerk off looking at Mary's nakedness, and then he spewed his load on Mary's snatch? Well, uh, that seems indeed... miraculous. Thus we could have both a virgin birth and a blood descendance from Joseph to Jesus... ALL HAIL THE HOLY WHITE RAIN OF JOSEPH! That's disgusting. You guys said that the virgin birth is impossible if Jesus is the son of Joseph. I've shown you how God did it so that both were fulfilled. It's not my fault that you can't deal with being wrong. 101644[/snapback] Being wrong? Pardon me, dumbass - but where in the Bible do you get your information from? Where's your proof of what you claim? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asuryan Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 That's disgusting. Thought so. You christians seem to have some issues with sex. Maybe someday you will accept that there's nothing wrong with jerking off, or with spewing your load over or inside a woman. Really. You guys said that the virgin birth is impossible if Jesus is the son of Joseph. I've shown you how God did it so that both were fulfilled. It's not my fault that you can't deal with being wrong. 101644[/snapback] Then explain Matthew, chapter 1, verse 19. Joseph was thinking about renouncing Mary, why should he've thought such things if he was the one that had sex with Mary? Come on, we'll need a better explanation than that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vixentrox Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 I've shown you how God did it so that both were fulfilled. 101644[/snapback] God "did it". Both were "fullfilled". They have a smoke afterwards or just settle for a glass of cold water? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnosis of Disbelief Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Sigh....another round of "Godidit, it's magic!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythra Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Another fine argument from the "it's magic" camp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythra Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Damn. It's true. Great minds do think alike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnosis of Disbelief Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 Hmmmm....I didn't notice the echo around here until now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkepticOfBible Posted November 4, 2005 Share Posted November 4, 2005 That's disgusting. You guys said that the virgin birth is impossible if Jesus is the son of Joseph. I've shown you how God did it so that both were fulfilled.101644[/snapback] You #@4&*$, please read the previous post or goto to the colosseum section for your debate Neither Mary nor Joseph deserve the throne, so they can't pass on something they don't deserve It's not my fault that you can't deal with being wrong. It's not our fault that you are being taken for a ride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts