You took it wrong. It was meant as a put-down.
More putdown. One good turn deserves another, right?
An even balder appeal to authority than my own, with a cheesy bow to the ancients thrown in for good measure. Bravo!
Strawman. As usual, there's nothing textually specific to back this up, nothing at all, just bare assertion.
Completely believable. There is a very large number of thoughtful, reasonable,courteous atheists outside this thread. I wish I were talking to them now.
Maybe I will.
Pots jeering at kettles. You would be the expert.
Later.
I know you meant it as sarcasm, but it's funny to me that your atheist turn comes down in the end to dogma pure and simple.
Atheism as reverse fideism has been very much evidence in these pages IMHO. The arguments on your side, such as they are, are some of the weakest I've ever seen.
And after a long travail, you arrive at threadbare belief. And still you say you can't understand the other side. Hilarious.
I personally believe in God, but I'm not a religious nut.
also, 4chan provides lulz when it comes to this topic.
You are such a pompous idiot.
You think you've proven something with your lose connections between Christianity and other religions through calendars and dates.
And you still think CDSes and MBSes as a bad thing.
What a moron . . .
I wish Bush could have had a third term; we were just broaching the subject of torturing atheists for sedition. *sigh* The good times are almost over.
lol at you thumpers getting mad at me. I'm not making loose connections. I even posted a ing math equation in relation to important events. A math equation that is solvable from the earliest pagan calendars long before Jesus walked. I know mathematically calculating his every move from something that predated his existence has no significant value. As a matter of fact not one of you bothered to even comment on it.
You guys can get as mad as you want. I get it.
I know that no matter what proof I provide it will be considered "loose relation" or "opinion".
Lets face it. A tablet from the year 25 could be found. It could explain in great detail how the legend of Jesus was to be founded and how the birth of Christianity was to be ushered in. You guys would call it fake, misinformation, loose correlations, its another Jesus there were lots of them......
Nothing regardless of how concrete will ever matter.
....but you will never sway my beliefs either. My faith in the lack of existence won't waver until definative proof exists. First hand originally do ented proof. My faith is strong.
B2B, stop posting in this thread before you embarrass yourself
I actually laughed more just now in the irony of being accused of making loose connections when the very basis for the mans existence is rooted in 5th and 6th party connections. lol not one original do ent not one artifact.
Lots of black pots and kettles here.
how about you attach your lips to my hole and breath in.
Embarrass myself
I'm with B2B. My faith is strong and will not be swayed. No need to get mad.
Getting the short end of the is embarrassing and you are still here.
Embarrass myself
It was funnier than 9/11 numerology. Thanks for the chuckles.
That you think your demonstrations rise to the level of logical proof is hysterical and pretentious. We all trade in opinion here.
So then, you're just as stubborn in your prejudice as those you criticize.
Bravo, B2B!
I don't believe I trade in opinion when the math of his entire life was in place before he existed. To me thats proof. You can calculate every significant moment from a tangible item that existed before he did. How is a mathematical calculation an opinion?
I don't care if you answer that or not. I'm just glad you recognize how stubborn I am about it becaue I'm only doing that to spite the thumpers. I'm actually willing to believe. There just happens to be zero proof.
If you wanted to truely lend credence to my bitterness it would be more along the lines of being bitter that I feel its factually provable that Jesus was horse and so is organized religion. Thankfully I hang by a thread of the belief in a potential higher power.
More importantly I want Winehole23 to like me. I respect his as a poster outside of this thread. I can bear the thought of having another enemy on these boards.
It's not. But the significance you attach to it is an interpretation. The correlation could be mere coincidence.
None will be forthcoming, unless you want to dip into scholasticism. And even scholasticism considered ontological proof to be somewhat post hoc. Only those who cannot believe by simple faith alone need the proofs. (N.B., Aquinas put it somewhat differently: only those who are unamenable to reason are required to hold Christ by simple faith.)
At least this is candid. I would put the problem somewhat differently for myself. I believe, but I am skeptical of believers. Unlike you, I don't require that the supernatural conform with my own versions of empiricism and rationalism. I can see how that would be a big stumbling block.
Last edited by Winehole23; 12-31-2008 at 01:01 PM.
Maths has disproven Christianity.
And CDS are the root of all evils.
At least we can agreeMaths has disproven Christianity.
And CDS are the root of all evils.
I totally forgot to add this to the thread
^^^
The Evolutionist have to create stuff like the "Oort cloud" to justify how Comets can still be burning after Billions of years. And yet they have the nerve to get on people who believe in Noah's ark?
I give you the Mysteries Oort cloud!
Fact: Comets disintegrate too quickly.
According to evolutionary theory, comets are supposed to be the same age as the solar system, about five billion years. Yet each time a comet orbits close to the sun, it loses so much of its material that it could not survive much longer than about 100,000 years. Many comets have typical maximum ages (on this basis) of 10,000 years.
Evolutionists explain this discrepancy by assuming that (a) comets come from an unobserved spherical 'Oort cloud' well beyond the orbit of Pluto, (b) improbable gravitational interactions with infrequently passing stars often knock comets into the solar system, and (c) other improbable interactions with planets slow down the incoming comets often enough to account for the hundreds of comets observed.(2) So far, none of these assumptions has been substantiated either by observations or realistic calculations.
Lately, there has been much talk of the 'Kuiper Belt', a disc of supposed comet sources lying in the plane of the solar system just outside the orbit of Pluto. Even if some bodies of ice exist in that location, they would not really solve the evolutionists' problem, since according to evolutionary theory the Kuiper Belt would quickly become exhausted if there were no Oort cloud to supply it.
Another example of this fairy tale.
More problems for the ‘Oort comet cloud’
First published:
TJ 15(2):11
August 2001
by Danny Faulkner
Comets are continually being lost through decay, collisions with planets, and ejections from the solar system. If the solar system were billions of years old, then all comets would have long ago ceased to exist if they were not continually being replaced. Thus to sustain long-age thinking, a way is needed to ‘resupply’ the solar system with comets from time to time.
For years, evolutionary astronomers have believed that long-period comets (those with orbital periods of more than 200 years) come from the so-called ‘Oort cloud’. The Oort cloud supposedly contains billions of comet nuclei orbiting the sun thousands of times further from it than the Earth. Astronomers think that the gravity of an occasional passing star or other object, or possibly a galactic tide, causes comets from the Oort cloud to fall into the inner solar system. This mechanism supposedly supplies the influx of comets needed to overcome the conclusion that the solar system is young.
There are problems with the Oort cloud, the greatest being that there is absolutely no evidence that it even exists! However, a recent study has revealed a new problem.Evolutionary theories of the origin of the solar system state that comet nuclei came from material left over from the formation of the planets. According to the theory, this icy material was sent out to the Oort cloud in the outer reaches of the solar system by the gravity of the newly formed planets. All of the earlier studies ignored collisions between the comet nuclei during this process.
This new study has considered these collisions and has found that most of the comets would have been destroyed by the collisions. Thus, instead of having a combined mass of perhaps 40 Earths, the Oort cloud should have at most the mass of about a single Earth. It is doubtful that this is enough mass to account for the comets that we see. The researchers postulate ‘escape valves’3 that could supply up to 3.5 Earth masses, but this is still ‘low compared to recent estimates of the mass of the Oort cloud’. They go on to ‘speculate that a distant source region for Oort cloud comets’ could resolve some other problems [emphasis added].
Of course, if the solar system is much younger than most astronomers think, then there is no need for the Oort comet cloud. Since it cannot be detected, the Oort cloud is not a scientific concept. This is not bad science, but non-science masquerading as science. The existence of comets is good evidence that the solar system is only a few thousand years old, just as the recent-creation model suggests.
so whoever can solve the israels/palestine conflict is going to be greater than JESUS, cause he didnt solve it in his time.
The Catholic resolution of this problem is the Nicene union of three hypostases (personae) in one ousion (shared essence). But you probably knew that already. The controversy at the time was considerable and also prolonged, so it's not so surprising that it still comes up. Whoever isn't a trinitarian won't be much swayed, but it's funny to me that you argue like a lumpen Protestant, coming as you do from an RC background.
As to 'worshipping' Mary, short of out and out Marionism it would seem to be of a piece with the routine veneration of saints in RC. They are not worshipped as gods, but appealed to as intercessors. You probably knew this too, didn't you?
Also, your ignorance of the trope of Christ as the new Adam and the gospels as a new covenant, is showing. For minimally conversant believers, the contradiction you pose b/w Mosaic law and the New Testament doesn't withstand even momentary scrutiny, and for someone who claims to have read the bible, your apparent unfamiliarity with OT prophecy is curious to say the least. For believers, the NT is the culmination and fulfillment OT law, not a contradiction.
A tip of my hat to the atheists like BB posing as holy doctors and teaching us all doctrine.
Bold!
Last edited by Winehole23; 12-31-2008 at 05:49 PM.
God sent me an e-mail today. He said you guys are all going to whether you like it or not. That includes the true believers and the infidels. God is an equal-opportunity-banisher.
Sorry, he didn't use his real address, so you can't reply.
Why is everyone tripping about religion? If ain't your bag why bother?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
