RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (6) < 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 >   
  Topic: Miracles as an argument for theism< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
skeptic



Posts: 1163
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,10:40   

Richard, I would guess that there are some that can not be sustained by faith alone and need some sort of extraordinary basis supporting their belief.  Again, I would cite this as a human failing.  Call it weakness.  It goes to Arden's stupid question, maybe people need to see the Virgin Mary in their tortilla.  I for one do not believe that a fuzzy image of the Virgin Mary, Budda, Jesus or GWB in my tortilla means anything at all and to try to give any discussion about it credence is stupid.  Again, it says nothing about God but it sure says a lot about people, on both sides.

Louis, just as an exercise, why don't you go ahead and try to contemplate how men are equal.  Be careful, don't hurt yourself and if you come up with something let me know.

as for the rest...well it's a waste of my time.

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,10:48   

skeptic, so you would see no significance (or at the least, the same amount of significance as the image of Baby Jesus in Swaddling Clothes manifested in an oil slick or pattern of flies on a deer carcass) in the resurrection of Jesus, turning water to wine, resurrection of Lazarus, virgin birth, loaves and fishes, etc etc etc?

You don't really believe these things happened?

Now that is interesting, and a break in the facade.  Please do expound, I will turn down the gain on the snark and I'm sure everyone else will too.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell.†Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
skeptic



Posts: 1163
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,10:56   

I see no comparison between the Resurrection and supposed images on tortillas.  It is also impossible to evaluate the other listed "miracles" objectively.  What is more important is to understand what they mean rather than trying to prove whether or not they really happened.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,10:57   

Quote (skeptic @ Feb. 27 2008,16:40)
Louis, just as an exercise, why don't you go ahead and try to contemplate how men are equal. †Be careful, don't hurt yourself and if you come up with something let me know.

Already did. Now are you going to explain what you mean or are you just trolling for kicks again?

How about you try to elaborate in what sense you think people are not born equal. It'll help me narrow down on what you want to focus on rather than wasting a huge amount of time writing something you'll end up handwaving away anyway.

How about you also answer the other questions:

Do people = opinions? Are all opinions equally valid? Etc. Come on big boy, you can do it. I'll join with Erasmus and merrily turn down the snark if your contribution blossom beyond "that's all crap". HOW is it crap? WHY is it crap? On what basis do you know it to be crap? Explain its crapness to us. Come on Skeptic, ENGAGE with the issue, stop trolling.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Paul Flocken



Posts: 290
Joined: Dec. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,11:13   

Quote (skeptic @ Feb. 27 2008,10:56)
I see no comparison between the Resurrection and supposed images on tortillas. †It is also impossible to evaluate the other listed "miracles" objectively. †What is more important is to understand what they mean rather than trying to prove whether or not they really happened.

skeptic, you miss the point that the virgin mary only appears where catholicism/protestantism are dominant religions. †I seriously doubt anyone in Kansas is ever going to see the image of the buddha in a water stain under a bridge abutment. †Likewise, no Hindu is ever going to see jesus in a piece of burnt toast. †Why does the god of the hebrew literature not reveal himself through miracles for anyone not descended from the hebrew tradition?

--------------
"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie--deliberate, contrived, and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. †Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."-John F. Kennedy

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,11:29   

Quote (skeptic @ Feb. 27 2008,10:40)
It goes to Arden's stupid question, maybe people need to see the Virgin Mary in their tortilla. †I for one do not believe that a fuzzy image of the Virgin Mary, Budda, Jesus or GWB in my tortilla means anything at all and to try to give any discussion about it credence is stupid.

But people who see the Virgin Mary in their tortillas think it's a real miracle. Why are they wrong? Why is it that that is *not* a miracle, but little Timmy in his hospital bed recovering against all the doctor's predictions IS a miracle?

Are you the one who gets to decide what a 'real' miracle is?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,11:30   

Quote
I see no comparison between the Resurrection and supposed images on tortillas.

Really?  Why not?
 
Quote
It is also impossible to evaluate the other listed "miracles" objectively.


really, why not?

Quote
 What is more important is to understand what they mean rather than trying to prove whether or not they really happened.


Really?  Why should they mean anything if they never happened?  Why should we even bother with wondering what they mean, if they never even happened?  

Looking forward to this one.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell.†Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,11:33   

Quote
What is more important is to understand what they mean rather than trying to prove whether or not they really happened.


Wow.

So they have meaning, even if they're imaginary?

Wow.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,11:40   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 27 2008,17:33)
Quote
What is more important is to understand what they mean rather than trying to prove whether or not they really happened.


Wow.

So they have meaning, even tho they might be imaginary?

Wow.

Hence why pissing about with Skeptic's presuppositionalist/relativist/solipsism is wholly boring. He's an intellectually dishonst shallow coward and utterly refuses to engage any issue or question beyond "that's crap" or "you're mean" or "other people think something else" as if these were somehow infallible revelations or novel contributions.

All anyone can try to do is crack the dome of dumb with which he tries to protect himself from reality.

Take the statement you quote of his. Important how? In what sense is this important? How do you know it's important? Who decides whether or not it's important or not? Why is whether it happened or not irrelevant to what it "means"? What does {insert specific miracle} "mean"? Who decides? How does one know? Etc etc etc etc etc etc etc. Skeptic cannot and will not answer these questions because they expose his faith for the shallow nonsense it is.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
EoRaptor013



Posts: 45
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,11:55   

Quote (skeptic @ Feb. 27 2008,10:48)
Raptor, thanks for the correction, I was writing on the fly.

But, before you get too cocky, I wouldn't suggest you get into a discussion of the Bible with me. †Unless you have a few years to spare to catch up.
[snip...]

I'll see your smugness and raise you a cocky:

Bring it on, Jack.

  
skeptic



Posts: 1163
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:00   

Wow, where to start with all this?  Louis, I'll save you for last.

Paul, you miss the point.  The God of the Hebrew is not revealing himself through random debatable images on tortillas.  People may think that's what they see and that's why the distribution is what it is.  And more importantly, so what?  What if God puts his calling card on a chocolate cake, what does it mean?  Nothing.  As Richard is trying to point out, if God needs to constantly leave his calling card all over the place Faith in God is an incredibly weak thing.

Arden, that's just it.  People see what they want to, or need to, see.  I'll start paying attention when God stands up and says, "Hey, didya see that miracle I just did?" Until then you'll just have to excuse me if I don't care.  Anybody relying on miracles to justify their faith or critisize someone else's is in a sorry place to start with.

Erasmus and Arden, what's the point of an image of Budda on a Big Mac bun?  Even if it's authentic, what does it mean?  Again, nothing.  In comparison, what does the Resurrection mean, the Flood, The Plagues in Eygpt, Adam and Eve and the Apple?  Completely independent of whether or not they ever really happened do they have any meaning?  Of course they do and in the same way the story of the prodigal son has meaning even though it was just a story.  I hope you both can see the difference here.

Louis, now child you need to close you mouth and pay attention when your betters are speaking.  No man is created equal, or born as you suppose, in any sense but one and that one is debatable.  Genetically, intellectually, socially, opportunistically, geographically, etc and on and on.  You try to find a way that men are equal and I think you'll fall flat on your face.  Course, there is one way, but I know you're not going there.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11117
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:01   

Quote (skeptic @ Feb. 27 2008,10:56)
†What is more important is to understand what they mean rather than trying to prove whether or not they really happened.

So if it looks like the virgin Mary, that's the main thing, not if god actually did it. I think you're right, *nobody* knows Christianity like you!

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
skeptic



Posts: 1163
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:01   

Raptor, *sigh*, alright go right ahead but don't say I didn't warn you.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:06   

Quote
Erasmus and Arden, what's the point of an image of Budda on a Big Mac bun?  Even if it's authentic, what does it mean?  Again, nothing.  In comparison, what does the Resurrection mean, the Flood, The Plagues in Eygpt, Adam and Eve and the Apple?  Completely independent of whether or not they ever really happened do they have any meaning?  Of course they do and in the same way the story of the prodigal son has meaning even though it was just a story.  I hope you both can see the difference here.


Sorry, I'm still marvelling at the idea that if miracles were all imaginary it wouldn't have any negative bearing on their validity, and that this is somehow a RETORT to people who think that miracles are bogus.

So Skeptic, evidently you think SOME miracles are real, even tho you reject Jesus's-face-on-food miracles. What's your defining criteria to decide if it's the real thing? Should it just be obvious?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
skeptic



Posts: 1163
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:14   

I don't know that any miracles are real.  I don't even know if there is such a thing as a miracle or if this is just code for ignorance.  I do know that there is meaning in stories if only in an allegorical sense and they can lead us to important insights.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:15   

Quote (skeptic @ Feb. 27 2008,18:00)
Louis, now child you need to close you mouth and pay attention when your betters are speaking. †No man is created equal, or born as you suppose, in any sense but one and that one is debatable. †Genetically, intellectually, socially, opportunistically, geographically, etc and on and on. †You try to find a way that men are equal and I think you'll fall flat on your face. †Course, there is one way, but I know you're not going there.

Wow! Undeservingly patronising yet again!

Now go back and read what I wrote before:

Quote
People aren't born equal? You mean some are god's chosen and some aren't? You mean something else? So you simply mean that Linford Christie's innate running abilities are better than mine? Because I don't think anyone will disagree with that. Equal in terms of value and worth Skeptic, two arbitrary human concepts.


From here.

You and I were, as before, talking about different things. Interstingly this whole deal will end precisely where I predicted it will in another thread far far away, i.e. demonstrating the lack of any value the subjective has in any epistemological sense.

It may have been mentioned to your before Skeptic that you need to read what people have actually written, not what you think they have written. How many people have told you in a three page thread that you have failed to understand a simple point or have misconstrued their argument and run off to bash a straw man of your own imagining? It's a couple at least isn't it. Let that give you pause Skeptic. Think about it. Perhaps they are right, perhaps they are not, but at least consider the possibility that this is something you need to stop doing (i.e. stop going after what you think people are saying not what people are actually saying).

Oh and FYI Skeptic, yes indeed many of us (myself very much included) can be very rude to you and others. There is a reason for this: you (and others) make nonsensical, irrelevant or just outright dishonest statements. You refuse to back up your claims, refuse to engage any topic on anything approaching an intellectual level. We are at least rude with a point. You simply are being rude with no point, you aren't engaing what people are actually saying. Think on that. Maybe if you spent so me of that precious time thinking as opposed to regurgitating accusations you've made umpteen times now to no effect you'd make a coherent contribution. This might remove a huge quantity of snark from all sides of the equation. I may have suggested this before Skeptic. You ignored it then as you will undoubtedly do now, but try, you might be surprised. And given the level of abuse you chuck around pointlessly, I think you have no basis for your whining ot persecution complex. I'll offer again Skeptic: back up your claims, make reasonable arguments and you'll find that people can and will disagree with you perfectly amicably. Fail to do that and people will get pissed off with you.

It's all up to you as usual.

Louis

ETA: Hint: in the five point comedy gold for Skeptic, the point of which has been missed as usual, I've used two different meanings of the word "equal", let's see if Skeptic can understand the difference.

--------------
Bye.

  
skeptic



Posts: 1163
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:19   

To try this another way, was the Ressurction a miracle and why?  Because no one else has ever died and come back to life three days later?  Because people shouldn't be able to die and come back to life?  Because we don't understand how Jesus came back to life?

Which of these is important when evaluating the meaning and significance of Jesus coming back to life?  None of them.  If you believe he did then you're much more focused on why he came back to life and not how.  And if you don't believe he did and you're focused on the how then you're missing the point of why.

  
skeptic



Posts: 1163
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:21   

Louis, you wasted all those words and never once addressed how men are equal in anyway.  Same old shoe.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11117
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:21   

Quote (skeptic @ Feb. 27 2008,12:19)
To try this another way, was the Ressurction a miracle and why? †Because no one else has ever died and come back to life three days later? †Because people shouldn't be able to die and come back to life? †Because we don't understand how Jesus came back to life?

Which of these is important when evaluating the meaning and significance of Jesus coming back to life? †None of them. †If you believe he did then you're much more focused on why he came back to life and not how. †And if you don't believe he did and you're focused on the how then you're missing the point of why.

And your still missing the main argument I'm advancing.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:29   

Quote (skeptic @ Feb. 27 2008,18:21)
Louis, you wasted all those words and never once addressed how men are equal in anyway. †Same old shoe.

No Skeptic, I didn't, did you read what I wrote?

If you're talking about the empirically determinable aspects of humans then obviously and uncontroversially all humans are not equal. As noted before.

If you're talking about arbitrary human things like subjective worth or significance or what have you, i.e. concepts that cannot be quantified by the very nature of the concepts themselves, or if they are quantified it's done with reference to an arbitrary metric which is used to define context (gee, it seems I've said something about this before) and thus is at least quantifiable in relative terms only, then all humans are equal. If only because we can shift metrics/choose metrics which allow this.

So as usual Skeptic, you;re right about one thing, It IS the same old shoe, but the same old shoe is not me wasting words or failing to address the issues, it's you not reading and simply attacking straw man versions of what you *think* people are saying not what they are saying.

In other words Skeptic, you are trolling pure and simple. You aren't interested in discussion, just in annoying people.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:30   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 27 2008,18:21)
Quote (skeptic @ Feb. 27 2008,12:19)
To try this another way, was the Ressurction a miracle and why? †Because no one else has ever died and come back to life three days later? †Because people shouldn't be able to die and come back to life? †Because we don't understand how Jesus came back to life?

Which of these is important when evaluating the meaning and significance of Jesus coming back to life? †None of them. †If you believe he did then you're much more focused on why he came back to life and not how. †And if you don't believe he did and you're focused on the how then you're missing the point of why.

And your still missing the main argument I'm advancing.

Well THAT's a fucking shock!

Is anyone else bored with this tiresome troll/concern troll yet?

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11117
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:33   

Quote (Louis @ Feb. 27 2008,12:30)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 27 2008,18:21)
Quote (skeptic @ Feb. 27 2008,12:19)
To try this another way, was the Ressurction a miracle and why? †Because no one else has ever died and come back to life three days later? †Because people shouldn't be able to die and come back to life? †Because we don't understand how Jesus came back to life?

Which of these is important when evaluating the meaning and significance of Jesus coming back to life? †None of them. †If you believe he did then you're much more focused on why he came back to life and not how. †And if you don't believe he did and you're focused on the how then you're missing the point of why.

And your still missing the main argument I'm advancing.

Well THAT's a fucking shock!

Is anyone else bored with this tiresome troll/concern troll yet?

Louis

Can we give him his own, padded thread?

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:35   

Quote
To try this another way, was the Ressurction a miracle and why? †Because no one else has ever died and come back to life three days later? †Because people shouldn't be able to die and come back to life? †Because we don't understand how Jesus came back to life?


Wait -- but what if the Resurrection simply never happened? Then it ain't a miracle anymore, no?

†  
Quote
I don't even know if there is such a thing as a miracle or if this is just code for ignorance. †I do know that there is meaning in stories if only in an allegorical sense and they can lead us to important insights.


This doesn't feel terribly satisfying. I don't think parables and miracles are the same thing, or serve the same function. Parables serve as object lessons on how one might behave in real life. Miracles are 'created' to show that God is real and that faith has tangible roles in real life. Like it or not, they're meant to serve as proof. If the miracle is just imaginary, the proof evaporates. I mean, think about it: if someone supposedly has their cancer disappear due to a miracle, but it's just as likely that it disappeared due to treatment, how is that any kind of 'lesson'?

†  
Quote
Louis, you wasted all those words and never once addressed how men are equal in anyway. †Same old shoe.

Based on what his wife has told me, Louis is significantly unequal in one particular way, ifyouknowwhatImeanandIthinkyoudo...

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11117
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:36   

Quote

Wait -- but what if the Resurrection simply never happened? Then it ain't a miracle anymore, no?


No! Then its a miracle that people believe in it!

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:46   

I'm reading The Spatula Brain (courtesy of Albatrossity) and if I don't develop a brain tumor before I'm through that will be a miracle.

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:47   

Quote (skeptic @ Feb. 27 2008,18:19)
To try this another way, was the Ressurction a miracle and why? †Because no one else has ever died and come back to life three days later? †Because people shouldn't be able to die and come back to life? †Because we don't understand how Jesus came back to life?

Which of these is important when evaluating the meaning and significance of Jesus coming back to life? †None of them. †If you believe he did then you're much more focused on why he came back to life and not how. †And if you don't believe he did and you're focused on the how then you're missing the point of why.

You're flipping between two things as usual.

If Jesus never existed at all, if he never came back to life or was even alive to die in the first place this has some bearing on whether or not the story of the ressurection is objectively, unambiguously, verifiably true.

If all you seek to garner from the story is some allegory or parable or metaphor that neatly illuminates a particular aspect of the human condition then your bible is as good as a five year old's "Spot the Dog" book. Both provide an individual with an allegory or story or parable or metaphor that neatly illuminates a particular aspect of the human condition.

If you are saying something as uncontroversial as "stories and myths are useful to humans whether or not they are true in any objective sense" then no one disagrees with you. Not me, not PZ, not Dawkins, not even the most militant nasty atheist you can imagine. That demonstrably untrue stories still can possess some utilitarian value is as uncontroversial a fact as "earth goes round sun". Not novel, not ground breaking not worthy of you wasting your precious time telling us all something we a) don't disagree with and b) already knew much better than you do.

If you are trying to argue that because a story has utilitarian value it is therefore objectively true then you are wrong. Plain and simple. Want me to go into why? Ok then. It's a logical fallacy. The classic familiar example is an opposite case to this. If something is objectively true and has no use, that use does not affect whether or not it is objectively true. Or if something is objectively true and has been used to do something "bad" or "good" (those words will need contextual definition) then the consequences of that thing being true are still irrelevant to the truth of it. The fact that we are subject to gravity, undeniably so, does not mean that we should push people off cliffs. The use of a specific fact (or non- fact) does not determine it's truth, only careful determination of the evidence supporting that fact can do that.

If you are trying to argue that a story's utilitarian value is more important that whether or not that story is objectively true or not, then you are making a subjective value judgement you have no hope of justifying by any means unless you begin to define the context of it (gee, it seems like I've said something like this before too).

If Jesus never existed, then the story of his ressurection has exactly the same SUBJECTIVE value as any other untrue story. Again, unless as above, you can demonstrate that you have a means to distinguish between subjective claims IN THE ABSENCE OF CONTEXT (why is this all very familiar?). The utilitarian value of an untrue story lies again in the realm of the rationally determinable, that one story may be more or less useful than another is again uncontroversial, such utility is decided on the basis of the evidence. Again IN CONTEXT (a concept I defined at some length).

Get it yet?

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11117
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:50   

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Feb. 27 2008,12:46)
I'm reading The Spatula Brain (courtesy of Albatrossity) and if I don't develop a brain tumor before I'm through that will be a miracle.

There once was a young man named bill
Who read a book that made him ill
with dualist pretenses
among its offenses
and writing, like, structured to kill.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
EoRaptor013



Posts: 45
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:50   

Quote (skeptic @ Feb. 27 2008,13:01)
Raptor, *sigh*, alright go right ahead but don't say I didn't warn you.

Before you go, weren't you going to show how advanced your understanding of the Bible is?

Let's try a simple one:

What effect did the Babylonian exile have on the development of Jewish, and ultimately Christian, theology? Please point to passages that support your view.

Thanks.

ETA: Is there a better thread for this discussion -- assuming there ends up being a discussion?

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:51   

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Feb. 27 2008,12:46)
I'm reading The Spatula Brain (courtesy of Albatrossity) and if I don't develop a brain tumor before I'm through that will be a miracle.

You'll have to prove it really happened, otherwise only Skeptic will be impressed.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11117
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 27 2008,12:52   

Quote (EoRaptor013 @ Feb. 27 2008,12:50)
Quote (skeptic @ Feb. 27 2008,13:01)
Raptor, *sigh*, alright go right ahead but don't say I didn't warn you.

Before you go, weren't you going to show how advanced your understanding of the Bible is?

Let's try a simple one:

What effect did the Babylonian exile have on the development of Jewish, and ultimately Christian, theology? Please point to passages that support your view.

Thanks.

ETA: Is there a better thread for this discussion -- assuming there ends up being a discussion?

Oh, take him a away! Puh-lease!

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
  179 replies since Feb. 26 2008,09:23 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (6) < 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]