MagicMItchJensen

Joined

• started 7 topics
• posted 27 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by MagicMItchJensen

• 
  35

  Ignorant Atheist Talk Show Host Destroyed by Agnostic Dr. Bart Erhman! Topic "Did Jesus and Paul exist?"

  by MagicMItchJensen in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i want you to see how fake people are who pretend their open-minded, dr. erhman try's to reason with someone whose mind is totally made up.

  the topic is whether there was a man named jesus and paul, the infidel atheist get's owned because he shows his true colors!.

  1. when would you tell this fool he stupid or willfully ignoring the facts?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MagicMItchJensen

  "

  Atwill’s Cranked-up Jesus

  ---

  Joseph Atwill is one of those crank mythers I often get conflated with. Mythicists like him make the job of serious scholars like me so much harder, because people see, hear, or read them and think their nonsense is what mythicism is. They make mythicism look ridiculous. So I have to waste time (oh by the gods, so much time) explaining how I am not arguing anything like their theories or using anything like their terrible methods, and unlike them I actually know what I am talking about, and have an actual Ph.D. in a relevant subject from a real university.

  Note that I have divided this article into two parts, the second (titled “Our Long Conversation”) is something you can easily skip (see the intro there for whether reading it will be of any interest to you). So although this post looks extraordinarily long, it’s really that second part that gives it such length. You can just read up to the beginning of that section though. You don’t have to continue beyond that to get the overall point."

  http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/4664

  
  

  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2451087/American-Bible-scholar-claims-ancient-confessions-prove-story-Jesus-Christ-entirely-fabricated-Roman-aristocrats.html
  
  
• 
  35

  Ignorant Atheist Talk Show Host Destroyed by Agnostic Dr. Bart Erhman! Topic "Did Jesus and Paul exist?"

  by MagicMItchJensen in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i want you to see how fake people are who pretend their open-minded, dr. erhman try's to reason with someone whose mind is totally made up.

  the topic is whether there was a man named jesus and paul, the infidel atheist get's owned because he shows his true colors!.

  1. when would you tell this fool he stupid or willfully ignoring the facts?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MagicMItchJensen

  Has anyone read the Conspiracy claims that Rome created Christianity to bring about peace and teach people "paying taxes is godly"? There is a writer without a phD, none of his works are peer-reviewed who claims Rome created the Christian religion in the First Century and Jesus and his Apostles never existed. He found some secret documents he planned on revealing to show how Governments used religion to pacify the masses (Sounds like he read Karl Marx) and make them honest instead of bloodthirsty thieves.

  How can we use a source like Joseph Atwill if no recognized scholars and institutes give his work credence? One area professional debaters demand is their opponents have a certain amount of recognized education, that's why my favorite atheist-biologist debater won't take on hacks because he does not want to waste his time on pseudo-scholars even when offered $100,000 to debate someone he declined out of principle. The poison offered up by Joseph Atwill has leaked on to various circles and people are taking him at his word, why is that? Consistent standards need to be accepted by all parties engaging in conversation, pulling out weirdos without recognized works by authorities in the field is a waste of time. That's why the atheist-biology expert said when offered to debate someone without a phd, someone without peer-reviewed writings refused to engage him as the crank's view insulted his pioneering works in the field of evolutionary biology.

  Here's Carrier's view on Atwill, Carrier recognizes how men like Atwill affect his works too.

  http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/4664
  
• 
  65

  Richard Dawkins espouses Militant Atheism: "Mock them, Ridicule them." Attack Religious People with Insults!

  by MagicMItchJensen in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  richard dawkins has said frequently if we don't agree with religious or spiritual people we need to "insult them!

  " tell their their out of their "fucking gourds!

  " and make sure you really show them how stupid they are for believing in something they can't prove!".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MagicMItchJensen

  Richard Dawkins has not changed his view, you might wish he has softened this since two years ago, why don't we apply the "rule of time past" to all arguments made. Hell we can forgive the Watchtower since all of their weird End Time claims are old but we won't because we know the Watchtower will continue to preach "Doom and Gloom", "Don't live Now because the End is Near!". Why is it when people post videos of famous leaders on their side of the argument its said "How old is that Video?" I heard Dawkins say the same thing less than two years ago, he's gotten in trouble making weird claims about Pedophiles, Rape and other topics most find abhorrent here.

  
  

  oltologist33 minutes ago

  I must admit, Dawkins way was my way too but I've read a lot of posts, written a lot of posts, responded to a lot of posts and been responded to a lot over the past few days.

  My feeling is that I was wrong and so is Dawkins.

  There is a better way and that is to challenge without insulting.

  However, I understand where Dawkins is coming from I think.

  In the past, religious leaders went totally unchallenged. They considered themselves to be above the law. They were able to use and abuse mankind. Many of them did. I'll just mention mind control and paedophilia."

  
  

  Doltologist, your refreshing view, you know where this all leads and nobody is trying to hide the fact about the cover-ups in religious circles dealing with pedophiles and death. I find it dishearting when authors people rally against say wicked things their followers quicky say "Hey, when did he say that?" and someone says "Oh, he said that one year ago!" they say "Oh, he probably softened his approach, let's all forgive and forget how he feels because people change." People don't change that quick unless their about to get kicked off the Debate Circuit and lose all their audience that provide them with a very nice living. Change only comes when they lose money, not because someone said "Hey, your going to get people killed, get out there and tell people you were wrong!" To date Richard has never changed his mind, he stand's firmly behind his beliefs people should mock anyone religious or spiritual dealing with the metaphysical realm.

  It's wrong to say "What's the time line of Richard Dawkins video" , to a reply of "He is still behind this kind of mockery, in fact he's said some very stupid things about child-sex, rape and topics everyone here with some form of ethics will angrily denouce! Doltogoist, your reasonable, you see what he is saying is wrong so why do people try to qualify unambiguous hate speech?

  
  
• 
  65

  Richard Dawkins espouses Militant Atheism: "Mock them, Ridicule them." Attack Religious People with Insults!

  by MagicMItchJensen in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  richard dawkins has said frequently if we don't agree with religious or spiritual people we need to "insult them!

  " tell their their out of their "fucking gourds!

  " and make sure you really show them how stupid they are for believing in something they can't prove!".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MagicMItchJensen

  Richard Dawkins has said frequently if we don't agree with religious or spiritual people we need to "insult them!" tell their their out of their "Fucking gourds!" and make sure you really show them how stupid they are for believing in something they can't prove!"

  I have had the pleasure of listening to Richard Dawkins, he's not stupid, his gift of speech make's us all look like dum-dums! My question though is his offer to attack religious people and insult them is very dangerous. Why would he want people to insult others who are radicals or zealots. It's been pointed this method of conversation can get you killed, look how Islam handles people insulting the Prophet in Texas, USA "When Fools do stupid things to cause trouble!". What if someone made him get on a plane so he could go a region where religious tolerance does not exist to mock them, either Richard would get publicly lashed (1,000 lashes over a weekly period) or stoned to death, why put deadly ideas inside the heads of people who put their trust in all the words you say?

  How is that helping eliminate hateful, intolerant groups like ISIS by showing your better than their leaders? If you want to add more fuel to the fire, Richard doing a great job! Rational people who care about their audience do no espouse ideas that could lead to the deaths and beatings of people who are followers and take the words of him literally by following through and doing stupid things like insulting the people, is that what this is all about? There is no good reason to behave like Stalin, if people disagree with you, put them in a work camp or Re-Education camp like the Khmer Rouge did? Is that how educated people behave, I thought rational thinkers preached peaceful dialogue, not warmongering hateful words insulting the core beliefs of your fellow humans.

  How long would Richard Dawkins be allowed to insult the clerics or Mullahs in the Middle East or Asia? Christians don't attack Richard Dawkins, they let him speak freely without telling him their going to kill him. What if Richard Dawkins had people insult Islamic leaders only to get them killed, would he be blood guilty? Why would anyone tell others to "Mock Them! Insult them! Tell them their Stupid!"? So is this his goal, what's behind a radical agenda, to start a war against religious people who are not afraid to die because they have hope? When Secularist start wars with religious people, it's the Secularist who get killed off because the religious people have hope of another life to come. The Secularist knowing this is their only life will do all they can to avoid death, their not afraid to disown everything they believe to stay alive. I think creating a war against religious people is stupid because he think's they will sit back and tolerate abuse indefinitely, others on online chats learned the hard way insulting religious people is dangerous to your health. I'am very peaceful, I don't like innocents getting hurt, that's why Richard's idea makes me very upset!
  

  Richard Dawkins espouses Militant Atheism: "Mock them, Ridicule them."

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPqqp8KVuQU
  
• 
  182

  The Case for Theism

  by FusionTheism in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  "theism" here means "belief in a god" or "the worldview that an intelligent designer created the universe and life.

  " ("god" here means a being with a mind who initiated and/or wound-up the universe, and designed life on earth)the most common claim that i see atheists making on twitter, is that "no evidence" exists in support of belief in a god.this post will remove any excuse atheists have for claiming "no evidence exists" in support of an initiator.

  atheists can still reject this evidence as "weak," but they cannot truthfully say it does not exist.now, it is true that we do not have "observable, repeatable, falsifiable, empirical, scientific" evidence conclusively proving that an initiator exists, but we do have many lines of philisophical, experiential, and logical evidence.and... here... we... go:1:) many leading scientists, including stephen hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the singularity/big bang.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MagicMItchJensen

  Fusion, do you know the difference between the definition of "agnostic" and "atheist" under the best Philosophical dictionaries?

  Once you read up on that, I was curious what's the best evidence or proof you have come across from someone trying to convert you from "theism, deist, agnostic" to the atheist view?

  What changed the former agnostic's mind, she or he had to come across something big evidence wise, something your missing or can't see? To change views, the evidence or well done arguments to make that transition, you think? Fusion, can you share the best arguments against God and why you think it has a strong merit? The person trying to convince you must show you why your position is not as strong as theirs. The example of evil and suffering, the person trying to prove their position to you must provide evidence there's no possible good reason in the Universe why suffering or evil is totally unnecessary.

  The person you debate is not in a position to sit back and enjoy while you explain your position if their positing their ideas. They must provide you with the best reasons why your wrong, don't let them sit back like some religious person claiming "I have faith in what I believe", you want reasons and proof why. The schools of philosophy are recognizing each party must bring their fair share to the debate, it's not a one sided issue.
• 
  1

  Miami Herald Article on Witnesses in a Closed World Preaching.

  by MagicMItchJensen in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  "we are only trying to get people to read their bible", i wish i knew witnesses who took the bible as serious as they do the publications(still most dubs don't read all jehovah's urgent lifesaving message printed by the slave!

  that's very sad if we offer the magazines to people were not reading, that's being a hypocrite, right?

  ), most can't keep up with the reduced spiritual food the organization has lovingly cut in half so all the witnesses can keep pace with jehovah's chariot!

  1. 
• 

  MagicMItchJensen

  "We are only trying to get people to read their Bible", I wish I knew witnesses who took the Bible as serious as they do the publications(still most dubs don't read all Jehovah's Urgent lifesaving message printed by the Slave! That's very sad if we offer the magazines to people were not reading, that's being a hypocrite, right?), most can't keep up with the reduced spiritual food the Organization has lovingly cut in half so all the Witnesses can keep pace with Jehovah's Chariot! You asked if the Witnesses are doing the door-to-door work, here's your answer in the May 31, 2015 Herald!

  "...http://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article22737906.html

  
  
• 
  35

  Ignorant Atheist Talk Show Host Destroyed by Agnostic Dr. Bart Erhman! Topic "Did Jesus and Paul exist?"

  by MagicMItchJensen in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i want you to see how fake people are who pretend their open-minded, dr. erhman try's to reason with someone whose mind is totally made up.

  the topic is whether there was a man named jesus and paul, the infidel atheist get's owned because he shows his true colors!.

  1. when would you tell this fool he stupid or willfully ignoring the facts?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MagicMItchJensen

  What views from Dr. Carrier did you think have merit and will change how we think Christianity sprung from the First Century followers of Jesus or in Carrier's case (Followers of Jesus through revelation, not a physical relationship or being trained by their teacher, instead Peter or Paul might have been taught about Jesus by visions like Mohammed and Joseph Smith).

  I like talking about different subjects, to answer WMFury's question there is no reason why I would pretend to be open minded, often it's people who challenge you that have closed their mind. Are you still opened minded even if the facts were to lead you to another 180 degree change in views?
• 
  35

  Ignorant Atheist Talk Show Host Destroyed by Agnostic Dr. Bart Erhman! Topic "Did Jesus and Paul exist?"

  by MagicMItchJensen in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i want you to see how fake people are who pretend their open-minded, dr. erhman try's to reason with someone whose mind is totally made up.

  the topic is whether there was a man named jesus and paul, the infidel atheist get's owned because he shows his true colors!.

  1. when would you tell this fool he stupid or willfully ignoring the facts?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MagicMItchJensen

  WitnessMyFury, all anyone wants is a fair chance to discuss topics others get attacked on. We lose members here, members with educations because they get frustrated at the lack of fair speech. Think about what you’re saying, you say people bring in a “historical Jesus as a backdoor way of getting him raised from historical guru or teacher to God, god or powers of God”. The argument I present is people are not willing to change their opinions like those in the Watchtower Society, you know how often we drove people insane preaching in Field Service “we have the Truth” while never allowing anyone to ask us questions about our religious past because we knew this opened up Pandora’s Box.

  Can we have a discussion using the consensus of textual critics and historians to answer a question people have clearly made up their mind on? Do you believe a religious man who went by the name of Jesus of Nazareth existed because there are many who say the historical facts say he never existed? The goal is not to claim he had super natural powers, my desire is to expand on a topic of whether he was here or a made up myth, a myth his followers were willing to die for in the most exotic and excruciating way. Paul was no idiot, as he said in 1 Corinthians "If we are preaching a lie and Jesus did not raise from the dead, we are to be pitied wasting our lives and being executed over a terrible lie!"

  Someone recently wrote “The only reason Christians did not go extinct is because the Roman Empire sponsored their religion.” This question was not yours, it was someone who had no idea what they were talking about, if you read up on Galerius (Roman General who wanted to secure all the power throughout the Empire but failed miserably your view will change on whether Christians were sponsored.) And historical Armenia that blows out the water that Christians were allowed to thrive without Rome’s attempt as genocide. Why can’t we have dialogue like people on TV or videos do, not attacking people but asking questions and using facts and methods of ascertaining how the scholars come to their conclusions? I readily adjusted to micro-evolution because it’s a fact, there is no denying it yet some without brains still deny it. Let’s talk why people believe and don’t believe and why, thank you all for hearing me out!

  My objective was to point out how bad the Radio Host was to Dr. Erhman, when hosts are rude to well-educated guests they invite and make fallacious claims, it’s our job to reason through what’s going on!
• 
  35

  Ignorant Atheist Talk Show Host Destroyed by Agnostic Dr. Bart Erhman! Topic "Did Jesus and Paul exist?"

  by MagicMItchJensen in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i want you to see how fake people are who pretend their open-minded, dr. erhman try's to reason with someone whose mind is totally made up.

  the topic is whether there was a man named jesus and paul, the infidel atheist get's owned because he shows his true colors!.

  1. when would you tell this fool he stupid or willfully ignoring the facts?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MagicMItchJensen

  Why is this subject such a sore topic, is this what we all have become? We are afraid to admit there was a religious leader in the First Century named "Jesus of Nazareth". When Terrance wrote his little piece on "Papias" did anyone tell him we can't accept anything he wrote because we don't have any of the original parchments written by the Early Church Fathers so why did he bother writing his little speculation on Papias? Seems very convenient to pick and choose what were going to accept as fact and what's fiction. How come nobody told Terrence all the figures in his story line did not exist, instead he did not receive any negative comments but praise. That's not how were suppose to operate unless we are wanting a "Online Fascism" to rule. How many of the writers he mentioned have texts dating back to their timeline? What's the earliest materials from Eusebius writings, are they from his life or re-written as most parchments and texts were?

  No, if you had some ignorant person disagreeing with the Four Horseman of the Apocalypse of atheism(people pulling nonfactual statements out of their asses) the party would be picking their mental faculty or attacking their reasoning skills apart! Why the contradiction, to further some agenda when the evidence they use is open for all to see or because of all the pain this subject causes? Why not share the same mindset, nobody on this site is near Dr. Erhman's caliber, the top scholars as Dr. Erhman said, don't disagree Jesus of Nazareth (a religious teacher or guru) existed, the debate was whether he was God, god or the Son of God. Dr. Erhman made sure he qualifies this with "reputable or accepted", using your same reasoning than we can never know if anything written in the past or any historical figures existed. Its factual that there is far more evidence for Jesus than any other historical figure, that's not in debate unless your fringe! The same deniers of the holocaust, also claiming that we have no historical evidence Julius Caesar or Alexander the Great, and "millions more". We need be consistent, not denying what scholars have agreed upon. Why is the need to disprove Jesus so important, if we take him out than we take all other historical figures that don't have a fraction of Jesus's evidence he was here.

  
  

  The definition of "disingenuous" is someone who uses Dr. Erhman for their own agenda but once they feel he's research is moving against their presuppositions they begin to question his merit like their of his education and scholarly merits. The Radio host was off his rocker, he's trying to argue with Erhman on Bart's home turf, imagine if he was debating Micheal Denton on molecular biology, would you stand on the sidelines saying "Did Dr. Denton adjust his view again, he's whack for doing that!"

  
  

  If one of the regular writers was showing off his post that Dr. Erhman replied to, how come nobody blasted his post mention Erhman's jumping from side to side. I don't recall Dr. Erhman ever saying someone named "Jesus who was a religious guru or teacher did not exist!" because the historical data would not permit Bart from making such a uneducated statement. Erhman himself along with others are blunt when they state "No rational scholar or anyone the historical community and consensus takes serious doubts "a religious man named Jesus Christ existed", to make such a statement demonstrates either their ignorant or their trying to make lots of money writing sensationalism." Dr. Erhman and Dr. Meier both accept the fact if you deny the historical evidence Jesus existed your going to have to wipe the slate clean of all historical figures existing since there's no evidence written by the scribes proving historical figures existed.
  

  Dr. Meier's video shows even more new evidence recently discovered validating that there was a teacher named Jesus of Nazareth, I find it very odd how selective people are when they choice the same author and deny him on the same topic. Dr. Erhman has not changed his views on Jesus, he's honest enough to go where the he feels the evidence and new discoveries will take him. During his debate with D. Wallace, Wallace dropped a bomb telling him that Baylor University has yet to release a fragment the top paleographer in the world has dated to the First Century, Dr. Wallace appears very certain we now have a piece of Bible fragment from the First Century and if it's proven so, Dr. Erhman will gladly adjust his views, he does not cement his mind on certain topics because of his past religous experience, when others are bringing forward fringe authors to compete against highly respected authors and scholars, ask yourself what's their agenda?
  

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAN3kQHTKWI

  The Real Jesus: Paul Maier presents new evidence from history and archeology at Iowa State

  
  

  
  

  to anyone still wanting to learn, watch the video by Paul Meier to see some new and exciting proof from different areas that Jesus did exist and the accuracy of many of the writings and people(Pilate, Caiphus) and others some of the skeptics tried to claim did not exist, very exciting stuff!
• 
  35

  Ignorant Atheist Talk Show Host Destroyed by Agnostic Dr. Bart Erhman! Topic "Did Jesus and Paul exist?"

  by MagicMItchJensen in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i want you to see how fake people are who pretend their open-minded, dr. erhman try's to reason with someone whose mind is totally made up.

  the topic is whether there was a man named jesus and paul, the infidel atheist get's owned because he shows his true colors!.

  1. when would you tell this fool he stupid or willfully ignoring the facts?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  MagicMItchJensen

  I want you to see how fake people are who pretend their open-minded, Dr. Erhman try's to reason with someone whose mind is totally made up. The topic is whether there was a man named Jesus and Paul, the Infidel Atheist get's owned because he shows his true colors!

  1. When would you tell this fool he stupid or willfully ignoring the facts?
  

  2. When did you notice how his bias refused any honest discussion on the historical Jesus and Paul?

  3. Using the Radio Talk Host's logic and follow through, what can we accept as reality and what's fiction?

  4. The Host is giving all us skeptics a very bad name, he's not skeptical, he's stupid! You don't argue with Dr. Bart Erhman telling him your "fringe pseudo scholars" are worth his time reading and quote people Dr. Erhman knows and get owned like this clown did, why are people so dishonest, throughout the interview he's struggling as his audience and engineer seek answers to contradict one of the best scholars in the World!

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9CC7qNZkOE