I asked why you do not take up the debate challenge and I think your comment is appropo, Alan:
>Because it is so bad. And life is too short to waste time on people like that. Others have already done a far better job than I could in dealing with the basics of his claims.
The blade cuts both ways!
Rex
Shining One
JoinedPosts by Shining One
-
94
The Skeptic's Worst Nightmare (S)
by Shining One incheck some of this out and you may see why there are two sides to the issues that are portrayed as so one sided here.
you will immediately smell the b.s.
emanating from the skeptic's book of bible stories!
-
-
Shining One
-
94
The Skeptic's Worst Nightmare (S)
by Shining One incheck some of this out and you may see why there are two sides to the issues that are portrayed as so one sided here.
you will immediately smell the b.s.
emanating from the skeptic's book of bible stories!
-
-
Shining One
>one we cannot answer simply by appealing to the number of surviving manuscripts that preserve their writings.
The point is this: the manuscripts are so much in agreement that it lends added veracity to their claims, Not only in agreement but in the supernatural effort that kept the comparative texts so close to what was written originally. You can see that simply by looking at the Dead Sea Scrolls and comparing them to the previous oldest documentation. In some case we are talking a 1200 year gap!
Old testament full or partial manuscripts number in the 5000 range or more??? New Testament(not applicable to the above reference) manuscripts number over 25,000! Even O.J. could ahve been convicted with that mountain of evidence. The true nature of what passes for skepticism is that NO amount of evidence, written or otherwise, is ever enough for one who is BIASED with presuppositions!
Rex -
61
Alan F's flaming arguments and insults
by Rex inhi alan, .
have you ever looked at the carved up mountains, hills and valleys?????
have examined the remarkable similarity to the mount st. helen's canyon that was carved our very quickly?
-
-
Shining One
Hi Everyone,
Not much above deserves a comment. The comments speak for themselves and the same situation exists now for those ones:......follow the leader. It is fascinating to see your accusations and insuations for what they are: projecting your own fears and phobias and assigning them to me.
You don't want to hear any dispute of what you have come to believe and I do realize that blade cuts both ways. It's less, "once a JW, always a JW", than what it really is: simple human (dysfunctional) nature.
Rex -
18
Christian Answer to Atheist Bible: the Flood
by Rex inno, i did not write this.
it is a compilation from academia: .
the source of the gilgamesh epic .
-
-
Shining One
Hi Alan,
>But since you seem to want to challenge knowledgeable people, you go right ahead and present any evidence your little heart desires, and let's see what happens?
But I'm fairly sure that you're going to run away at this point.
Are you going to 'run away' and just pretend to be above debating the fellow on the Skeptic's Nightmare links?
Rex -
61
Alan F's flaming arguments and insults
by Rex inhi alan, .
have you ever looked at the carved up mountains, hills and valleys?????
have examined the remarkable similarity to the mount st. helen's canyon that was carved our very quickly?
-
-
Shining One
itsallgoodnow,
I respect a woman who is not a backslapper and a toady...oops, just read your post again! Forget that, Watchtowerettes are sometimes just followers even after they leave the Borg. BTW, you have a real nice picture.
Rex -
94
The Skeptic's Worst Nightmare (S)
by Shining One incheck some of this out and you may see why there are two sides to the issues that are portrayed as so one sided here.
you will immediately smell the b.s.
emanating from the skeptic's book of bible stories!
-
-
Shining One
>Having skimmed a couple of the links, I find that it's a complete waste of time to read further. Your man James Patrick Holding writes a better defense than you do, but it's still pretty bad.
If it is so bad why not take his debate challenge?
Rex -
94
The Skeptic's Worst Nightmare (S)
by Shining One incheck some of this out and you may see why there are two sides to the issues that are portrayed as so one sided here.
you will immediately smell the b.s.
emanating from the skeptic's book of bible stories!
-
-
Shining One
>Forgetting that only the original text, not every copy of scripture, is without error: Wow! An admission that the bible contains errors! If the bible is supposed to have been set down by divine inspiration...couldn't an all-powerful god have simply divinely inspired all the copyists through the ages too?
God works through man, His creation, not in spite of him.
>Or are the errors simply to test us mere dumb mortals, who can't possibly understand anyway (#3)?
Obviously, You can't see the forest for the trees. WHAT does the story tell? WHAT does the parable mean?
God obviously did use man to protect His word down through the ages, the evidence within the Dead Sea Scrolls prove this. Now if you simple don't want to believe, why not be honest about it? God does not fit into your lifestyle? So be it.
Rex -
94
The Skeptic's Worst Nightmare (S)
by Shining One incheck some of this out and you may see why there are two sides to the issues that are portrayed as so one sided here.
you will immediately smell the b.s.
emanating from the skeptic's book of bible stories!
-
-
Shining One
A good question here on the numbers that are often mentioned in scripture...
We all know that the books of the Bible are translated from Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew ino our various languages, hundreds of them in general. Did you know that the Hebrew used letters to represent numbers? This is troublesome for translators. The contention if 'inerrancy' is never cut and dried. There are a lot of variables. The 'inerrancy' claim is a presuppostion, a philisophical point, that is held on the original manuscripts, even amongst conservative scholars. Some do not hold to 'inerrancy' but do hold to 'infallibility'. This is more realistic since we obviously do not have anything close to the originals. You will never have an absolute, 100% inerrancy unless God would choose to reinspire a particular team of translators. God has always worked through man and not around him. That's why you see so many instances where God is described in natural terms. People need to do more looking at the intent behind a passage and its meaning to us personally, instead of fretting over the details.
Rex -
94
The Skeptic's Worst Nightmare (S)
by Shining One incheck some of this out and you may see why there are two sides to the issues that are portrayed as so one sided here.
you will immediately smell the b.s.
emanating from the skeptic's book of bible stories!
-
-
Shining One
>There's about as much evidence for the resurrection of the Bab as there is for the resurrection of Jesus. So why is one better than the other? Isn't it evident that both claims are spurious?
AlanF
On the resurrection: 25,000 manuscripts that are essentially in agreement isn't enough 'evidence' for you? Hmmm, and not even the undisputed testimony of Paul before the Jewish and Roman authorities where He claimed hundreds were still alive who had seen the risen Christ? How about the fact that the poor, Jewish carpenter made such a impact in three years of ministry that the movement turned the Roman empire upside down...even after the crushing of the revolt in 70 a.d.? There are TEN manuscripts in existence that tell us of the wars of Julius Ceasar and you may accept that as history. 25000 manuscripts aren't enough 'extraordinary evidence' for you to admit that there might be something to the events of Calvary? I already knew what your response would be, Alan.
That's ok, I don't mean anything really harsh toward you personally. You are dealing with the Watchtower scam in your own way and helping others. That's a good thing and you are to be commended. It would be refreshing to see more openmindedness from all of us here. I realize that you have studied in earnest on the several topics that you share with us. I respect your research of the sciences and readily admit your superior knowlege. I just want you to see that there really are two sides to every issue and that 'the jury is still out' when it comes to disproving or proving what the facts really are. You seem to be a naruralist and I am a supernaturalist. I bear no ill will toward you and apologize for my disrespect.
I can even 'break bread' with a liberal like Bishop Spong while contending that he is dead wrong! My hope is that you get that supernatural touch in your life and that the Lord reveals Himself to you in an unmistakable way. I got along real well with Jim Penton though we are diametrically opposed on theology. We got to talk and fellowhip at the Berean Conference in '99 & 2000, which is held every summer at Grove City College in Pennsylvania. -
94
The Skeptic's Worst Nightmare (S)
by Shining One incheck some of this out and you may see why there are two sides to the issues that are portrayed as so one sided here.
you will immediately smell the b.s.
emanating from the skeptic's book of bible stories!
-
-
Shining One
Oh my, this one is a real treasure....
http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nowayjose.html
Why give a skeptic the benefit of the doubt?
http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nowayjose.html
Comparisons of skeptics, who not to waste time on ( a special one for Alan F.):
http://www.tektonics.org/af/calcon_CC1.html
Hey Runningman, can I nominate you and your 'Skeptic's Bible Stories' here?
http://www.tektonics.org/parody/screwball.html
Another Skeptical argument debunked, the Canon of scripture:
http://www.tektonics.org/lp/ntcanon.html
These (and a few other links) should keep the skeptics busy for awhile if they are as intellectually honest as they claim to be! BTW fellows, debates can be had here.......
Rex