Three thousand scared of a dozen!

julio
atheist
Posts: 290
Joined: 2008-12-27
User is offlineOffline
Three thousand scared of a dozen!

Three thousand scared of a dozen!
Acts 5:1-11.
After the first two victims of the Official Inquisition [Ananias and Sapphira], killed by Peter FOR MONEY [later, across the centuries would compute into MILLIONS!], great fear came upon all who HEAR the story being told by a third party!!
Do you know why?

No gods with indirect messages to me.


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2366
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is onlineOnline
julio wrote:Three thousand

julio wrote:
Three thousand scared of a dozen! Acts 5:1-11. After the first two victims of the Official Inquisition [Ananias and Sapphira], killed by Peter FOR MONEY [later, across the centuries would compute into MILLIONS!], great fear came upon all who HEAR the story being told by a third party!! Do you know why?
     Acts 4; tells about  those who sold land and turned over all the money to Peter.  Acts: 6 tells how Peter and his aides were arrested and thrown into prison but with the help of GOD were allowed to escape.              The moral is clear "extort all the money you can, kill off those who hold back a cent to terrorize others and God will help you get away with the crimes," amen!

 

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2482
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Jeffrick wrote:julio

Jeffrick wrote:

julio wrote:
Three thousand scared of a dozen! Acts 5:1-11. After the first two victims of the Official Inquisition [Ananias and Sapphira], killed by Peter FOR MONEY [later, across the centuries would compute into MILLIONS!], great fear came upon all who HEAR the story being told by a third party!! Do you know why?
     Acts 4; tells about  those who sold land and turned over all the money to Peter.  Acts: 6 tells how Peter and his aides were arrested and thrown into prison but with the help of GOD were allowed to escape.              The moral is clear "extort all the money you can, kill off those who hold back a cent to terrorize others and God will help you get away with the crimes," amen!

 

 

Blessed be!

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


julio
atheist
Posts: 290
Joined: 2008-12-27
User is offlineOffline
Editing the word "HEAR". It

Editing the word "HEAR". It is "HEARD"; sorry.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10327
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is onlineOnline
My guess? An irrational

My guess? An irrational belief is hard to cling to in the face of massed and organized opposition. Even if the opposition has a similarly irrational belief themselves.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


RespectfulButBe...
Posts: 48
Joined: 2009-02-22
User is offlineOffline
not a hard question to answer, but not an error in the Bible

If my pastor asked two people a question and immediately they each died, I'd be afraid, too.

You don't mess with Peter.

Once an athiest, now a believer, and always ready to debate issues respectfully.


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2366
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is onlineOnline
Please

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

If my pastor asked two people a question and immediately they each died, I'd be afraid, too.

You don't mess with Peter.

       Could you tell  us all why you would continue to 'believe' after reading the hokum of Acts 4: 5: & 6:{  and frankly anything else in the bible.

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


RespectfulButBe...
Posts: 48
Joined: 2009-02-22
User is offlineOffline
hardly hokum

Just because something is not within your common experience doesn't mean it is hokum.  I believe in the standard model of physics despite the hokum of Einstein and Heisenberg, too, though it took the science of physics 800 years before experiments showed that time slows down when you move and particles appear and disappear out of nothing.  I can assure you, if I'd said those things 120 years ago, I would have been laughed out of the profession of physics for peddling hokum.  Now we laugh out those who say the opposite.

Like most people at RRS, you just assume that the Bible is false and post non-arguments (branding something as hokum without showing why it is hokum is NOT an intellectual argument, it is an anti-intellectual shortcut) and then validate your views by hanging out with other people who do the same.  That's pretty thin soup on which to rest your world view.

As for why I believe, that's a complicated matter that would take too long to discuss in the so-called Bible Errancy forum.  I'd point to three singular facts, though:

First, the existence of matter that can form planets, bodies, etc. depends on a number of physical constants taking, within minute tolerances, exactly the form that they take.  So, if you rule out God, you are left with the following arguments: (1) The universe just happened, by a great coincidence, to be constructed just the way it is without any intervention from a reasoning being or (2) there are multitudes of "universes" where the constants are different, and only those "universes" where the constants are just right have life.   If you are aware of another argument, I'd be glad to hear it, but, otherwise, you're stuck with God, a universe that is wildly improbable, or the need to explain not just why there is one universe but why there are gazillions (to use the technical term).  Which of those three hypotheses do you not consider to be hokum, and what is the evidence that supports the other(s)?

Second, there is a remarkable record of prophecy in the Bible.  Show me a prophecy that has not been, and logically cannot be, fulfilled, and I will agree that the Bible is hokum.  But I've read the Bible many times, and I can't think of one.  Here's your chance to set me straight.

Third, the Bible tells us that 500 people saw Jesus after the Resurrection.  It also tells us that, on the day Jesus died, many dead bodies arose and wandered into Jerusalem.  How could a primarily Jewish sect survive in the face of those claims if the claims were untrue?  If the dead didn't walk the streets of Jerusalem, surely those who lived at the time would have said so.

Once an athiest, now a believer, and always ready to debate issues respectfully.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10327
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is onlineOnline
RespectfulButBelieving

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Just because something is not within your common experience doesn't mean it is hokum.

Nor does it mean that it is not. I'll remind you that we're working with more than common experience. We're working with human history.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
 

Like most people at RRS, you just assume that the Bible is false and post non-arguments (branding something as hokum without showing why it is hokum is NOT an intellectual argument, it is an anti-intellectual shortcut) and then validate your views by hanging out with other people who do the same.  That's pretty thin soup on which to rest your world view.

Actually, I think if you put some effort into it, you'd find that 95%+ of all the contributing members of this site are directly aware of the bibles inconsistancies and lies. Not to mention the theft of the tales within from older cultures. The bible is useless gossip, and nothing more. It is most definately not in any way shape or form a running history or even partial history of anything at all. It is fiction.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

As for why I believe, that's a complicated matter that would take too long to discuss in the so-called Bible Errancy forum.

Not to mention that we would refute your reasons for believing. Whether or not that would change your belief is of course another question entirely.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
  

First, the existence of matter that can form planets, bodies, etc. depends on a number of physical constants taking, within minute tolerances, exactly the form that they take.

Logical fallacy alert. Specifically: Begging the question and Retrospective determinism for the two main ones. I could have tossed a couple more in, but that is sufficient. In other words, you're assuming the end result was the intended result, as opposed to accepting that things are the way they are because things are the way they are.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

  So, if you rule out God, you are left with the following arguments:

Ruling out god isn't even an issue. Adding god is begging the question again. The default is that there isn't a god. Therefore your next arguments are wrong by default. But I might have something to say about them anyway.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

 (1) The universe just happened, by a great coincidence, to be constructed just the way it is without any intervention from a reasoning being or (2) there are multitudes of "universes" where the constants are different, and only those "universes" where the constants are just right have life. 

False Trichotomy. If that wasn't a fallacy before(and it must have been), it is now. An expanded version of the False Dichotomy, if you want to look it up.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
   If you are aware of another argument, I'd be glad to hear it, but, otherwise, you're stuck with God, a universe that is wildly improbable, or the need to explain not just why there is one universe but why there are gazillions (to use the technical term).  Which of those three hypotheses do you not consider to be hokum, and what is the evidence that supports the other(s)?

There are at least dozens of hypothesis' that you didn't mention. I'm not going to bother getting into them, as you've adequately demonstrated your ignorance of logic and science at this point, and you probably wouldn't understand anyway.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Second, there is a remarkable record of prophecy in the Bible. 

No, there isn't.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
  Show me a prophecy that has not been, and logically cannot be, fulfilled, and I will agree that the Bible is hokum.

There are enough words in the bible to prophesize anything. War and Peace can do the same thing. And Moby Dick. Also the Demon Wars trilogy by R.A. Salvatore, each book is at least 800 pages long. All of these can do what the bible is said to have done. Therefore this particular argument is even more ridiculous than most.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
   But I've read the Bible many times, and I can't think of one.  Here's your chance to set me straight.

Irrelevant.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Third, the Bible tells us that 500 people saw Jesus after the Resurrection. 

Strange that none of them thought to put it to paper, or even mention it to the authorities. I don't believe you or the bible. Neither of you have the credibility you'd need to pull off a claim like this.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
  It also tells us that, on the day Jesus died, many dead bodies arose and wandered into Jerusalem.

Strange how noone saw this either, eh?

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
   How could a primarily Jewish sect survive in the face of those claims if the claims were untrue?  If the dead didn't walk the streets of Jerusalem, surely those who lived at the time would have said so.

*Snort* Appeal to popularity is what you're leaving on? Wow you need to spend some time learning logic.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


RespectfulButBe...
Posts: 48
Joined: 2009-02-22
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Nor does it

Vastet wrote:
Nor does it mean that it is not. I'll remind you that we're working with more than common experience. We're working with human history.
We're working with your still unsupported assertion that Acts is filled with hokum.  You've said so, but you haven't proffered a shred of evidence to back that up.

Quote:
Actually, I think if you put some effort into it, you'd find that 95%+ of all the contributing members of this site are directly aware of the bibles inconsistancies and lies.
You wouldn't be able to tell that from the Biblical Errancy thread.  I doubt that anyone in here except the guy who started it (and I) has ever read the Bible all the way through.  Have you?

Quote:
Not to mention the theft of the tales within from older cultures.
Again, why wouldn't important world events such as the flood be reflected in the legends of other cultures?  The fact that other cultures also discuss the flood is evidence that it happened, not evidence that it did not.

Quote:
The bible is useless gossip, and nothing more. It is most definately not in any way shape or form a running history or even partial history of anything at all. It is fiction.
Again, blind assertions.  Repeat your mantras all you want, but saying something is false is not in any way shape or form proof that it is false.  It's just part of the RRS "the Bible is obviously wrong" circle jerk.

Quote:
Not to mention that we would refute your reasons for believing. Whether or not that would change your belief is of course another question entirely.
I came here for argument.  And I'm pretty sure that I'm more open minded to evidence than you are, since you have yet to point to any.

Quote:
Logical fallacy alert.
Second rate rhetorical device alert.

Quote:
Specifically: Begging the question and Retrospective determinism for the two main ones. I could have tossed a couple more in, but that is sufficient. In other words, you're assuming the end result was the intended result, as opposed to accepting that things are the way they are because things are the way they are.
I have a hypothesis that explains why something is the way it is.  You, apparently, do not.  I do not claim to know how God came to exist, but I do claim that His existence is a lot more likely than the universe just happening to exist with tolerances of one part in 10^60 in several fundamental constants.

If somebody were to discover a functioning cuckoo clock on Mars, would you say we shouldn't look for the builder, but should instead just accept things the way they are?  Because all of the scientists I know would demand an explanation for how it got there.  Your's is a very lazy world view.

Quote:
The default is that there isn't a god.
Not at all.  This is the Biblical Errancy forum. It's your job to prove the errors in the Bible. 

Quote:
Therefore your next arguments are wrong by default.
Well, they're certainly not wrong by any evidence you've provided, since you've provided none.

Quote:
But I might have something to say about them anyway.
Sure you will.  But I bet it won't involve any evidence.

Quote:
False Trichotomy. If that wasn't a fallacy before(and it must have been), it is now. An expanded version of the False Dichotomy, if you want to look it up.
Condescending (and repeating your incorrect arguments) doesn't make you sound more intelligent.

Quote:
There are at least dozens of hypothesis' that you didn't mention. I'm not going to bother getting into them, as you've adequately demonstrated your ignorance of logic and science at this point, and you probably wouldn't understand anyway.
That is pathetic.  As for my knowledge of logic and science, Harvard gave me a PhD in physics, so I think I must know something about it.  You should try looking up Steven Weinberg's discussions of the Anthropic principle.  Maybe you are willing to hide behind your unsupported logical fallacy bluff, but there are serious people in the world (Weinberg's the brightest person I know, and a Nobel laureate in physics) who take the view that I espouse on this subject very seriously, even if they don't all agree with my conclusion.  But Weinberg actually knows what he's talking about, and you prefer to hide behind a smoke screen of invective instead of marshalling evidence to prove your points.

Quote:
No, there isn't.
Wow, another well thought out, intelligently argued answer.

Quote:
There are enough words in the bible to prophesize anything.
I asked you for a prophecy that was not fulfilled.  Just one, and you win.  But you obviously can't point to one.

Quote:
War and Peace can do the same thing. And Moby Dick. Also the Demon Wars trilogy by R.A. Salvatore, each book is at least 800 pages long. All of these can do what the bible is said to have done. Therefore this particular argument is even more ridiculous than most.
Name one prophecy in War and Peace.  Because Í've read it, in Russian and in English, and I can tell you for a fact that there is none.  Not a single one.  I haven't read the other works, so I can't comment on them.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
But I've read the Bible many times, and I can't think of one.  Here's your chance to set me straight.

Vastet wrote:
Irrelevant.
Yes, it is irrelevant, because you don't know a thing about the Bible.  You talk big about how it's wrong, but you've never read it.  Clearly.

Quote:
Strange that none of them thought to put it to paper, or even mention it to the authorities.
Matthew put it on paper.  And the authorities saw it.

Quote:
Strange how noone saw this either, eh?
Strange how nobody threw the BS flag and affirmatively stated the Christians are wrong, this never happened, eh?

Quote:
*Snort* Appeal to popularity is what you're leaving on? Wow you need to spend some time learning logic.
*Snort* it's not an appeal to popularity, it's an appeal to the fact that you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

I was right.  Not a single fact.  Try reading the Bible, then come back and we'll discuss its truthfulness.

Once an athiest, now a believer, and always ready to debate issues respectfully.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10327
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is onlineOnline
http://www.infidels.org/libra

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

We're working with your still unsupported assertion that Acts is filled with hokum.

Actually, someone else made that particular assertion. I said the bible is fiction. A much better term, in every sense of the word.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
You've said so, but you haven't proffered a shred of evidence to back that up.

It's all over the place. You not knowing is simply proof of your unwillingness to look. It's even on this very site, in a large topic. Since you're so intellectually and physically lazy, I'll point you to one. Just one. The billions of others you can find for yourself. Including the one on this site.

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theism/christianity/errancy.html

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Quote:
Actually, I think if you put some effort into it, you'd find that 95%+ of all the contributing members of this site are directly aware of the bibles inconsistencies and lies.
You wouldn't be able to tell that from the Biblical Errancy thread. I doubt that anyone in here except the guy who started it (and I) has ever read the Bible all the way through. Have you?

Maybe it's you who lack understanding of the bible then. As for reading the bible myself, nope. I got as far as the physical impossibility of adam and eve, before I even thought of reading the bible mind you, and denounced the whole thing as trash on the spot. Mankind is not descended from a single couple. Period. And then I learned about a few dozen other problems with it. Like the impossibility of noah's ark AND the theft of the tale from an older culture. And then the final blow was freewill vs gods lack of showing himself and the argument for absolute morality. If my morality does not conform to the so-called absolute morality of god, then god either doesn't exist or is the definition of evil to me. I'm not going to go over a hundred more problems with the bible for your lazy ass. You auto fail for even suggesting I should.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Quote:
Not to mention the theft of the tales within from older cultures.
Again, why wouldn't important world events such as the flood be reflected in the legends of other cultures? The fact that other cultures also discuss the flood is evidence that it happened, not evidence that it did not.

That's OLDER cultures. Like, hundreds of years older. Or thousands.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Quote:
The bible is useless gossip, and nothing more. It is most definitely not in any way shape or form a running history or even partial history of anything at all. It is fiction.

Again, blind assertions.

No, simple fact. The only blind assertion is your response. Try proving to me that the bible is real, instead of asking me to prove it isn't. I have done so multiple times over. I will no longer recognise requests to prove it again, as any such requests are mere proof of your lack of knowledge in the subject.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
Repeat your mantras all you want, but saying something is false is not in any way shape or form proof that it is false. It's just part of the RRS "the Bible is obviously wrong" circle jerk.

You must be looking in the mirror, he who has not submitted any proof the bible is real.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Quote:
Not to mention that we would refute your reasons for believing. Whether or not that would change your belief is of course another question entirely.

I came here for argument. And I'm pretty sure that I'm more open minded to evidence than you are, since you have yet to point to any.

Now you've resorted to straight out lies. Not good. Especially when you haven't provided anything yourself, while I and this site and the net have provided all the proof you need within a two second google search. You just are too closed minded to accept reality.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Quote:
Logical fallacy alert.
Second rate rhetorical device alert.

Response grade = fail.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Quote:
Specifically: Begging the question and Retrospective determinism for the two main ones. I could have tossed a couple more in, but that is sufficient. In other words, you're assuming the end result was the intended result, as opposed to accepting that things are the way they are because things are the way they are.
I have a hypothesis that explains why something is the way it is.

No, you don't. You have a logical fallacy. It defeats itself. Like two plus two equals four.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
You, apparently, do not.

Look in the mirror as you say this. Over and over until it sinks into your thick skull.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
I do not claim to know how God came to exist, but I do claim that His existence is a lot more likely than the universe just happening to exist with tolerances of one part in 10^60 in several fundamental constants.

Which shows you don't know basic math either. How sad. However improbable the universe is, a god is infinitely more so.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

If somebody were to discover a functioning cuckoo clock on Mars, would you say we shouldn't look for the builder, but should instead just accept things the way they are? Because all of the scientists I know would demand an explanation for how it got there. Your's is a very lazy world view.

Now you're trying Ray Comfort!? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA. Go eat a banana.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Quote:
The default is that there isn't a god.

Not at all.

Yes, it is. Simple, basic, fucking logic. Occam's Razor, to be precise.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
This is the Biblical Errancy forum. It's your job to prove the errors in the Bible.

No, it's your job to disprove them. But you just don't get it.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Quote:
Therefore your next arguments are wrong by default.

Well, they're certainly not wrong by any evidence you've provided, since you've provided none.

Wishful thinking gets you nowhere, except in your own mind.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Quote:
But I might have something to say about them anyway.

Sure you will. But I bet it won't involve any evidence.

Bet you it did. Bet you also don't realise it.

Quote:
False Trichotomy. If that wasn't a fallacy before(and it must have been), it is now. An expanded version of the False Dichotomy, if you want to look it up.
Condescending (and repeating your incorrect arguments) doesn't make you sound more intelligent.

Not responding to it being pointed out that your logic is faulty gives you an auto-fail. Playing the victim in the process just makes you an idiot.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

That is pathetic.

Yes, you are.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
As for my knowledge of logic and science, Harvard gave me a PhD in physics, so I think I must know something about it.

Bullshit. You haven't proved that either, and at this point I'm calling it for what it is.

I notice you mention logic in the first segment of your sentence, but then ignore it when pulling your fictional PhD out for physics(which, by the way, has nothing to do with the bible, history, or anything else under discussion in this topic). Proving you can't even respond to your lack of logic when confronting it. How sad is that?

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
You should try looking up Steven Weinberg's discussions of the Anthropic principle.

Refuted here. For one.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Maybe you are willing to hide behind your unsupported logical fallacy bluff,

You have no idea how ridiculous this makes you sound. I almost fell off my chair laughing.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

but there are serious people in the world (Weinberg's the brightest person I know, and a Nobel laureate in physics)

Guess you don't know many people. And physics doesn't make you master of all subjects. It means you accomplished something in physics. A mere portion of the scientific community. Where's his Nobel prize for evolution studies? Biology? Astronomy? Quantum physics? Engineering? Guess he thought he had all the answers and stopped learning. Sounds like foolish arrogance to me. Just like you sound. Every word you type is propping my arguments up even more for anyone who's watching and has even a semi-functional brain.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
who take the view that I espouse on this subject very seriously, even if they don't all agree with my conclusion. But Weinberg actually knows what he's talking about, and you prefer to hide behind a smoke screen of invective instead of marshalling evidence to prove your points.

You wish.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Quote:
No, there isn't.
Wow, another well thought out, intelligently argued answer.

Look who's talking.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Quote:
There are enough words in the bible to prophesize anything.
I asked you for a prophecy that was not fulfilled. Just one, and you win. But you obviously can't point to one.

I proved that when one takes the bible and tries to use it to prophecize, one can find anything. Now you prove that a prophecy came true when the prophecy was known . Don't even try jesus, he could also be a work of fiction. No contemporary accounts of his existence exist.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Quote:
War and Peace can do the same thing. And Moby Dick. Also the Demon Wars trilogy by R.A. Salvatore, each book is at least 800 pages long. All of these can do what the bible is said to have done. Therefore this particular argument is even more ridiculous than most.
Name one prophecy in War and Peace. Because Í've read it, in Russian and in English, and I can tell you for a fact that there is none. Not a single one. I haven't read the other works, so I can't comment on them.

I guess I can throw you another bone. We'll see if you use it.

http://apostasies.blogspot.com/2006/12/refutation-of-christianity-part-iii.html

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
Yes, it is irrelevant, because you don't know a thing about the Bible. You talk big about how it's wrong, but you've never read it. Clearly.

I don't have to have read the bible. It's still irrelevant.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:
Quote:
Strange that none of them thought to put it to paper, or even mention it to the authorities.

Matthew put it on paper. And the authorities saw it.

Bullshit. It wasn't recorded for decades at least, and never by the authorities, who were the most likely to record it. Look who doesn't know his own religion? How surprised are we? Not at all.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Quote:
Strange how noone saw this either, eh?

Strange how nobody threw the BS flag and affirmatively stated the Christians are wrong, this never happened, eh?

Why would they? At the time, christianity was a cult in every sense of the word. Its members were rightly viewed as insane, and were very few in number. Now it's a global cult. It's survival and wide spreading is all that gives it any authority at all today, imaginary though that authority is. Noone wastes an article in a newspaper or writes a report on some mentally ill person with delusions.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

Quote:
*Snort* Appeal to popularity is what you're leaving on? Wow you need to spend some time learning logic.
*Snort* it's not an appeal to popularity, it's an appeal to the fact that you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

No, it's an appeal to popularity. My 8 year old niece had a better understanding of logic than you do when she was 5. It's really quite sad for someone who claims to have a PhD to not know the first thing about logic.

RespectfulButBelieving wrote:

I was right. Not a single fact. Try reading the Bible, then come back and we'll discuss its truthfulness.

*Snort*

How about you don't bother coming back at all? You have nothing constructive to add, you ignore reality and logic for your own fantasy, and everything you've said has been refuted a hundred times over on this site alone.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10327
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is onlineOnline
http://www.infidels.org/libra

 

Double post

~Vastet

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.