On the verge...

Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

...Of something huge!

Perhaps not as big as some discoveries out there, but I have found out some very interesting things in my research into the early Gnostics. You may have to wait until I post the dissertation, but in the end I think everyone who reads it will be pleasantly surprised.

A little confused? Let's just say I stumbled onto the very evolution of Christianity, and can pretty much pinpoint where and when it came to be and from where. And the dates I have come to find for these things will shock you!

I'm hoping to make a show of this with some help from the rest of the Squad. I'm looking forward to getting this essay done and in the hands of atheists and free-thinkers everywhere. Hopefully I can get this thing published somewhere.

The more I research the better my position stands. Stay tuned...

Rook

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


Atheist_Scathe
Posts: 69
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Re: On the verge...

Rook_Hawkins wrote:
...Of something huge!

Perhaps not as big as some discoveries out there, but I have found out some very interesting things in my research into the early Gnostics. You may have to wait until I post the dissertation, but in the end I think everyone who reads it will be pleasantly surprised.

A little confused? Let's just say I stumbled onto the very evolution of Christianity, and can pretty much pinpoint where and when it came to be and from where. And the dates I have come to find for these things will shock you!

I'm hoping to make a show of this with some help from the rest of the Squad. I'm looking forward to getting this essay done and in the hands of atheists and free-thinkers everywhere. Hopefully I can get this thing published somewhere.

The more I research the better my position stands. Stay tuned...

Rook

"god"-dammit, now I'm poised at the edge of my seat! :twisted: Let me know how that goes, you've piqued my full interest!


Equilibrium
Equilibrium's picture
Posts: 219
Joined: 2006-02-13
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Make it into a flyer!


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Equilibrium wrote:
Make it into a flyer!

Knowing Rook it'll be 50 pages or more.

I talked to Rook about this tonight, and I'm really looking forward to doing a show on it..

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


CynageN
Posts: 101
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Can't wait to hear/read about it.


LeftofLarry
RRS local affiliateScientist
LeftofLarry's picture
Posts: 1199
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

BLASPHEMY! YOU WILL ALL ROT IN HELL!!!! Smiling Just kiddin' can't wait to read it.


Rigor_OMortis
Rigor_OMortis's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2006-06-18
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

That actually sounds very interesting...

I'll see the "God" movie before, as I haven't had the chance, hopefully that'll clear up some of the research I'm doing.

Rook, do expect an article and many comments on that, plus, some real background check. If you get this nice enough, you guys can write the "Anti-Bible".

Inquisition - "The flames are all long gone, but the pain lingers on..."
http://rigoromortis.blogspot.com/


Equilibrium
Equilibrium's picture
Posts: 219
Joined: 2006-02-13
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Rigor_OMortis wrote:
"Anti-Bible"

Yes! Rook has his new book title.


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

HAHA! Yeah, there you go. Although I would probably suggest using the Greek form of the word, only because I'm partial to their nature.

Aντιτιτηεναι η Βίβλος (Against the Bible)

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Re: On the verge...

Rook_Hawkins wrote:
... Let's just say I stumbled onto the very evolution of Christianity, and can pretty much pinpoint where and when it came to be and from where. And the dates I have come to find for these things will shock you!

I just popped major wood Smiling

Can't wait to see what you've come up with.

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


LeftofLarry
RRS local affiliateScientist
LeftofLarry's picture
Posts: 1199
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

I think Rook has been preparing to become god.


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

LeftofLarry wrote:
I think Rook has been preparing to become god.

Perhaps.... *shifty eyes*


GrimJesta
GrimJesta's picture
Posts: 152
Joined: 2006-06-21
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Is there an ETA on this becoming public? The reason I'm interested is because right now I am debating with one of my good friends about the origins of Jesus and how Gnosticism influenced the creation of this mythical figure. I'd really like to read what you wrote and see if it'd help my side of the discussion.

Jeeze, I want to read it just to read it. Uh oh. I said "Jesus"[sorta] in vain. My soul is screwed.

-=Grim=-

No Nyarlathotep, Know Peace.
Know Nyarlathotep, No Peace.


HealingBlight
HealingBlight's picture
Posts: 256
Joined: 2006-04-13
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Oh by oh boy oh boy, I'm sure we are all wetting our pants over this, I'm sure we are all wetting other peoples pants over this.
Heehee. Ok, I am actualy a little intrested in seeing this, maybe it will be useful in europe, I hear there is a court case that could be enlightened about this twist, you know, help point out the BSness of the chruch. Smiling

-----------------------
I'll get back to you when I think of something worthwhile to say.


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

The show featuring this information will be available for subscribers (or people who purchase the shows before they air for free) as soon as Sapient finishes the editting process. He has to make sure it sounds pretty-like.

The document is being reviewed currently by a friend and when it is sent to me again, it will undergo whatever changes need to be applied, and then I will send it back and when the final edit is done it will be published. Hopefully soon.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


LeftofLarry
RRS local affiliateScientist
LeftofLarry's picture
Posts: 1199
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Rook_Hawkins wrote:
The show featuring this information will be available for subscribers (or people who purchase the shows before they air for free) as soon as Sapient finishes the editting process. He has to make sure it sounds pretty-like.

The document is being reviewed currently by a friend and when it is sent to me again, it will undergo whatever changes need to be applied, and then I will send it back and when the final edit is done it will be published. Hopefully soon.

Rock on Rook, what are you writing this for? Is it for a degree? or are you just hell bent... in destroying theism? Smiling Also, where are you publishing?

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server which houses Celebrity Atheists.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Speaking on beahlf of Rook because I'm here...

LeftofLarry wrote:
Is it for a degree?

Nope, the man is just a writeaholic.

Quote:
or are you just hell bent... in destroying theism?

I believe his original goal was simply the pursuit of knowledge, the end of Christianity was simply a byproduct of his desire to learn more.

Quote:
Also, where are you publishing?

At RationalResponders.com first... then... who knows? TIME? Newsweek? Discovery Magazine?

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Equilibrium
Equilibrium's picture
Posts: 219
Joined: 2006-02-13
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

You guys have to give me the option to subscribe first!


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Equilibrium wrote:
You guys have to give me the option to subscribe first!

LOL, you spolied VIP.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Equilibrium
Equilibrium's picture
Posts: 219
Joined: 2006-02-13
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Sapient wrote:
Equilibrium wrote:
You guys have to give me the option to subscribe first!

LOL, you spolied VIP.

Hey well, I can always keep the money Eye-wink

"Character is higher than intellect... A great soul will be strong to live, as well as to think."
-Ralph Waldo Emerson


LeftofLarry
RRS local affiliateScientist
LeftofLarry's picture
Posts: 1199
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Sapient wrote:
Speaking on beahlf of Rook because I'm here...
LeftofLarry wrote:
Is it for a degree?

Nope, the man is just a writeaholic.

Quote:
or are you just hell bent... in destroying theism?

I believe his original goal was simply the pursuit of knowledge, the end of Christianity was simply a byproduct of his desire to learn more.

Quote:
Also, where are you publishing?

At RationalResponders.com first... then... who knows? TIME? Newsweek? Discovery Magazine?

absolutely....I think you should try and get published on ANSWERS IN GENESIS..HAHAHA...

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server which houses Celebrity Atheists.


GrimJesta
GrimJesta's picture
Posts: 152
Joined: 2006-06-21
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Argh, I really want to know what this is about. Maybe you should wait for a day there's no wind and sky-write it. Smiling

-=Grim=-

No Nyarlathotep, Know Peace.
Know Nyarlathotep, No Peace.


Nick
Posts: 187
Joined: 2006-08-01
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

GrimJesta wrote:
Argh, I really want to know what this is about. Maybe you should wait for a day there's no wind and sky-write it. Smiling

-=Grim=-

What's that in the sky?! It's a bird... it's a plane... No! It's Rook Hawkins!!

Wilson: "We were afraid that if you found out you solved a case with absolutely no medical evidence you'd think you were God." House: "God doesn't limp."


Roark
Posts: 7
Joined: 2006-07-09
User is offlineOffline
doubt

I?m not saying that knowledge cant come in different shapes and sizes, as I am also not saying that Rook doesn?t know certain things about what he says he knows. But are you people so starved for knowledge that your going to eat up everything this guy says?

First off, I?ve been reading this thread, not sure if I wanted to spend the time to even do this, as I am sure I will regret it anyway. But all he is doing is going over all ready published information, if you people want the dates of when Christianity started, how it started, including the where and why of it, all you have to do is open an art history book, or take a new testament class. You don?t even need to go through that much trouble, spend a day at the bookstore. There isn?t any mystery to it, theologians have already pin pointed these dates he claims to have discovered.

Theologians are most of the real experts on the bible, because they go to college, and work with professors who have actually published work of their own because they deal with the actual ancient documents and writings, and have colleagues to keep up with, and check on their work to validate it. If you want a truly objective view on the phenomena of religion, read some Karen Armstrong.

I can?t imagine how a 23 year old, with seemingly no college or publishing experience, can claim to be an expert on anything.

I looked up the supposed Greek word you used for ?against the bible,? and I can?t find it anywhere, where did you get it? I checked both ancient and new Greek, I can?t find the word for ?against? that you used.

I also looked at you?re myspace account because I was interested in someone who claims to be an expert on something, I find it interesting that although making such a claim as one who is an expert, one finds the need to give the finger in nearly every picture they have scrolling of themselves?I can see what you stand for without having to go any further on your site.

How many places have you been? Just curious, you talk as if you?ve been all over the world.

I also have to wonder, me being an atheist myself, in what the point is in beating a dead horse, why look into everything there is to know about a book that is mostly mythology? The only thing both atheist and theologians can agree upon (theologians who believe in god anyway) is that one cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

With this said, the greatest philosophical minds can come to an agreement about neither being able to prove or disprove something, it seems that to endlessly debate this topic is a waste of time and energy. Why is it a waste? Because anyone who truly believes in god, and has faith, will not listen to any of the facts presented to them, other than what their religious organization feeds them. Nothing you say or do will change their minds. If you?re an atheist, good for you, I don?t run into many atheists (or Christians for that matter), who actually live their lives as if they truly believe in what they say they do.

Dedicating all your time, to debate with people who are likely to stay a Christian, raising the same points over and over about the same contradictions found a long time ago, and thinking to yourself as they do to themselves afterward that you truly won the debate, is not living your life as a person who is truly free in this existence, to think and feel and do as they wish with the responsibility of the self awareness they have found for themselves.

No, you are still living your life ruled by a book you don?t believe in, because you spend all your time finding the little ?facts? and contradictions in something false to begin with. This is all so that you can smile, and feel good about yourselves when you get into a debate. It?s easy to defeat a Christian in a philosophical debate as long as you know about the basics of logic.

Non-cognitivism is a loose ethical belief that says that one cannot honestly know of anything in particular that can be vindicated as ?right? or ?wrong.? Anyone who claims to believe in this, instead of using it to prove a philosophical point, is too afraid or too influenced by the sickness of the post-modern world, to put their finger on anything they find unethical; basically having no ethical backing to live their lives with. If one tries, they can find the universal basis for right and wrong in most day-to-day and life long situations they find themselves in. Non-cognitivism might address an interesting aspect of meta-ethical philosophies, but to claim it as a belief system, I cant honestly see how people would live their lives applying it.

Im not saying that Rook said he believed in non-cognitivism, I just saw the word tossed around somewhere in the forum, and thought it kind of interesting.

The only person that seems to have anything of value to say here is Godel. I was wondering if you?ve read Godel, Escher, Bach, and what you thought of it if you had.

Roark

I AM?????????

SOME ?EXPERT? WHO IS FULL OF HIMSELF!!!!!

(Insert pretentious picture of someone mysteriously staring off into space here)


LeftofLarry
RRS local affiliateScientist
LeftofLarry's picture
Posts: 1199
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Re: doubt

Roark wrote:
I?m not saying that knowledge cant come in different shapes and sizes, as I am also not saying that Rook doesn?t know certain things about what he says he knows. But are you people so starved for knowledge that your going to eat up everything this guy says?

First off, I?ve been reading this thread, not sure if I wanted to spend the time to even do this, as I am sure I will regret it anyway. But all he is doing is going over all ready published information, if you people want the dates of when Christianity started, how it started, including the where and why of it, all you have to do is open an art history book, or take a new testament class. You don?t even need to go through that much trouble, spend a day at the bookstore. There isn?t any mystery to it, theologians have already pin pointed these dates he claims to have discovered.

Theologians are most of the real experts on the bible, because they go to college, and work with professors who have actually published work of their own because they deal with the actual ancient documents and writings, and have colleagues to keep up with, and check on their work to validate it. If you want a truly objective view on the phenomena of religion, read some Karen Armstrong.

I can?t imagine how a 23 year old, with seemingly no college or publishing experience, can claim to be an expert on anything.

I looked up the supposed Greek word you used for ?against the bible,? and I can?t find it anywhere, where did you get it? I checked both ancient and new Greek, I can?t find the word for ?against? that you used.

I also looked at you?re myspace account because I was interested in someone who claims to be an expert on something, I find it interesting that although making such a claim as one who is an expert, one finds the need to give the finger in nearly every picture they have scrolling of themselves?I can see what you stand for without having to go any further on your site.

How many places have you been? Just curious, you talk as if you?ve been all over the world.

I also have to wonder, me being an atheist myself, in what the point is in beating a dead horse, why look into everything there is to know about a book that is mostly mythology? The only thing both atheist and theologians can agree upon (theologians who believe in god anyway) is that one cannot prove or disprove the existence of god.

With this said, the greatest philosophical minds can come to an agreement about neither being able to prove or disprove something, it seems that to endlessly debate this topic is a waste of time and energy. Why is it a waste? Because anyone who truly believes in god, and has faith, will not listen to any of the facts presented to them, other than what their religious organization feeds them. Nothing you say or do will change their minds. If you?re an atheist, good for you, I don?t run into many atheists (or Christians for that matter), who actually live their lives as if they truly believe in what they say they do.

Dedicating all your time, to debate with people who are likely to stay a Christian, raising the same points over and over about the same contradictions found a long time ago, and thinking to yourself as they do to themselves afterward that you truly won the debate, is not living your life as a person who is truly free in this existence, to think and feel and do as they wish with the responsibility of the self awareness they have found for themselves.

No, you are still living your life ruled by a book you don?t believe in, because you spend all your time finding the little ?facts? and contradictions in something false to begin with. This is all so that you can smile, and feel good about yourselves when you get into a debate. It?s easy to defeat a Christian in a philosophical debate as long as you know about the basics of logic.

Non-cognitivism is a loose ethical belief that says that one cannot honestly know of anything in particular that can be vindicated as ?right? or ?wrong.? Anyone who claims to believe in this, instead of using it to prove a philosophical point, is too afraid or too influenced by the sickness of the post-modern world, to put their finger on anything they find unethical; basically having no ethical backing to live their lives with. If one tries, they can find the universal basis for right and wrong in most day-to-day and life long situations they find themselves in. Non-cognitivism might address an interesting aspect of meta-ethical philosophies, but to claim it as a belief system, I cant honestly see how people would live their lives applying it.

Im not saying that Rook said he believed in non-cognitivism, I just saw the word tossed around somewhere in the forum, and thought it kind of interesting.

The only person that seems to have anything of value to say here is Godel. I was wondering if you?ve read Godel, Escher, Bach, and what you thought of it if you had.

Roark

I AM?????????

SOME ?EXPERT? WHO IS FULL OF HIMSELF!!!!!

(Insert pretentious picture of someone mysteriously staring off into space here)

Don't you think you may be prejudging here? Obviously, I haven't read what he has to say...so I can't comment on it...and you are basing your whole argument on his myspace page. Do you know Rook personally? maybe he did stumble on something, that's been missed by scholars or theologians? maybe he didn't and all he did was re-iterate...either way...whay such negativity?

rook likes to do research on biblical texts, pre-cannonical gospels, etc... maybe..just maybe he may have connected some dots.. who knows..I just think perhaps you should wait to read it....before discrediting it...

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server which houses Celebrity Atheists.


GrimJesta
GrimJesta's picture
Posts: 152
Joined: 2006-06-21
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

LOL, how many of the greatest minds in history didn't have a college degree? College has little impact on being a scholar. All it proves is your discipline, not how intelligent or articulate you are. How would not going to college negate a persons research?

That doesn't make sense.

That being said, I don't see anyone "starved for knowledge", but people interested in hearing what Rook has to say. He did make a big claim, and one people want to see backed up. But that's bad?

-=Grim=-

No Nyarlathotep, Know Peace.
Know Nyarlathotep, No Peace.


Roark
Posts: 7
Joined: 2006-07-09
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

I?m not basing all of this off of his myspace account. It was merely one of the points on the validity of the mindset of someone who is a self-proclaimed expert. You don?t see Steven Hawking (for instance) spreading uneducated profanities needlessly on a personal site dedicated to letting the visitor know about who they are as a person.

Additionally, I find it highly improbable, that someone who has lived a very short time on this earth, compared to the researchers who've dedicated more than half their lives digging through and analyzing all of the aforementioned topic/topics, only to be found by someone who just recently in their lives (comparatively speaking) decided to read up on Christian documents.

By definition, what Rook has done, doesn?t make him an "expert" in any sense of the word, but like I said, it doesn?t make his current knowledge less true. It makes him know what anyone who has the time to do the research, find out just the same.

Copying and pasting exactly everything I wrote and then adding a small comment about it is a waste of space.

What I?m saying isn?t negative, no more so negative than some of the responses some people who post here say to mentalities and arguments they disagree with.

And although I do agree that college isn?t a necessary prerequisite to being smart and educated, what you might not be thinking of is the resources available to someone who isn?t a part of the types of organizations I?m talking about. No one who just proclaims to know things and does a lot of reading, has the ability in the scholarly setting, to gain access to rare and original texts and documents, or access to opinions of colleagues who have been in the field for longer than rook has been alive, and are most likely college educated and teach what they know.

Show me a modern theologian, philosopher or scholar who isn?t either college educated, older than 23, or currently associated with other great minds of their field, and I?ll take this guy seriously in his claims. There?s something called credentials, unfortunately with the Internet, anyone and everyone can seem as smart and as qualified as they want to be.


GrimJesta
GrimJesta's picture
Posts: 152
Joined: 2006-06-21
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Roark wrote:

What I?m saying isn?t negative, no more so negative than some of the responses some people who post here say to mentalities and arguments they disagree with.

That is my only beef with a lot of the discussion that goes on around here at times...

:cry:

-=Grim=-

No Nyarlathotep, Know Peace.
Know Nyarlathotep, No Peace.


Equilibrium
Equilibrium's picture
Posts: 219
Joined: 2006-02-13
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

If he can back up his claim, I don't care if he doesn't have a college degree.

He is still up there with Dennis McKinley and Richard Carrier on studies of Christianity.

"Character is higher than intellect... A great soul will be strong to live, as well as to think."
-Ralph Waldo Emerson


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Roark wrote:

And although I do agree that college isn?t a necessary prerequisite to being smart and educated...

If you feel the above is true, why do you keep referring back to below....

Quote:
There?s something called credentials, unfortunately with the Internet, anyone and everyone can seem as smart and as qualified as they want to be.

We seem to be in agreement you don't need a college degree or other credentials to be qualified to speak on certain topics. And as an FYI, all of Rooks work is being checked and edited by famed historian Richard Carrier, who will be in studio with us in a few weeks to record a batch of shows. So credentials that can be added to the editing of Rooks work are:

- B.A. from Berkeley in History and Classical Civilizations
- M.A. and M.Phil in ancient history from Columbia University
- Most of the way through a doctorate of Ancient History at Columbia University

That enough credentials to get you to stop prejudging?

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

I'm not "self-proclaimed" anything. I never claimed scholarship or totted fake degrees, I'm upfront about my age, but this is a subject i AM well versed in.

Instead of attacking me, you are more then welcome to come on the show and quiz me.

If you have something to say to me, say it where we can all hear it, and where I can prove to you the extent of my knowledge. I tire of people claiming that somehow age is a factor in knowledge, when in most cases people like Aristotle and Socrates were not much older then I am when they changed whole civilizations with new thoughts and ideas. People younger then I am now ran entire societies, ruled over vast empires...

Alexander the Great conquered most of the known world at the time, and he was only nine years older then I am at his death and was 20 when he became king of Macedon.

Nobody here is putting me on any pedastool, and any admiration I have from fans is earned through the sweat of the research I put in daily on a variety of subjects. Again, if you are so sure of my abilities, feel free to come on the show and we'll see exactly what YOU know compared to what I do.

And from what I can see, anybody who claims that Theologians are the real experts on this subject is somebody who knows little to nothing of historicity.

I'd be fine in giving this diatribe here an audio response with more meat to it.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


Roark
Posts: 7
Joined: 2006-07-09
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Its interesting what you call prejudging, most people call verifying. Why should anyone trust someone they don?t know, who calls themselves an expert, without looking into who they are and what they?ve done first?

If you?ve been on a job interview, or have done the hiring in the interview, you know what I?m talking about.

I think it?s odd that people get offensive at a site called rational response, to someone who challenges the claims of someone else, I have no knowledge of him, nor did I find any about his work or who was editing it.

I referred to the point on credentials to make the point that although it doesn?t take a degree to be smart, when people usually call themselves experts, they have a full body of work published, and/or have some sort of educational background. Is this hard to understand


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Roark wrote:
Its interesting what you call prejudging, most people call verifying. Why should anyone trust someone they don?t know, who calls themselves an expert, without looking into who they are and what they?ve done first?

You're attacking me instead of the material, that's why! You care only about discrediting me and not the research that I've done. You want to tackle something? You want to "verify" something? Then listen to the radio show, and when I say something, you check it out. If I'm right, you've got no where to stand calling me out. If I'm wrong, then go ahead and call me out all you want - as long as you keep in mind this is about the message not the messenger.

And stop being such a dick.

Quote:
If you?ve been on a job interview, or have done the hiring in the interview, you know what I?m talking about.

So I'm hiring somebody for a position in welding. They have no certifications in such things, no schooling in it what-so-ever, but they have been welding all their lives. In fact, not only have they been welding on their lives, but they are a third generation welder. As per the job, they have experience. Peraps not credentials, but experience.

Here lies the fatal flaw in your whole case. Experience overrules credentials in almost all cases. Even those WITH credentials still need experience.

Quote:
I think it?s odd that people get offensive at a site called rational response, to someone who challenges the claims of someone else, I have no knowledge of him, nor did I find any about his work or who was editing it.

You dolt, you are being jumped on because you attacked ME. You didn't attack a claim of any sorts, you attacked ME. Learn the difference between the message and the messenger and we may have a chance to talk. Otherwise, your atempt to belittle me has done nothing but make you look bad.

Quote:
I referred to the point on credentials to make the point that although it doesn?t take a degree to be smart, when people usually call themselves experts, they have a full body of work published, and/or have some sort of educational background. Is this hard to understand

From somebody who came off like a giant dildo with their first post, yes. Had you been more respectful of others before barging in and making a bravado of false claims without even knows me, perhaps this tone we give you would be more upbeat?

Have a bad day, you've earned it. My offer still stands.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


Roark
Posts: 7
Joined: 2006-07-09
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Were talking about religion here, people who do research and study about religion and spirituality, publish work, and are recognized for their knowledge are called theologians. I also didn?t word it as you said I did, by saying that I said ?theologians are the real experts.?

Ad hominem, you know what I?m talking about, claiming that I personally know nothing about a subject because of how I grouped people who study about religion as not to your liking is a logical fallacy, and you know this.

I?m not attacking you; I?m questioning the validity of your claims.

It says on the front page of this website that Rook is a ?biblical expert,? which I would say is a bold claim of any takes the word expert seriously. I also didn?t say anything about your age as being a factor of whether or not you?re a smart person.

Aristotle and Socrates were young and knew a lot because comparatively speaking, to the amount of knowledge there is today, they were breaking new ground in nearly every subject they wrote about. And just because they changed civilization, doesn?t mean it was right, or that they were doing the changing intentionally. Today we have specialists in a single area of one aspect of a subject, it?s so specialized that we can?t possible have someone like Aristotle today. Doctors are a good example of this.

I never said I knew more than you did on Christianity, where did you get that idea from?

I notice you didn?t answer hardly anything I asked of you. This went exactly as I thought it would.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Roark wrote:

It says on the front page of this website that Rook is a ?biblical expert,? which I would say is a bold claim of any takes the word expert seriously.

For the record, I wrote the front page. I'm the one that refers to Rook as the Bible expert, and Mike as the Science expert, and both have corrected me in the past, and said things like "I'm just a science geek" or "I'm a Bible geek." In the case of "Bible Geek" there is already another show host Dr. Robert Price, who uses the title, so Rook tends to stay away from it.

Now, I go to Google to define expert, and I notice the first definition:

expert: a person with special knowledge or ability who performs skillfully

With that in mind, I don't care what you say, or Rook says, or Mike says to correct me, but Rook is a Bible and Ancient Texts expert, and Mike is a science expert. Besides it's a nice succinct word that describes very accurately if not perfectly the situation to onlookers of the site.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Roark
Posts: 7
Joined: 2006-07-09
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

?And stop being a dick?

?You dolt??

?From somebody who came off as a giant dildo??

These are things you said.

At dictionary.com

Rational:

1. Having or exercising the ability to reason.
2. Of sound mind; sane.
3. Consistent with or based on reason; logical: rational behavior. See Synonyms at logical.
4. Mathematics. Capable of being expressed as a quotient of integers.

Ok, now Credentials:

1. That which entitles one to confidence, credit, or authority.
2. credentials Evidence or testimonials concerning one's right to credit, confidence, or authority: The new ambassador presented her credentials to the president.

If one has good credentials, they most likely also have experience.

Very good Rook, in one post you?ve managed to; while not knowing who I am, try and insult me by saying things that are both very irrational, and uneducated. Good job in using logic and reason to answer some simple questions. Do you talk like that to people you don?t agree with on your radio show? If that?s the case (and I?m not doing it anyway) you haven?t shown that your worth listening to. Nor would I ever go on and debate something with you on a radio show when you can?t even control what you write, I can?t imagine what your like with your friends around you.

Thank you Sapient for talking for Rook and answering my questions better than he has.

And ill have a good day, because I?m not sensitive about people asking me questions and looking for rational responses.


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Let me sum this up:

Rook: "Hey, I've come up with an interesting idea I will present soon"

Us: "Cool, we're excited"

Roark: "I question Rook's credentials and the whole point of what you guys are doing. Just cause Rook says so doesn't make it so."

Rook: "You haven't even heard my case yet"

Sapient: "Expert is a relative word, the point is we generally know what we're talking about, and encourage others to verify our claims"

Others: "Nobody intended on simply taking anyone's word for anything."

Roark: "I continue to question your credentials and motives"

Rook: "You're being a dick"

Roark: "It's irrational to call somebody a dick"

Yellow: "That is of course unless you are in fact, being a dick"

Can we stop circle jerking and simply wait to judge Rook's work on its own merit?

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Roark wrote:
?And stop being a dick?

?You dolt??

?From somebody who came off as a giant dildo??

These are things you said.

At dictionary.com

Rational:

1. Having or exercising the ability to reason.
2. Of sound mind; sane.
3. Consistent with or based on reason; logical: rational behavior. See Synonyms at logical.
4. Mathematics. Capable of being expressed as a quotient of integers.

FWIW sometimes the most rational response is telling someone to stop being a dick, or any of the above inflammatory remarks. Rational people are not bound to nothing but pleasant comments.

Quote:
Ok, now Credentials:

1. That which entitles one to confidence, credit, or authority.
2. credentials Evidence or testimonials concerning one's right to credit, confidence, or authority: The new ambassador presented her credentials to the president.

If one has good credentials, they most likely also have experience.

While many people who have credentials have experience, there is no prerequisite to all with credentials that they have experience, as I imagine you'd agree. You muddy the waters with this claim. I know of nothing to increase the experience one has, just because they have "credentials."

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Yellow_Number_Five wrote:

Rook: "You're being a dick"

Roark: "It's irrational to call somebody a dick"

Yellow: "That is of course unless you are in fact, being a dick"

*cyber high five* for saying the same thing in a different way at the same time. I love it when we agree... it means we've likely come to the rational conclusion.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Roark
Posts: 7
Joined: 2006-07-09
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

?Credentials, evidence or testimonial to ones right to credit.?

What does it take to prove someone?s right to credit? And what is in the testimonial? What someone has done, or his or her experience. Doing things gets you experience. Credentials don?t increase someone?s experience, but prove as testimony to their experience and or knowledge.

I didn?t say anyone was bound to pleasant comments. But resorting to name-calling is a bit childish. If we were in a collegiate setting, Rook wouldn?t be heard. If, as Rook seems to want to do, we want to aspire to those we admire, such as Aristotle and Socrates as Rook brought up earlier, than what better way to emulate them than by acting as if were not educated at all? I have never once so far been belligerent or hostile, nor have I wanted to start a fight. I?ve only been asking questions.

Again, I asked some questions that weren?t answered. It seems contentious to say that it?s ok for you guys to bash Christians, but it?s not ok for others to come along and question why and what the reason is behind your actions. If my questions of why things are said on this site, and the validity of who says them are wrong, then you?re no different than those you criticize.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Roark wrote:
Quote:
?Credentials, evidence or testimonial to ones right to credit.?

What does it take to prove someone?s right to credit?

Having a college degree is a credential, and whatdya know... it's on topic!

Quote:
And what is in the testimonial? What someone has done, or his or her experience. Doing things gets you experience. Credentials don?t increase someone?s experience, but prove as testimony to their experience and or knowledge.

Credentials prove as testimony to knowledge generally, and don't have anything to do with experience as a rule. A college graduate is a perfect example. I took no media related courses in college, and probably have more experience in the field of radio, and audio production than many recent graduates.

Quote:
I didn?t say anyone was bound to pleasant comments.

No, you merely juxtapositioned a bunch of insults, which you seemed to deserve next to the word rational, then going on to say he said things that were very irrational. What are we to infer? You muddied the waters again.

Quote:
But resorting to name-calling is a bit childish.

Maybe so, and stomping your foot down in a forum prejudging his work is just as childish.

Quote:
If we were in a collegiate setting, Rook wouldn?t be heard.

And if we were in a collegiate setting Rook likely wouldn't have made the inflammatory remarks. We're not in a collegiate setting though, we're on an internet message board.

Quote:
I have never once so far been belligerent or hostile, nor have I wanted to start a fight.

I don't think that the above statement accurately represents the situation. I would imagine most people that have read your posts and caught your tone would agree with me.

Quote:
I?ve only been asking questions.

The above is not a question, it's a statement. Not only have you not "only been asking questions" but you've also made a bunch of assumptive statments and accusatory phrases. Do I remember you saying something about us being like Christians? I couldn't help but be reminded of a theist and their personal dishonesty when you said that.

Quote:
Again, I asked some questions that weren?t answered.

Which one are you just dying to get an answer to?

Quote:
It seems contentious to say that it?s ok for you guys to bash Christians, but it?s not ok for others to come along and question why and what the reason is behind your actions.

It's seems even more contentious to say that we said that when we never did. You see now why you were being called a dick? Most likely because you were and still are being a dick. If it wasn't ok for people to come along and question, you think your posts would still remain? Here's the answer in case you don't want to be honest with yourself (and us) again... NO the posts wouldn't remain.

Quote:
If my questions of why things are said on this site, and the validity of who says them are wrong, then you?re no different than those you criticize.

And the strawman you just presented along with the dishonesty referenced above makes you no different than those we criticize. Drop your hypocrisy.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Roark
Posts: 7
Joined: 2006-07-09
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Lol, well, I?ve about spent more time than I should of on this. It was fun, but listening to people who believe that they are infallible, drone on with one another, and stroke each others egos about ?how bad Christianity is, oh poor world, lets talk endlessly about things that will never be resolved,? is not my idea of time spent wisely.

You?re all very amusing.

Roark.

I AM??

SOMEONE WHO READS A LOT OF BOOKS AT BARNES AND NOBLES??.AND IS SMARTER THAN YOU?.


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Let's review Roark's hypocrisy:

Roark ignores his own personal attacks and presuppositions against me while calling me on mine:

Roark Recently wrote:
Very good Rook, in one post you?ve managed to; while not knowing who I am, try and insult me by saying things that are both very irrational, and uneducated

Roark Previously wrote:
I AM?????????

SOME ?EXPERT? WHO IS FULL OF HIMSELF!!!!!

(Insert pretentious picture of someone mysteriously staring off into space here)

Roark Recently wrote:
Lol, well, I?ve about spent more time than I should of on this. It was fun, but listening to people who believe that they are infallible, drone on with one another, and stroke each others egos about ?how bad Christianity is, oh poor world, lets talk endlessly about things that will never be resolved,? is not my idea of time spent wisely.

Roark Recently wrote:
You?re all very amusing.

Kettle meet the pot.

Roark Previously wrote:
I also looked at you?re myspace account because I was interested in someone who claims to be an expert on something, I find it interesting that although making such a claim as one who is an expert, one finds the need to give the finger in nearly every picture they have scrolling of themselves?I can see what you stand for without having to go any further on your site.

Hmm...

Roark Previously wrote:
No, you are still living your life ruled by a book you don?t believe in, because you spend all your time finding the little ?facts? and contradictions in something false to begin with. This is all so that you can smile, and feel good about yourselves when you get into a debate. It?s easy to defeat a Christian in a philosophical debate as long as you know about the basics of logic.

You continually show your dishonesty and hypocrisy as we sift through your repugnance. If you want to talk about childish, let's start here. :roll: As anything I've called you or said displeasing to you is well deserved and anybody who has read your words will know such things.

If you can't handle the heat, don't step into the kitchen and light the stove. You want your questions answered? Which ones? I will answer them once you give me some reason why you care so much about my personal life. And then, maybe, I may give you the time of day past what you have already shown me you deserve, which so far has amounted to no respect. I'm simply treating you with the same sort of civility you have shown me and my compatriots. I remind you, you did equate everyone who posted in this forum with mindless starving zombies who will blindly follow whatever I say.

While you obviously have never listened to a show (or maybe you have and are too intellectually honest to admit that you've heard me say this) as I am always telling people to study for themselves and not take what I tell them on blind faith. In fact, had you listened to the past show this last friday you would have heard me say it to Travis. But apparently, doing any sort of research on the people you are conversing with or criticising would be byond your scope of reasonability. And you can sit there and judge my credibility while you "stopped" reading after only looking at pictures of me?!

This is one of those cases where you have failed to hear the call, "don't judge a book by it's cover" yet this is exactly what you have done. You want logic, you want civility, you show some first. Don't just come barging onto our forums making grandiose claims about the people here, and myself personally, and not expect backlash. And if what I said really offended you, you have weaker skin then I would have otherwise thought.

And as per his last post, Roark officially becomes nominated for the "Stupid Nimrod of the Week" award. Complete with "Ass-Hat" avatar.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Roark wrote:
Lol, well, I?ve about spent more time than I should of on this.

You're first post probably put you into that category, I just pegged you as someone with nothing better to do.

Quote:
It was fun, but listening to people who believe that they are infallible...

There's that dishonesty again. I'll say it here for you and for everyone in case it's not crystal clear, nobody on our team believes they are infallible, and all of us agree to not being above making mistakes. I however am very justified in calling you dishonest, as I've seen it now several posts in a row, including the ridiculously offbase comment above.

Quote:
oh poor world, lets talk endlessly about things that will never be resolved,? is not my idea of time spent wisely.

I'm putting $5 on you lying about being an atheist, and you may even be a theist. Oh, and that's not an infallible judgement, just a small $5 bet. Rational people recognize that making an absolute statement like thinking that the end of religion will NEVER come, is illogical. Furthermore, most atheists at least have a glimmer of optimism on the issue.

Quote:

You?re all very amusing.

Thanks, we strive to amuse. You are amusing as well, although not sure if you were aiming for that.

Quote:
I AM??

SOMEONE WHO READS A LOT OF BOOKS AT BARNES AND NOBLES??.AND IS SMARTER THAN YOU?.

Funny. I think that statement, shouted in all caps shows you for the hypocrite you are. You ARE no better than those we criticize, in fact you are the type we criticize: dishonest, hypocritical, and arrogant.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Rook_Hawkins wrote:

And as per his last post, Roark officially becomes nominated for the "Stupid Nimrod of the Week" award. Complete with "Ass-Hat" avatar.

You're infallible commands I shall follow my lord.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Do thy bidding, thou wimpy-minded, knowledge-starving fool!!!


LeftofLarry
RRS local affiliateScientist
LeftofLarry's picture
Posts: 1199
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Roark wrote:
Lol, well, I?ve about spent more time than I should of on this. It was fun, but listening to people who believe that they are infallible, drone on with one another, and stroke each others egos about ?how bad Christianity is, oh poor world, lets talk endlessly about things that will never be resolved,? is not my idea of time spent wisely.

You?re all very amusing.

Roark.

I AM??

SOMEONE WHO READS A LOT OF BOOKS AT BARNES AND NOBLES??.AND IS SMARTER THAN YOU?.

First off..roark, you came on this message board on your own..no one made you. Secondly, you came here with prejudjements and presuppositions without knowing Rook or anyone else and you immediately attacked him. Although I agree with you that we shouldn't take anything anyone says for granted and do much research ourselves, it is just as bad to dismiss something before even reading it. I want to also add that even published "experts" in their respective field have been known to be wrong.

It seems your problem lies within the fact that rook being an "expert" is based on 1. his age, 2. his myspace profile and 3. the lack of credentials. How do you know that the work he's working on now WON'T be published? The reason why people here became hostile towards you is simply because you prejudged because the term "expert" did not fit your definition or liking. That is extremely short sighted in my opinion.
And I agree you've wasted too much time insulting Rook. Now here's what I propose: wait for his paper to be finished and posted. Read it. Do the background research for yourself, if still not satisfied, discredit his proofreader: Richard Carrier (an expert by your definition), then come back and be as arrogant and pompous as you want. Point is...READ THE PAPER FIRST!!

Do you choose to not go to a movie because an "expert" reviewer gave it a bad review?

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server which houses Celebrity Atheists.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

LeftofLarry wrote:

Although I agree with you that we shouldn't take anything anyone says for granted and do much research ourselves

If there were a mantra for the RRS it would be the above statement, that is how much we agree with the above.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

Sapient wrote:
LeftofLarry wrote:

Although I agree with you that we shouldn't take anything anyone says for granted and do much research ourselves

If there were a mantra for the RRS it would be the above statement, that is how much we agree with the above.

Indeed. I myself tell Christians that ALL the time. Case in point, as stated earlier in the thread, I even told Travis that in the last episode this past Friday! So yes, the RRS does indeed support and condone and continually state that we and YOU should do your own research and verify things for yourself.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


applesforadam
Posts: 151
Joined: 2006-06-27
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

The substance of this post can be summed up very easily:
roark ---> :smt075 <--- rook
roark's argument ---> :smt021 <--- rook's argument

I'll never understand how people who are college educated in philosophy always seem to omit the most fundamental teaching of philosophy that is the truth of an idea is completely and utterly impartial to the person presenting said idea. I'm assuming roark is college educated in philosophy or at least religious studies of some sort because his posts oozed of the sort of elitist smut that can only come from the current state of many American colleges. I'd like to add also, I'm not sure if he derived his name from the hero from the Fountainhead, but if he did, it is evidence that he is simply not capable of understanding true logic as he completely misrepresented any ideal Ayn Rand presented in her novel. I'd also like to add that I felt obligated to post after spending much more time than I should have commit to reading the whole discussion :smt120

"It's not so much staying alive. It's staying human that's important." - 1984
www.myspace.com/applesforadam
applesforadam.blogspot.com


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
On the verge...

applesforadam wrote:

...spending much more time than I should have commit to reading the whole discussion :smt120

Yup, anyone who spent that much time reading Roarks posts and the refutations, got pwned! (including me) Laughing out loud

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.