Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent. Full Story

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#173210 Aug 1, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Apologists are modern day liars with no morals and no spine.
Argumentum ad Hominem is a logical fallacy. It's usually used by somebody who attacks the character of a person rather than the argument itself, and in your case you do so with no personal knowledge of me. If stated without such personal knowledge this is a lie, and as such, is a demonstration of immorality. It fails to answer or critique the argument and seeks to demean the person instead which seems to be the easier task, thus revealing a "lack of spine."

Don't you defend Darwinian Evolution" as being true? If yes, you too are an apologist.

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

#173211 Aug 1, 2013
It doesn't talk about his birth? Get a grip! Lol! That was weak even for an ignorant christhole like you. Note it says they LIVED there until he was 2 and then fled to Egypt. Luke mentions not a word about fleeing to Egypt and says they lived in Nazareth. So I guess you are claiming they lived in the manger for 2 years instead of returning to their house in Nazareth? Lol!

You have been busted lying again.

And you know it.
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>Matthew Chapter 2 says *NOTHING* of the birth narrative. Matthew Chapter 2 is about the visit from the Magi and the escape into Egypt and subsequent return to Nazareth. The birth narrative in Matthew is very sparse and so doesn't say what you're claiming.

The Luke narrative expands the account so we see why Joseph was traveling to Bethlehem. Mary and Joseph traveled to Bethlehem for the census. This would be like you traveling to Cleveland, Ohio with your wife and her giving birth there, even though your home is in Kentucky.

Your argumentum ad hominem and lack of understanding of ancient writing styles has exposed the weakness of your position.

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

#173212 Aug 1, 2013
It's so cute when socks talk to each other!

Oh and I wanted to add who would stay in another city for 2 years if their wife gave birth there instead of returning home?

I wouldn't stay in Cleveland an extra weeks let alone an extra 2 years instead of taking my baby home.

Oops sorry for interrupting your obvious sock to sock talk. Continue to gush over how smart your other sock is! Wow sorry but you went wayyyyyyy over the top there.
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>whoever voted the dim bulb icon might want to check Biblegateway and look at the story in all it's translations.

I say MIGHT because I doubt the will.

"A fanatic is one who can't change their mind and won't change the subject."
- Winston Churchill

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

#173213 Aug 1, 2013
Why is it all your socks joined around the same few months in 2007? Obviously you were on some sock crusade back then as well.

Pathetic
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>The war we see today between worldviews is one of extremes. Polymath seems to be one of the more levelheaded skeptics here, and Quantum Bob seems to maintain a respectable tone even though we disagree passionately.

The "fundamentalists" and "militant atheists" are the ones at each others throats while the rest of us look on in disbelief at the ignorance on both sides.

Speaking of Winston Churchill, one of my favorite quotes from him came during an exchange with Lady Nancy Astor:

Lady Nancy Astor: "Winston, if you were my husband, I'd poison your tea."

Winston Churchill: "Nancy, if I were your husband, I'd drink it.”

And from an unknown author:

"It's better to be an optimist who is sometimes wrong than a pessimist who is always right."

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#173214 Aug 1, 2013
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>That's Agnosticism. Atheism is the rejection of religious beliefs and is based on a humanist approach to social issues and morals. But feel free to continue to spew half truths just like those you mock.
<quoted text>Again please stop blending Atheism with agnosticism.
You only make yourself look foolish IMO.
Agnosticism is the belief that knowledge about the existence of God or the supernatural is impossible. This is not a position that I hold.

Atheism is the lack of belief in a God or supernatural. What I presented is the reason for my lack of belief in a God or supernatural: both the lack of evidence for such and the inherent incoherence of the concept of a supernatural.

I do have an affinity to ignosticism: that the whole concept of 'God' is incoherent.

I am also a humanist, but that is a separate issue having to do with ethics.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#173215 Aug 1, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Atheists are more likely to be free thinkers, but there is a difference,
atheism is the rejection of deities, while free thought says.
There is insufficient evidence of deities.
Free thought
Freethought is a philosophical viewpoint that holds opinions should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, or other dogmas.[1][2][3] The cognitive application of freethought is known as "freethinking", and practitioners of freethought are known as "freethinkers".[1][4 ]
Freethought holds that individuals should not accept ideas proposed as truth without recourse to knowledge and reason. Thus, freethinkers strive to build their opinions on the basis of facts, scientific inquiry, and logical principles, independent of any logical fallacies or the intellectually limiting effects of authority, confirmation bias, cognitive bias, conventional wisdom, popular culture, prejudice, sectarianism, tradition, urban legend, and all other dogmas. Regarding religion, freethinkers hold that there is insufficient evidence to support the existence of supernatural phenomena.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freethought
I disagree with your definition of atheism. It is the lack of belief in deities, not necessarily the rejection of such beliefs. I would also say the the reasonable position is lack of belief in the face of insufficient evidence. Of course, as the lack of evidence is prolonged to a sufficient point, it can also be reasonable to reject the belief. I believe that point has been reached.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#173216 Aug 1, 2013
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm inclined to agree that natural causes should be considered before supernatural causes. But insisting that supernatural causes have to be testable to verify their existence seems extreme to me.
And it seems to be a minimal standard to me.
If there are supernatural beings, they must be capable of free movement between our time/space existence and another plane of existence.
Let's analyze this a bit more closely, shall we? Is this movement a movement of energy? matter? anything detectable? If it is energy or matter, how do you deal with the resulting lack of conservation of energy in *this* plane of existence? If it is not energy, in what sense is there motion?
Paranormal investigators use thermal scanners and sound recording equipment, and have developed fair criteria to determine whether or not an event is natural or supernatural. The methodologies are constantly being evaluated and improved to look for fraudulent practices in the field environment.
And what, exactly, are these 'fair criteria'? How do you account for the extra energy of heat or sound? That again would be a violation of conservation of energy. How would you account for a sound wave being generated? By what process? Why in our hearing range? Temperature changes also show a dramatic energy shift. Again, that would be a substantial violation of conservation of energy.

Of course, you can regain conservation of energy *if* you decide to consider the 'supernatural events' as actually being natural events subject to physical laws. Either way, we know the physical items in the environment obey such laws and that is a fundamental problem for anything regarding a supernatural.
I find that the charge of "insufficient evidence" is too much of a convenient argument. It appears to be a philosophical and emotional escape hatch for the atheist who doesn't wish to find himself or herself cornered by evidence that is difficult to refute.
Vague or anecdotal evidence is known to be fallible to a high degree. That is true even for 'natural' phenomena. Without a *very* good reason to supernatural, it *would* be insufficient evidence. In particular, dramatic claims (a non-physical existence) require dramatic evidence.
It allows for too much "subjective value" which is emotionally based at the core, while grasping for whatever naturalist philosophies will support the atheistic worldview.
If 'subjective value' is a significant effect in analyzing the evidence, then the evidence is insufficient.

Let's do it this way: what sort of experiment would suffice to show that a supernatural does NOT exist? What sort of experiment would suffice to show it *does* exist?

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#173217 Aug 1, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
It doesn't talk about his birth? Get a grip! Lol! That was weak even for an ignorant christhole like you. Note it says they LIVED there until he was 2 and then fled to Egypt. Luke mentions not a word about fleeing to Egypt and says they lived in Nazareth. So I guess you are claiming they lived in the manger for 2 years instead of returning to their house in Nazareth? Lol!
You have been busted lying again.
And you know it.
<quoted text>
Chapter 2 of Matthew says NOTHING of the birth of Jesus. It records what happened when the Magi from the east visited. Joseph and Mary fled to Egypt for 2 years. Try to keep up. Luke's focus in writing the birth narrative was not the same as Matthew's focus. Matthew was writing to a Jewish audience and Luke was writing to a Greco-Roman audience.

Matthew was a Jewish tax collector. As a result of cultural messianic expectations, he knew the prophecies very well. Most Jews of that era did. When Matthew wrote the birth narrative and the flight into Egypt, he was recalling prophecy from hindsight.

When Israel was a child, I loved him, and I called my son out of Egypt.-Hosea 11:1

Some will argue that this speaks of only Israel being called out of Egypt in a historical sense. Matthew applied this to show that Jesus was also a symbolic singular personal parallel to the national historical Passover and the Exodus traditions. This was an appeal and apologetic to a predominantly Jewish audience.

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#173218 Aug 1, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Why is it all your socks joined around the same few months in 2007? Obviously you were on some sock crusade back then as well.
Pathetic
<quoted text>
I only discovered this site last year. In 2007 I had other things to do. You make assumptions without evidence so well. Feel free to continue. I laugh at your foolishness.:))

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#173219 Aug 1, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
It doesn't talk about his birth? Get a grip! Lol! That was weak even for an ignorant christhole like you. Note it says they LIVED there until he was 2 and then fled to Egypt. Luke mentions not a word about fleeing to Egypt and says they lived in Nazareth. So I guess you are claiming they lived in the manger for 2 years instead of returning to their house in Nazareth? Lol!
You have been busted lying again.
And you know it.
<quoted text>
Here are the entire 1st and 2nd chapters of Matthew from the NLT (the version I use). You can look up other versions as well.

Matthew 1

New Living Translation (NLT)
The Ancestors of Jesus the Messiah

1 This is a record of the ancestors of Jesus the Messiah, a descendant of David[a] and of Abraham:

2 Abraham was the father of Isaac.
Isaac was the father of Jacob.
Jacob was the father of Judah and his brothers.
3 Judah was the father of Perez and Zerah (whose mother was Tamar).
Perez was the father of Hezron.
Hezron was the father of Ram.[b]
4 Ram was the father of Amminadab.
Amminadab was the father of Nahshon.
Nahshon was the father of Salmon.
5 Salmon was the father of Boaz (whose mother was Rahab).
Boaz was the father of Obed (whose mother was Ruth).
Obed was the father of Jesse.
6 Jesse was the father of King David.
David was the father of Solomon (whose mother was Bathsheba, the widow of Uriah).
7 Solomon was the father of Rehoboam.
Rehoboam was the father of Abijah.
Abijah was the father of Asa.[c]
8 Asa was the father of Jehoshaphat.
Jehoshaphat was the father of Jehoram.[d]
Jehoram was the father[e] of Uzziah.
9 Uzziah was the father of Jotham.
Jotham was the father of Ahaz.
Ahaz was the father of Hezekiah.
10 Hezekiah was the father of Manasseh.
Manasseh was the father of Amon.[f]
Amon was the father of Josiah.
11 Josiah was the father of Jehoiachin[g] and his brothers (born at the time of the exile to Babylon).
12 After the Babylonian exile:
Jehoiachin was the father of Shealtiel.
Shealtiel was the father of Zerubbabel.
13 Zerubbabel was the father of Abiud.
Abiud was the father of Eliakim.
Eliakim was the father of Azor.
14 Azor was the father of Zadok.
Zadok was the father of Akim.
Akim was the father of Eliud.
15 Eliud was the father of Eleazar.
Eleazar was the father of Matthan.
Matthan was the father of Jacob.
16 Jacob was the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary.
Mary gave birth to Jesus, who is called the Messiah.

17 All those listed above include fourteen generations from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the Babylonian exile, and fourteen from the Babylonian exile to the Messiah.
The Birth of Jesus the Messiah

18 This is how Jesus the Messiah was born. His mother, Mary, was engaged to be married to Joseph. But before the marriage took place, while she was still a virgin, she became pregnant through the power of the Holy Spirit. 19 Joseph, her fiancé, was a good man and did not want to disgrace her publicly, so he decided to break the engagement[h] quietly.

20 As he considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream.“Joseph, son of David,” the angel said,“do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife. For the child within her was conceived by the Holy Spirit. 21 And she will have a son, and you are to name him Jesus,[i] for he will save his people from their sins.”

22 All of this occurred to fulfill the Lord’s message through his prophet:

23 “Look! The virgin will conceive a child!
She will give birth to a son,
and they will call him Immanuel,[j]
which means ‘God is with us.’”

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...

24 When Joseph woke up, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded and took Mary as his wife. 25 But he did not have sexual relations with her until her son was born. And Joseph named him Jesus.

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#173220 Aug 1, 2013
Chapter 2 of Matthew

Matthew 2

New Living Translation (NLT)
Visitors from the East

2 Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the reign of King Herod. About that time some wise men[a] from eastern lands arrived in Jerusalem, asking, 2 “Where is the newborn king of the Jews? We saw his star as it rose,[b] and we have come to worship him.”

3 King Herod was deeply disturbed when he heard this, as was everyone in Jerusalem. 4 He called a meeting of the leading priests and teachers of religious law and asked,“Where is the Messiah supposed to be born?”

5 “In Bethlehem in Judea,” they said,“for this is what the prophet wrote:

6 ‘And you, O Bethlehem in the land of Judah,
are not least among the ruling cities[c] of Judah,
for a ruler will come from you
who will be the shepherd for my people Israel.’[d]”

7 Then Herod called for a private meeting with the wise men, and he learned from them the time when the star first appeared. 8 Then he told them,“Go to Bethlehem and search carefully for the child. And when you find him, come back and tell me so that I can go and worship him, too!”

9 After this interview the wise men went their way. And the star they had seen in the east guided them to Bethlehem. It went ahead of them and stopped over the place where the child was. 10 When they saw the star, they were filled with joy! 11 They entered the house and saw the child with his mother, Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasure chests and gave him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh.

12 When it was time to leave, they returned to their own country by another route, for God had warned them in a dream not to return to Herod.
The Escape to Egypt

13 After the wise men were gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream.“Get up! Flee to Egypt with the child and his mother,” the angel said.“Stay there until I tell you to return, because Herod is going to search for the child to kill him.”

14 That night Joseph left for Egypt with the child and Mary, his mother, 15 and they stayed there until Herod’s death. This fulfilled what the Lord had spoken through the prophet:“I called my Son out of Egypt.”[e]

16 Herod was furious when he realized that the wise men had outwitted him. He sent soldiers to kill all the boys in and around Bethlehem who were two years old and under, based on the wise men’s report of the star’s first appearance. 17 Herod’s brutal action fulfilled what God had spoken through the prophet Jeremiah:

18 “A cry was heard in Ramah—
weeping and great mourning.
Rachel weeps for her children,
refusing to be comforted,
for they are dead.”[f]
The Return to Nazareth

19 When Herod died, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt. 20 “Get up!” the angel said.“Take the child and his mother back to the land of Israel, because those who were trying to kill the child are dead.”

21 So Joseph got up and returned to the land of Israel with Jesus and his mother. 22 But when he learned that the new ruler of Judea was Herod’s son Archelaus, he was afraid to go there. Then, after being warned in a dream, he left for the region of Galilee. 23 So the family went and lived in a town called Nazareth. This fulfilled what the prophets had said:“He will be called a Nazarene.”

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#173221 Aug 1, 2013
Luke 2:1-22 tells us why Joseph and Mary were in Bethlehem and that 8 days after Jesus' birth they went to the temple in Jerusalem. Check it out for yourself.

Luke 2

New Living Translation (NLT)
The Birth of Jesus

2 At that time the Roman emperor, Augustus, decreed that a census should be taken throughout the Roman Empire. 2 (This was the first census taken when Quirinius was governor of Syria.) 3 All returned to their own ancestral towns to register for this census. 4 And because Joseph was a descendant of King David, he had to go to Bethlehem in Judea, David’s ancient home. He traveled there from the village of Nazareth in Galilee. 5 He took with him Mary, his fiancée, who was now obviously pregnant.

6 And while they were there, the time came for her baby to be born. 7 She gave birth to her first child, a son. She wrapped him snugly in strips of cloth and laid him in a manger, because there was no lodging available for them.
The Shepherds and Angels

8 That night there were shepherds staying in the fields nearby, guarding their flocks of sheep. 9 Suddenly, an angel of the Lord appeared among them, and the radiance of the Lord’s glory surrounded them. They were terrified, 10 but the angel reassured them.“Don’t be afraid!” he said.“I bring you good news that will bring great joy to all people. 11 The Savior—yes, the Messiah, the Lord—has been born today in Bethlehem, the city of David! 12 And you will recognize him by this sign: You will find a baby wrapped snugly in strips of cloth, lying in a manger.”

13 Suddenly, the angel was joined by a vast host of others—the armies of heaven—praising God and saying,

14 “Glory to God in highest heaven,
and peace on earth to those with whom God is pleased.”

15 When the angels had returned to heaven, the shepherds said to each other,“Let’s go to Bethlehem! Let’s see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has told us about.”

16 They hurried to the village and found Mary and Joseph. And there was the baby, lying in the manger. 17 After seeing him, the shepherds told everyone what had happened and what the angel had said to them about this child. 18 All who heard the shepherds’ story were astonished, 19 but Mary kept all these things in her heart and thought about them often. 20 The shepherds went back to their flocks, glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen. It was just as the angel had told them.
Jesus Is Presented in the Temple

21 Eight days later, when the baby was circumcised, he was named Jesus, the name given him by the angel even before he was conceived.

22 Then it was time for their purification offering, as required by the law of Moses after the birth of a child; so his parents took him to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord. 23 The law of the Lord says,“If a woman’s first child is a boy, he must be dedicated to the Lord.”[a] 24 So they offered the sacrifice required in the law of the Lord—“either a pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons.”

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...

Need I say anymore?

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#173222 Aug 1, 2013
So with all of that Mr. Liberty, show me where *exactly* it says that Jesus was born in a house in Nazareth.

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

#173223 Aug 1, 2013
All your socks were made in 2007 and you know it. This was pointed out to you before.
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>I only discovered this site last year. In 2007 I had other things to do. You make assumptions without evidence so well. Feel free to continue. I laugh at your foolishness.:))

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

#173224 Aug 1, 2013
So we see Herod who died years before Jesus was born... Cough.. Sends the wise men. They go see Jesus at his HOUSE in Bethlehem. Not a manger. HOUSE. The family later flees to Egypt and then moves to Nazareth... Which didn't exist until the second century. Cough... Luke says the family lived in Nazareth and travelled to Bethlehem not that they had a house there.

Several errors there.
Roman Apologist wrote:
Chapter 2 of Matthew
2 Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea
7 Then Herod called for a private meeting with the wise men,
9 After this interview the wise men went their way. And the star they had seen in the east guided them to Bethlehem. It went ahead of them and stopped over the place where the child was. 10 When they saw the star, they were filled with joy! 11 They entered the house and saw the child with his mother, Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasure chests and gave him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh.

12 When it was time to leave, they returned to their own country by another route, for God had warned them in a dream not to return to Herod.
The Escape to Egypt

13 After the wise men were gone, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream.“Get up! Flee to Egypt with the child and his mother,” the angel said.“Stay there until I tell you to return, because Herod is going to search for the child to kill him.”

14 That night Joseph left for Egypt with the child and Mary, his mother, 15 and they stayed there until Herod’s death. This fulfilled what the Lord had spoken through the prophet:“I called my Son out of Egypt.”[e]

16 Herod was furious when he realized that the wise men had outwitted him. He sent soldiers to kill all the boys in and around Bethlehem who were two years old and under, based on the wise menÂ’s report of the starÂ’s first appearance. 17 HerodÂ’s brutal action fulfilled what God had spoken through the prophet Jeremiah:

18 “A cry was heard in Ramah—
weeping and great mourning.
Rachel weeps for her children,
refusing to be comforted,
for they are dead.”[f]
The Return to Nazareth

19 When Herod died, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt. 20 “Get up!” the angel said.“Take the child and his mother back to the land of Israel, because those who were trying to kill the child are dead.”

21 So Joseph got up and returned to the land of Israel with Jesus and his mother. 22 But when he learned that the new ruler of Judea was Herod’s son Archelaus, he was afraid to go there. Then, after being warned in a dream, he left for the region of Galilee. 23 So the family went and lived in a town called Nazareth. This fulfilled what the prophets had said:“He will be called a Nazarene.”

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...

Since: Mar 11

Louisville, KY

#173225 Aug 1, 2013
I never said he was born in a house in Nazareth and you know it. The gospels wildly contradict each other as you have shown.
Roman Apologist wrote:
So with all of that Mr. Liberty, show me where *exactly* it says that Jesus was born in a house in Nazareth.
xianity is EVIL

Windsor, Canada

#173228 Aug 1, 2013
Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Apologists are modern day liars with no morals and no spine.
Roman Apologist wrote:
<quoted text>
Argumentum ad Hominem is a logical fallacy. It's usually used by somebody who attacks the character of a person rather than the argument itself, and in your case you do so with no personal knowledge of me. If stated without such personal knowledge this is a lie, and as such, is a demonstration of immorality. It fails to answer or critique the argument and seeks to demean the person instead which seems to be the easier task, thus revealing a "lack of spine."
Don't you defend Darwinian Evolution" as being true? If yes, you too are an apologist.
wrong
evolution is a proven FACT

apologetics are used by religitards to defend fantasy as if it were true,
can you comprehend that?

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#173230 Aug 1, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree with your definition of atheism. It is the lack of belief in deities, not necessarily the rejection of such beliefs. I would also say the the reasonable position is lack of belief in the face of insufficient evidence. Of course, as the lack of evidence is prolonged to a sufficient point, it can also be reasonable to reject the belief. I believe that point has been reached.

I would tend to agree with you, but here in topix land we have to define everything very carefully. And in arguments with Buck via his citations of The Stanford definitions of psychology per say atheism is the denial of the existence of God. To which you or I may say is the the lack of belief But it can be argued in this way that atheism is a belief. Specifically the denial of god.

But when you say you are a unbeliever, because you are a free thinker. You change the playing field totally. And give them no legs to stand on.
To defining any belief you present has insufficient evidence to support the existence. You are not denying or rejecting. You are making the statement that you have not the evidence to say I'm denying the existence of anything. I'm denying you have evidence of anything you believe.

I know it's unnecessarily complicating a simple concept.
But it does shift the burden of proof back where it came from.
As I'm not denying or rejecting, I'm asking you to show me the evidence. I hope that makes sense.

Besides if you read into the definition of free thought, I think you will agree.

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#173231 Aug 1, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
So we see Herod who died years before Jesus was born... Cough.. Sends the wise men. They go see Jesus at his HOUSE in Bethlehem. Not a manger. HOUSE. The family later flees to Egypt and then moves to Nazareth... Which didn't exist until the second century. Cough... Luke says the family lived in Nazareth and travelled to Bethlehem not that they had a house there.
Several errors there.
<quoted text>
How do you come to that conclusion? I gave you the chapters and verses with the birth narratives. Your earlier claim was that Jesus was born in a house in Nazareth. That's plainly what you claimed. I asked you to show me where it says that, and you can't do it. I'm not saying that Luke says they had a house there. I'd rather not have to embarrass you with your posts, but I can show you exactly what you said.

As for your other assertion about me being here in 2007, I didn't even know this site existed in 2007. You're obviously confused and it's of little use attempting to dialogue with you.

“a.k.a. GhostWriter2U”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#173232 Aug 1, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
I would tend to agree with you, but here in topix land we have to define everything very carefully. And in arguments with Buck via his citations of The Stanford definitions of psychology per say atheism is the denial of the existence of God. To which you or I may say is the the lack of belief But it can be argued in this way that atheism is a belief. Specifically the denial of god.
But when you say you are a unbeliever, because you are a free thinker. You change the playing field totally. And give them no legs to stand on.
To defining any belief you present has insufficient evidence to support the existence. You are not denying or rejecting. You are making the statement that you have not the evidence to say I'm denying the existence of anything. I'm denying you have evidence of anything you believe.
I know it's unnecessarily complicating a simple concept.
But it does shift the burden of proof back where it came from.
As I'm not denying or rejecting, I'm asking you to show me the evidence. I hope that makes sense.
Besides if you read into the definition of free thought, I think you will agree.
Are you claiming that God doesn't exist?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

NCAA Basketball Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 hr Patrick 1,110,901
Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 2 hr cpeter1313 305,668
Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 6 hr broombroom 200,977
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 6 hr Bruin For Life 27,419
Freshman Jonah Bolden declared ineligible for U... Sep 12 Brew In 1
Indiana Basketball: 2015 Forward Juwan Morgan C... Sep 11 Mike Williams 1
ACC Tournament 2014: Biggest Storylines to Watc... (Mar '14) Sep 11 Anonymous 2
•••
•••

NCAA Basketball People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••