What do u think of Jesus Christ?(God)
Mysterious

Brooklyn, NY

#75658 Dec 2, 2012
Myth Buster wrote:
<quoted text>
You'll simply waste the one life you have as a national embarrassment and world class ignoramus if you rely on the likes of the thoroughly discredited Licona for info.
http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/201...
http://skepticink.com/debunkingchristianity/
http://www.truthbeknown.com/licona.htm#.ULvRN...
truthbeknown.com ? really? really?? bwaaaaahhahahahahahaaaaaaaaa!! !!

Hey RN student, go to truthbeknown.com and look at all the "glowing endorsements" of Murdock's scholarly (cough! BS! cough!)on the left margin of the website. Then go to Mike Licona's site and you won't see any endorsements. I wonder why? Maybe it's because Mike Licona is an expert and doesn't need to "bolster" a shattered reputation with like minded celebrity endorsements. Murdock is desperately seeking credibility when it's obvious she has none.

I'm willing to bet that mythduster doesn't even dare read Mike Licona's refutations. He can't critique the material straight from the source so he has to call names and have a meltdown. Why are anti-theists so delusional?
Myth Buster

Glendale, AZ

#75659 Dec 2, 2012
Mysterious wrote:
I never even mentioned creationism in my post.
Actually, you did but you're too brain dead to understand your own posts. Also, blissful ignorance of science doesn't "shoot down" scientific hypotheses, punk.
Myth Buster

Glendale, AZ

#75660 Dec 2, 2012
Mysterious wrote:
Maybe it's because Mike Licona is an expert
Licona is a stark raving mad insane lunatic not an expert who should be totally ashamed of himself for his bullshit on the supposed resurrection of a mythical character. You and RN Student will spend the rest of your worthless lives blissfully ignorant of science and history if you simply solely on disingenuous fellow Christian cultists to reinforce you own inane delusions, punk.
Mysterious

Brooklyn, NY

#75661 Dec 2, 2012
Myth Buster wrote:
<quoted text>
Licona is a stark raving mad insane lunatic not an expert who should be totally ashamed of himself for his bullshit on the supposed resurrection of a mythical character. You and RN Student will spend the rest of your worthless lives blissfully ignorant of science and history if you simply solely on disingenuous fellow Christian cultists to reinforce you own inane delusions, punk.
Then refute Licona's arguments. Actually read them and try. If you're as smart as you suppose yourself to be, it should be easy for you. The fact that you insult the person is an indicator that you can't refute the argument. On the other hand, concerning Murdock, since we can refute her arguments, we don't need to insult her lack of intelligence. She does that herself, and you actually help her by your endorsement of her.

We will always be more correct than the atheists and anti-theists.
Myth Buster

Glendale, AZ

#75662 Dec 2, 2012
John W. Loftus on Michael Licona (pt 1):

When it comes to the evidence that Jesus rose up from the dead consider what we don't have, but would like to, things that Michael Licona admits in this book. We do not have anything written directly by Jesus himself or any of his original disciples, nor do we have anything written by the Apostle Paul before he converted telling us about the church he was persecuting, nor anything written by the Jewish leaders of that time about Jesus or Paul, nor anything by the Romans that mentions Jesus, the content of his preaching, why he was killed, or what they thought about claims he had resurrected. This means we have no written responses to Jesus from the Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, or teachers of the law. Nor do we have any testimonies from Ananias, Caiaphas, Herod or Pilate about the events we find in the gospels. Jesus always had the last word over his opponents in the gospel accounts--something I have never seen in any real religious debate. So we really need to know what his opponents said in response to these claims. We have no records that they were converted either. Licona says that "what we do have is good." I think not. The Jews of Jesus' day believed in Yahweh and that he does miracles, and they knew their Old Testament prophecies, and yet the overwhelming numbers of them did not believe Jesus was raised from the dead by Yahweh. So Christianity didn't take root in the Jewish homeland but had to reach out to the Greco-Roman world for converts. Why should we believe if they were there and didn't?

There are other things we don't have but would like to. We don't have the correspondence from Chloe's household in Corinth (1 Corinthians 1:11) telling us of their church disputes, especially concerning the resurrection that Paul responded to. Nor do we have their response to Paul's first letter which forced him to defend his apostleship, since they questioned it afterward (2 Corinthians). Nor do we know what Paul meant when he said some of the Corinthians and Galatians had accepted a "Jesus other than the Jesus we preached" (2 Corinthians 11:3-4) or a "different gospel" (Galatians 1:6-8). What we do know is that the sectarian side that wins a debate writes the history of that debate and chooses which books to include in their sacred writings. We don't even have one legitimate Old Testament prophecy that specifically refers to Jesus' resurrection. Nor do we have any present day confirmations that God works miracles like virgin births or resurrections in today's world, something that would be of critical importance to historians when assessing these claims.

Basically then, we lack a great deal of needed independent collaborative evidence. We have no independent reports that the veil of the temple was torn in two at Jesus' death (Mark 15:38), nor that darkness came "over the whole land" from noon until three in the afternoon (Mark 15:33) nor that "the sun stopped shining" (Luke 23:45), nor that there was an earthquake at his death (Matthew 27:51, 54), with another "violent" one the day he arose from the grave (Matthew 28:2), nor that the saints were raised to life at his death, then waited until Jesus arose before walking out of their own opened tombs, who subsequently "went into the holy city and appeared to many people" and were never heard from again (Matthew 27:52-53). Could these events really have occurred without subsequent Roman or Rabbinic literature or Philo or Josephus mentioning them? These silences are telling.
Myth Buster

Glendale, AZ

#75663 Dec 2, 2012
John W. Loftus on Michael Licona (pt 2):

What we have at best are second-hand testimonies filtered through the gospel writers. With the possible exception of Paul who claimed to have experienced the resurrected Jesus in what is surely a visionary experience (so we read in Acts 26:19, cf. II Cor. 12:1-6; Rev. 1:10-3:21--although he didn't actually see Jesus, Acts 9:4-8; 22:7-11; 26:13-14), everything we're told comes from someone who was not an eyewitness. This is hearsay evidence, at best. Everything we read in the gospels depends entirely on authors who were not there and did not see any of it for themselves from manuscripts that date in the 4th century CE from a Church that had no problems in lying with forged texts (seen best in "The Donation of Constantine"). Let that sink in.

Despite the fact that Licona's book purports to be historiographical in nature it is not, not by a long shot. A historian qua historian would never conclude from the paucity of evidence that Jesus resurrected from the grave. It is not possible. Only a theologian could conclude this. If someone claimed he levitated we would need more than his word to believe him. If we read in an ancient text that someone levitated we have the added problem of verifying such a thing since we cannot personally interrogate him. Almost all of the important questions we have go unanswered. This book offers nothing more than a bait and switch, where it purports to show a historian can conclude Jesus resurrected, but in the end it's a theologian's perspective that comes from someone who was raised to believe in a Christian culture and now defends what he was raised to believe. For the only people who can accept Licona's conclusion are believers like him who were raised to believe in a God who did this kind of miracle, and that's it.

It is a massive book though, and there is much to learn from it. I would give it five stars for research, but the bait and switch methodology does not allow me to do so since it's delusional on a grand scale.
Myth Buster

Glendale, AZ

#75664 Dec 2, 2012
Mysterious wrote:
On the other hand, concerning Murdock, since we can refute her arguments
Religious indoctrination requires ignorance and cowardice resulting in arrogance and intolerance. You're one of the most severe cases of mental retardation via Christian indoctrination ever to post in this forums.

Your barbaric cult has desperately tried to discredit Murdock and others before her and have always failed. On the other hand, Licona's bullshit on the supposed resurrection of a mythical character has been thoroughly discredited as complete and utter bullshit as detailed above.
downhill246

Boca Raton, FL

#75665 Dec 2, 2012
Myth Buster wrote:
<quoted text>
The rationalizations of dangerously delusional nutcases like you are self-degrading and absolutely pathetic. If the universe and life on earth were created by design then there would be overwhelming evidence of design.
There has never been a single scientific observation in the history of the human race in support of design. Science understands how life on earth began and is currently working towards duplicating the entirely natural process in a controlled environment.


Dr Frankenstein! Its alive!!!!

More redundant psycho babble from the resident retard. It seems quite obvious that in spite of all the state-of-the-art medical help available in the 21st century, you are determined to die stupid.

"The world is too complicated in all its parts and interconnections to be due to chance alone. I am convinced that the existence of life with all its order in each of its organisms is simply too well put together."

Astronomer Allan Sandage. Former Staff Member Emeritus with the Carnegie Observatories in Pasadena, California. He is best known for determining the first reasonably accurate value for the Hubble constant and the age of the universe.


"The genetic code turns out to be a syntactic structure of arithmetic, the result of unique summations that have been carried out by some primordial abacus at least three and half billion years ago."

Mathematician and geneticist Vladimir Shcherbak.

"What really astounds me is the architecture of life. The system is extremely complex. It's like it was designed.
There's a huge intelligence there. I don't see that as being unscientific. Others may, but not me”

Gene Myers , Celera Genomics headquarters, the scientific institute that broke the genome code and assembled the “map.”
Myers was the computer scientist who put together the genome map.

Myth busted!!!
downhill246

Boca Raton, FL

#75666 Dec 2, 2012
Myth Buster wrote:
<quoted text>
Religious indoctrination requires ignorance and cowardice resulting in arrogance and intolerance. You're one of the most severe cases of mental retardation via Christian indoctrination ever to post in this forums.
Your barbaric cult has desperately tried to discredit Murdock and others before her and have always failed. On the other hand, Licona's bullshit on the supposed resurrection of a mythical character has been thoroughly discredited as complete and utter bullshit as detailed above.


You and Murdock have a lot in common, you both write fiction but at least she gets paid to do it.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#75667 Dec 2, 2012
downhill246 wrote:
<quoted text>
Abiogenesis is a myth of naturalism. The simple cell is more sophisticated than the most complex machinery ever created by modern man. If you found a fully functioning 2013 red Ferrari in a forest would you argue that it was randomly created by nature because it had billions of years to do so or would you admit that such a fine piece of machinery was intelligently designed??
I would call it the watchmakers fallacy

Your god belief is contingent upon abiogenisis?

abiogenisis is an hypothesis. But. Life is very much less fragile that you would depict it.

are snowflakes and mineral crystals designed by your god?

If I found a Ferrari, I would know it was not your god, your god designed humans, what a fuck-up

but then again, he gets everything wrong, everything he does turns into a pile of chite and he needs erase it and start over.

Looks like he picked you as his spokesman, typical kind of decision by him.
downhill246

Boca Raton, FL

#75668 Dec 2, 2012
Myth Buster wrote:
John W. Loftus on Michael Licona (pt 1):
When it comes to the evidence that Jesus rose up from the dead consider what we don't have, but would like to, things that Michael Licona admits in this book......
The Loftus Delusion
http://www.loftus-delusion.com/answeringjohnw...

Loftus needs a history lesson.

In the year 200 AD, the Christian lawyer Tertullian, who was privy to the Roman archives, wrote a letter to the Roman Senate defending Christianity. An excerpt from the letter:

"But the Jews were so exasperated by His teaching, by which their rulers and chiefs were convicted of the truth, chiefly because so many turned aside to Him, that at last they brought Him before Pontius Pilate, at that time Roman governor of Syria; and, by the violence of their outcries against Him, extorted a sentence giving Him up to them to be crucified. He Himself had predicted this; which, however, would have signified little had not the prophets of old done it as well. And yet, nailed upon the cross, He exhibited many notable signs, by which His death was distinguished from all others. At His own free-will, He with a word dismissed from Him His spirit, anticipating the executioners work. In the same hour, too, the light of the day was withdrawn, when the sun at the very time was in his meridian blaze. Those who were not aware that this had been predicted about Christ, no doubt thought it an eclipse. YOU YOURSELVES HAVE THE ACCOUNT OF THE WORLD-PORTENT STILL IN YOUR ARCHIVES."

Tertullian, Apologeticus. XXI.19
downhill246

Boca Raton, FL

#75669 Dec 2, 2012
karl44 wrote:
<quoted text>
I would call it the watchmakers fallacy
Your god belief is contingent upon abiogenisis?
abiogenisis is an hypothesis. But. Life is very much less fragile that you would depict it.
are snowflakes and mineral crystals designed by your god?
If I found a Ferrari, I would know it was not your god, your god designed humans, what a fuck-up
but then again, he gets everything wrong, everything he does turns into a pile of chite and he needs erase it and start over.
Looks like he picked you as his spokesman, typical kind of decision by him.
The fact remains those God made humans you demean made the Ferrari and resorting to science of the gaps is a rather weak argument.

Harold Moskowitz, renowned physicist from Yale Univ, the author of the 1993 book The Origin of Cellular Life, puts the odds of any kind of random creation of life from non living matter at one in 10 to the billionth power. Since I can't even win the Lotto 52 weeks in a row, I'll go with a Creator God.
downhill246

Boca Raton, FL

#75670 Dec 2, 2012
karl44 wrote:
<quoted text>
I would call it the watchmakers fallacy
Your god belief is contingent upon abiogenisis?
abiogenisis is an hypothesis. But. Life is very much less fragile that you would depict it.
are snowflakes and mineral crystals designed by your god?
If I found a Ferrari, I would know it was not your god, your god designed humans, what a fuck-up
but then again, he gets everything wrong, everything he does turns into a pile of chite and he needs erase it and start over.
Looks like he picked you as his spokesman, typical kind of decision by him.
Got a natural explanation for the Big Bang?

No?

Science of the gaps again?

"When you read or hear anything about the birth of the universe, someone is making it up — we are in the realm of philosophy. Only God knows what happened at the very beginning."
Nobel Prize winning physicist Dr. Leon Lederman, Director Emeritus of Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory,
Myth Buster

Glendale, AZ

#75671 Dec 2, 2012
downhill246 wrote:
More redundant psycho babble from the resident retard.
You really should stop reading your own posts, you dangerously delusional nutcase!

The facts are indisputable:

It's never been rational to believe the universe was created by design because there's never been a single scientific observation in support of such a juvenile hypothesis.

It's never been more irrational to believe the universe was created by design because science continues to unravel mysteries and all of the evidence fully supports an entirely natural origin.

It's also never been more dangerous to be in a cult with violence and hatred inciting dogma on a world with weapons of mass destruction.

It's inevitable that there will be an international ban on the abomination known as organized religion. Retarded and revolting piles of shit like you will just have to learn to live without your self-degrading delusions of an imaginary spaceman and afterlife paradise for slaves to Dark Ages dogma.
Myth Buster

Glendale, AZ

#75672 Dec 2, 2012
downhill246 wrote:
You and Murdock have a lot in common, you both write fiction but at least she gets paid to do it.
In actual fact, Murdock has done a superb job of exposing the damn bible as a plagiarized work of fiction that only a brainwashed imbecile like you would believe was divinely inspired.
Myth Buster

Glendale, AZ

#75673 Dec 2, 2012
downhill246 wrote:
Loftus needs a history lesson.
Once again, you're wrong. It's YOU who needs to take your head out of your ass and learn to differentiate Christian revisionist history from history and Christian pseudoscience from science.
Myth Buster

Glendale, AZ

#75674 Dec 2, 2012
downhill246 wrote:
science of the gaps
The blind hypocrisy of the religiously retarded imbecilic sociopathic godbot never cease to amaze. There's no scientific evidence in support of the childish creation myth. It's YOU who worships a god of the gaps and the gaps for your imaginary friend are continuing to shrink, you dangerously delusional nutcase!
Myth Buster

Glendale, AZ

#75675 Dec 2, 2012
downhill246 wrote:
Got a natural explanation for the Big Bang?
The Big Bang Theory is a scientific theory that describes an entirely natural origin for the universe. You're a world class ignoramus making a complete ass of yourself on an international forum and belong in an insane asylum, you dangerously delusional nutcase.
Mysterious

Brooklyn, NY

#75676 Dec 2, 2012
Myth Buster wrote:
John W. Loftus on Michael Licona (pt 2):
What we have at best are second-hand testimonies filtered through the gospel writers. With the possible exception of Paul who claimed to have experienced the resurrected Jesus in what is surely a visionary experience (so we read in Acts 26:19, cf. II Cor. 12:1-6; Rev. 1:10-3:21--although he didn't actually see Jesus, Acts 9:4-8; 22:7-11; 26:13-14), everything we're told comes from someone who was not an eyewitness. This is hearsay evidence, at best. Everything we read in the gospels depends entirely on authors who were not there and did not see any of it for themselves from manuscripts that date in the 4th century CE from a Church that had no problems in lying with forged texts (seen best in "The Donation of Constantine"). Let that sink in.
Despite the fact that Licona's book purports to be historiographical in nature it is not, not by a long shot. A historian qua historian would never conclude from the paucity of evidence that Jesus resurrected from the grave. It is not possible. Only a theologian could conclude this. If someone claimed he levitated we would need more than his word to believe him. If we read in an ancient text that someone levitated we have the added problem of verifying such a thing since we cannot personally interrogate him. Almost all of the important questions we have go unanswered. This book offers nothing more than a bait and switch, where it purports to show a historian can conclude Jesus resurrected, but in the end it's a theologian's perspective that comes from someone who was raised to believe in a Christian culture and now defends what he was raised to believe. For the only people who can accept Licona's conclusion are believers like him who were raised to believe in a God who did this kind of miracle, and that's it.
It is a massive book though, and there is much to learn from it. I would give it five stars for research, but the bait and switch methodology does not allow me to do so since it's delusional on a grand scale.
How typical of you. You chickened out as usual. I challenged YOU to personally refute Mike Licona's work. All you gave me was a review by somebody who is stuck in the dark ages regarding historicity. I can refute anything Murdock says and I don't need the help of other apologists.

Have you ever thought on your own?

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#75677 Dec 2, 2012
downhill246 wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact remains those God made humans you demean made the Ferrari and resorting to science of the gaps is a rather weak argument.
Harold Moskowitz, renowned physicist from Yale Univ, the author of the 1993 book The Origin of Cellular Life, puts the odds of any kind of random creation of life from non living matter at one in 10 to the billionth power. Since I can't even win the Lotto 52 weeks in a row, I'll go with a Creator God.
you love to quote mine and lie

you remind me of buck, take the loosing side in every debate, it is done to protect your ego, and do you ever have a lot to protect.

Your paraphrasing is inaccurate as is your math references.

but you are lousy at any kind of science, your best qualities are altered copy and paste and invective as debate.

oh and you represent a failed god

does it,,,

I mean, does it.....

get any better than that?

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 3 min Riverside Rednek 59,123
Enough is Enough. Jehovahs Witnesses is a incid... (Oct '15) 1 hr No Soliciting 3
MESSAGE to Adam Lanza IN HELL 1 hr How Do You Know 14
Fischbach army depot-NATO site 67 (Mar '07) 2 hr John B 472
1z0-808 Real Exam Dumps 2 hr jhoniliver 1
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 2 hr Robert F 695,341
1z0-808 Dumps Questions 2 hr addison 1
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 4 hr Feb 2018 994,022
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 6 hr youareaperv 446,240
More from around the web