Prove there's a god.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#560345 Nov 8, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Excellent.
Thanks.

The work I utilized in the post is from Mark. S Smith. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_S._Smith Professional Scholars like this don't sacrifice their work efforts and the respect that comes from that rational approach and legitimate research - that is incorporated into reference works for future students and other scholars to draw upon - by giving intentionally misrepresented or biased assessments in order to satisfy a personal religious belief, and the similar religious beliefs of others.

That applies to history of any sort.

There is an emerging trend in *some* biblical, and in a larger scope, historical scholars and "archaeohistorians" to coin a term. These are people who have went to great effort to obtain highly credentialed and relevant educations and perform legitimate research - for a passion of career that is very important to them, obviously.

They actually utilize an a posteriori scientific method. They follow the evidence where it leads, then a conclusion is made based on *all* of the data.

They don't make the conclusion, then look only for the evidence that supports that, excluding any conflicting data.

For instance, if evidence is found that George Washington had a coconut pounded up his rectum before each battle as a some sort of bizarre ritual, irrefutable and verifiable as just that, a bizarre ritual, they don't try to present it as: "Coconut enema treatments he thought would alleviate his irritable bowel syndrome".

In order to preserve some notion of a historical image or belief people may hold. They don't add spin.
It aint necessarily so wrote:
I think RiversideRedneck has been twisting scripture again. He does that a lot, but don't tell him. He likes to pretend that the claims made against him are just as ungrounded and unevidenced as the ones he makes, and things like this just have to be ignored.
Yeah, Ar Ar(RR) generally makes sweeping proclamations, and would really prefer it if you'd limit your response to the same type of grand proclamations. That way, as you said, he can say to the effect: "WELL!, we both just have our BELIEFS don't we, and mine is just as good as yours!"

When supported by fact evidences and other similar material are supplied in response to his bare assertions that refute those assertions or require him to respond in kind, he might likely not respond back to those posts. They get, "Lost in the mix, oops!" LULZ...

The non responded to posts, when due to what I just described are my favorites. It's an implicit concession of defeat or inability to refute by the other party.
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Christians are just as good at mythopoeisis - making up mythology as they go along - as were their ancient forbears that wrote the original stories.
For faith based thinkers, reality, including the bible, is whatever you need it to be.
That's what religious faith boils down to, no? Religious faith requires no evidence whatsoever. Religious faith will ignore evidence, facts or proof that refute the religious faith.

What was it Martin Luther said?

"Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ... know nothing but the word of God." — Martin Luther

"What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church?[...] a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them." — Martin Luther

Yeah, that.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#560346 Nov 8, 2012
scaritual wrote:
Yeah, Ar Ar(RR) generally makes sweeping proclamations, and would really prefer it if you'd limit your response to the same type of grand proclamations. That way, as you said, he can say to the effect: "WELL!, we both just have our BELIEFS don't we, and mine is just as good as yours!"
When supported by fact evidences and other similar material are supplied in response to his bare assertions that refute those assertions or require him to respond in kind, he might likely not respond back to those posts. They get, "Lost in the mix, oops!" LULZ...
Yes, but I've been offered very little, if any, real evidence from you people. All you post is assumptions & beliefs, nothing solid, nothing concrete.

I don't care if you want to limit your responses or not. It just seems that you have to post these incredibly long posts just to get your point across while I'm able to do the same with very little.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#560347 Nov 8, 2012
scaritual wrote:
What was it Martin Luther said?
"Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ... know nothing but the word of God." — Martin Luther
"What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church?[...] a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them." — Martin Luther
Yeah, that.
Where did you find those 'quotes'? All I can find is shit site like these:

www.scholarisland.org/reason.htm
www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/luther.ht...
www.jesuscult.com/Luther_Anti-Reason.htm
theamazingdeception.com/faith.htm

oh, and here's a reliable atheist source:
www.lucifer.com/lucifer.html

In fact, all I can find is that those quotes are unsourced.

I wonder what atheist would've made that up.....?

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#560348 Nov 8, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
I have to admit, Epicurus beat me to it. That's true. It's just that none of these believers ever seem to understand that, not even a little.
Wasn't saying you stole it or anything. Easy observations to make for the non religious.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#560349 Nov 8, 2012
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess that was my fault as I should have asked for qualification although I assumed by use of the theory it was all-inclusive. The theory presupposes a start to present day continual and progressive evolution of species. Of that we can not prove. Certainly not from start to finish (and i know abiogenesis is different than evolution but evolution would still have to grab the baton at the point so-to-speak).
If you want to say there has been proof things of some animals evolving I will agree with you. But the theory itself, the all-inclusive theory, is far from proven.
(T) Peace
Are you one of those micro/macro people?
Orangelion

Wrexham, UK

#560350 Nov 8, 2012
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/T01L6PM...

Look up the thread, Ratchets existence in the Ratchet and Clank series alone proves that God exists.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#560352 Nov 8, 2012
Orangelion wrote:
http://www.topix.com/forum/top stories/T01L6PMRPTHB14MGK
Look up the thread, Ratchets existence in the Ratchet and Clank series alone proves that God exists.
Orangie-poo.....

Why are you wasting interwebspace with shit like this:

"Ratchet needs to be honoured for he is the ultimate cute animal, fail to do so will result in the destruction of society, so we must all cooperate and act now!"

lol, OR:

"Ratchet is given little respect, no one cares, no one gives toss, forget about that crappy little PS3 ratchet, the PS2 ratchet was at his best, only a fool wouldn't want to support him."
cory

Dublin, Ireland

#560353 Nov 8, 2012
god said let there be light there was a big bang and there was light and god sew it was good
Anon

Cleveland, OH

#560354 Nov 8, 2012
cory wrote:
god said let there be light there was a big bang and there was light and god sew it was good
Yo' be krazy..

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#560355 Nov 8, 2012
Anon wrote:
<quoted text>
Yo' be krazy..
I know God can do a lot, but I didn't know he could sew.
Orangelion

Wrexham, UK

#560357 Nov 8, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I know God can do a lot, but I didn't know he could sew.
Of course he can sew, he just doesn't want to idiot.

“What game?”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#560358 Nov 8, 2012
United in faith wrote:
<quoted text>

Faith is hope oh clueless one.
That is decidedly not true. I've slept with both Faith and Hope. They are not the same girl.
Orangelion

Wrexham, UK

#560359 Nov 8, 2012

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#560360 Nov 8, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, but I've been offered very little, if any, real evidence from you people. All you post is assumptions & beliefs, nothing solid, nothing concrete.
I don't care if you want to limit your responses or not. It just seems that you have to post these incredibly long posts just to get your point across while I'm able to do the same with very little.
When you resort to making unsupported, yet brief assertions that cover a large area, I have no choice but to respond fully, and address the issue.

So, yeah, it may be a lengthy response.

Much like with the fabricated origin of the Yahweh, I utilized a top biblical scholars work http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_S._Smith , that is cited in references to teach and instruct within historical and biblical studies, to respond.
Orangelion

Wrexham, UK

#560361 Nov 8, 2012
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
That is decidedly not true. I've slept with both Faith and Hope. They are not the same girl.
Faith brings hope fool, it is interchangeable, now go off and contract AIDS like all filthy ugly lesbians.
Orangelion

Wrexham, UK

#560362 Nov 8, 2012
River Tam wrote:
<quoted text>
That is decidedly not true. I've slept with both Faith and Hope. They are not the same girl.
Your 19 years old, your too young to have slept with any.
Anon

Cleveland, OH

#560364 Nov 8, 2012
Orangelion wrote:
<quoted text>
Faith brings hope fool, it is interchangeable, now go off and contract AIDS like all filthy ugly lesbians.
Ya know what, you're a nasty little shyte... I, for one, am damn tired of your blatant stupidity.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#560365 Nov 8, 2012
scaritual wrote:
<quoted text>
When you resort to making unsupported, yet brief assertions that cover a large area, I have no choice but to respond fully, and address the issue.
So, yeah, it may be a lengthy response.
Much like with the fabricated origin of the Yahweh, I utilized a top biblical scholars work http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_S._Smith , that is cited in references to teach and instruct within historical and biblical studies, to respond.
But you're missing the whole point that the term "Yahweh" is an assumption. Biblical Hebrew was written with consonants only, meaning that the name was written YHWH. The original pronunciation was lost many centuries ago, but the available evidence indicates that it was in all likelihood Yahweh.

The components of YHWH are Y, meaning roughly "he", and the consonantal root HWH, which is connected with acts of creation. There appear to be two main lines of reasoning to explain the origin of the name. The first suggests that it is the shortened form of a sentence used in worship, "he causes to be" or "he creates", from el du yahwi seba'ot, "el who creates the hosts", meaning the heavenly army accompanying the god El as he marched out beside the earthly armies of Israel.

Instead of getting info from atheist sites, Christian sites or from ex-Christians, you should get your info from non-bias sites.
endtime

AOL

#560366 Nov 8, 2012
.

PROOF Obama's ReElection = ANTICHRIST_______

&fe ature=plcp


.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#560367 Nov 8, 2012
scaritual wrote:
What was it Martin Luther said?
"Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ... know nothing but the word of God." — Martin Luther

"What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church?[...] a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them." — Martin Luther

Yeah, that.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Where did you find those 'quotes'?
In fact, all I can find is that those quotes are unsourced.
I wonder what atheist would've made that up.....?
You didn't look very good.

The first quote.

"Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ... know nothing but the word of God." — Martin Luther ,“Die verfluchte hure, Vernunft!(The damned whore, Reason.)

The second quote.

"What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church?[...] a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them." — Martin Luther (Cited by his secretary, in a letter in Max Lenz, ed., Briefwechsel Landgraf Phillips des Grossmüthigen von Hessen mit Bucer, vol. I.)

Both quotes are accepted as the historical words of Martin Luther.

Here's some more Martin Luther.

"To be a Christian, you must "pluck out the eye of reason." - Martin Luther, "Die verfluchte Huhre, Vernunft." (The damned whore, Reason).

*

"Reason should be destroyed in all Christians."

"Whoever wants to be a Christian should tear the eyes out of his Reason."

"Reason is the Devil's greatest whore; by nature and manner of being she is a noxious whore; she is a prostitute, the Devil's appointed whore; whore eaten by scab and leprosy who ought to be trodden under foot and destroyed, she and her wisdom ... Throw dung in her face to make her ugly. She is and she ought to be drowned in baptism... She would deserve, the wretch, to be banished to the filthiest place in the house, to the closets." — Martin Luther, Erlangen Edition v. 16

*

"Even though they grow weary and wear themselves out with child-bearing, it does not matter; let them go on bearing children till they die, that is what they are there for." - Martin Luther, Works 20.84

"The word and works of God is quite clear, that women were made either to be wives or prostitutes." — Martin Luther, Works 12.94

*

"We know, on the authority of Moses, that longer than six thousand years the world did not exist." — "Lectures on Genesis", Martin Luther

All from Martin Luther, the "Father" of Protestantism.

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
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 4 min Pres Mr Donald J ... 100,456
Do any attractive cougars or milfs want to trad... (Dec '11) 39 min Seejay 4
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr New Age Spiritual... 670,340
God is REAL - Miracles Happen! (Jun '11) 2 hr Peter Ross 6,147
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 2 hr Peter Ross 445,656
News Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 4 hr shkreli zionism 121,925
News The 'Fake News' Con: A Case Study 7 hr Libhater 58
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 13 hr Pegasus 286,455
More from around the web