Forget the evolution debate

[The ClayTaurus]

Unless you have a crystal ball, and can tell the future, you are being dishonest.

As it turns out...

The symbols on the bottom read, roughly translated:
"Clay's Crystal Ball of Internet Forum Debate Battle Winner Predictions"

It's quite accurate.

Uhh, he's just another chew toy to me, until he proves himself. So he could be versed on a book full of contradictions and misconceptions, but what does that prove? I could be well versed on the superman comics, so?

He's been here much longer than you. You've got who needs to prove themselves backwards, friend.

Why don't you just admit that you don't care what he says about the Bible because you've already made your mind up on it. You won't believe anything he has to say because you've set this up as an un-arguable argument:

"Defend the bible without using it. If you use it, you're just an idiot versed in a book of contradictions!"

 

[5stringJeff]

Please remember that Mark and Luke weren't disciples, and Mark was the first Gospel written, so ask yourself why would an "eyewitness" need to use someone else's work?

http://www.bowness.demon.co.uk/gosp1.htm

I'll assume, since you didn't point out any evidence to counter my initial claim, that you concede that the Gospels were written in the first century.

Mark was a close companion of Peter. Your article makes the assumption, never mentioned by Papias, that Mark was a Jew. It was quite possible that Mark was a Greek who learned Aramaic - many people were bilingual in that day.

Luke was one of the most well-trained historians of the ancient world. See here for more info.

You'll also see, from your own experience with the Bible and from this page, the harmony between the Gospels, which further bolsters the truth contained therein, especially that Jesus Christ really was a real person who really did walk on this earth, which was the point of the original post (OP).

 

[5stringJeff]

Just a friendly warning - any attempt you have to battle wits with gop_jeff will resort in a big lesson in humility on your part.

Jeff will always win for the simple fact that he refuses to be dragged down into the mud with you. The fact that he's 400 times more knowledgeable than you on this subject is just a bonus.

You guys are making me blush!

 

[kal-el]

I'll assume, since you didn't point out any evidence to counter my initial claim, that you concede that the Gospels were written in the first century.

I don't have to "concede" anything. I agree that they were written in the first century. Matthew, Mark, and Luke were written around 60 A.d., and John was written around 90 A.D- all of them at least 6 decades after the death of the carpenter.

Mark was a close companion of Peter.

You're preaching to the choir. Indeed he was very close to the disciple Peter. And his cousin, was a colleague of the apostle Paul. Mark went so far as to go along with Paul and his cousin on some of their missionary journies. Mark's gospel is the shortest one, he seemed to love action words, he depicted Jesus as a servant, his "miracles" acts of compassion. Half of Mark's gospel covers the last 8 days of Jesus's life.

Your article makes the assumption, never mentioned by Papias, that Mark was a Jew. It was quite possible that Mark was a Greek who learned Aramaic - many people were bilingual in that day.

Yes, it was not uncommon for people to speak 2 or more languages then. For example the OT was originally written in Aramaic and Hebrew. The NT was originally written in Greek, as it was the official language of that time.

Luke was one of the most well-trained historians of the ancient world. See here for more info.

Well, that's up in the air, but he was a doctor, and I believe Theophilus, a Greek historian, was a close friend of his.

You'll also see, from your own experience with the Bible and from this page, the harmony between the Gospels, which further bolsters the truth contained therein, especially that Jesus Christ really was a real person who really did walk on this earth, which was the point of the original post (OP).

Wow, hold on there, the bible is just a book, that's it. I'm not going to buy into some dead carpenter just because some book claims he's "divine". He doesn't gest a free pass because he lived 2,000 years ago, and some author's wrote about his life according to their prejudices, and worldviews.

But the gospels aren't biographies. Each author organized what he wanted to say differently.

 

[kal-el]

As it turns out...

The symbols on the bottom read, roughly translated:
"Clay's Crystal Ball of Internet Forum Debate Battle Winner Predictions"

It's quite accurate.

O, I see. Resorting to stupid linguistic sarcasm. That just shows your inability to argue.

He's been here much longer than you.

Wow, you're a sharp one!

You've got who needs to prove themselves backwards, friend.

Well, if you didn't notice, this isn't a popularity contest. I don't care what people on here think about me. This is a ****ing internet forum. You're acting like GOP is your "god" fellow.

Why don't you just admit that you don't care what he says about the Bible because you've already made your mind up on it.

What are you babbling? His points and facts are correct, but his opinions do not hold any weight.

You won't believe anything he has to say because you've set this up as an un-arguable argument:

"Defend the bible without using it. If you use it, you're just an idiot versed in a book of contradictions!"

Huh? Do yourself a favor here. Please put a bit more thought into your posts, and read up on shit before you post, so as not to portray yourself so naive, thanks.

 

[MtnBiker]

Huh? Do yourself a favor here. Please put a bit more thought into your posts, and read up on shit before you post, so as not to portray yourself so naive, thanks.

You are not in the postion here to tell anybody how to post.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

O, I see. Resorting to stupid linguistic sarcasm. That just shows your inability to argue.

No, it shows a sense of humor. What happened to yours? So bitter, you are.

Wow, you're a sharp one!

I can deconstruct your posts to sentence level and reply to them out of their context as well, if you'd so like.

Well, if you didn't notice, this isn't a popularity contest. I don't care what people on here think about me. This is a ****ing internet forum. You're acting like GOP is your "god" fellow.

Clearly you don't care what people here think about you. Why bother posting here then? Are you here to enlighten us, but not be liked by us? GOP is not anything more than a respectful person. If you go do a little research into some of his posts, you'll see he's not some put Christianity everywhere force you to swallow it types. I don't see where you get the contempt you have towards him in your posts.

What are you babbling? His points and facts are correct, but his opinions do not hold any weight.

Why do they not hold any weight? Because you say so? What makes your opinions heavier in weight than his? Because you think you're witty?

Huh? Do yourself a favor here. Please put a bit more thought into your posts, and read up on shit before you post, so as not to portray yourself so naive, thanks.

You're making GOP out to be some lunatic, and you're telling me to read up on posts. Right. I hope you've enjoyed the week or two you've been here, but save the holier-than-thou speeches for those who joined this board after you.

Here's a question for you: do you think that referring to a God someone believes in as a "sky pixie" is demeaning? Respectful? Insulting? Why can't you just say "your God?"

 

[manu1959]

There is nothing more frightful than arrogance in action.

 

[kal-el]

No, it shows a sense of humor. What happened to yours? So bitter, you are.

I guess all these deceptive, wild, unfounded claims are taking a bigger toll on me than I originally thought.

I can deconstruct your posts to sentence level and reply to them out of their context as well, if you'd so like.

Whatever floats your boat.

Clearly you don't care what people here think about you. Why bother posting here then?

I'll probably call it quits here after today, since there is little reward in arguing with lies and deceptions.

Are you here to enlighten us, but not be liked by us?

Negaitive. I'm simply here to offer anb atheistic viewpoint on god.

GOP is not anything more than a respectful person. If you go do a little research into some of his posts, you'll see he's not some put Christianity everywhere force you to swallow it types.

That may be the case, and he does construct well, factual arguments, but I would hardly classify him as an intellectual giant. In my short time here, I ran into others who I'd say are as smart, or smarter than GOP. No12vote4, even though he has a differing opinion, is a very formidable debater.

I don't see where you get the contempt you have towards him in your posts.

If you haven't noticed, I get all riled up when people spew nonsense. I act that way most of the time. Nothing personal towards GOP or others.

Why do they not hold any weight? Because you say so?

It's not his opinions, it's anyone's, including mine. Opinions mean nothing if not supported by evidence.

What makes your opinions heavier in weight than his?

Everything that I've stated in opinion, I've designated with "IMO", meaning I have no evidence, it's just opinion.

Because you think you're witty?

Where did you come up with this? I never claimed such a thing.

You're making GOP out to be some lunatic,

And you and dmp are making GOP out to be some infallible entity, worthy of worship.

and you're telling me to read up on posts. Right. I hope you've enjoyed the week or two you've been here, but save the holier-than-thou speeches for those who joined this board after you.

Why does seniority matter here? You're only intellectual if you have a high post count? Is that right?

Here's a question for you: do you think that referring to a God someone believes in as a "sky pixie" is demeaning? Respectful? Insulting? Why can't you just say "your God?"

I try and use as many nouns and adjectives that I can, for the effect.

 

[manu1959]

I'll probably call it quits here after today, since there is little reward in arguing with lies and deceptions.

clay,

couple of thoughts on this one....

3:1 odds says he welches on his promise

and if there is no reward in his arguing with lies and deception maybe he should change tacts

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I guess all these deceptive, wild, unfounded claims are taking a bigger toll on me than I originally thought.



Whatever floats your boat.



I'll probably call it quits here after today, since there is little reward in arguing with lies and deceptions.



Negaitive. I'm simply here to offer anb atheistic viewpoint on god.



That may be the case, and he does construct well, factual arguments, but I would hardly classify him as an intellectual giant. In my short time here, I ran into others who I'd say are as smart, or smarter than GOP. No12vote4, even though he has a differing opinion, is a very formidable debater.



If you haven't noticed, I get all riled up when people spew nonsense. I act that way most of the time. Nothing personal towards GOP or others.



It's not his opinions, it's anyone's, including mine. Opinions mean nothing if not supported by evidence.



Everything that I've stated in opinion, I've designated with "IMO", meaning I have no evidence, it's just opinion.



Where did you come up with this? I never claimed such a thing.



And you and dmp are making GOP out to be some infallible entity, worthy of worship.



Why does seniority matter here? You're only intellectual if you have a high post count? Is that right?



I try and use as many nouns and adjectives that I can, for the effect.

You didn't answer whether you thought "sky pixie" was insulting or not. Please answer, if you don't mind.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

clay,

couple of thoughts on this one....

3:1 odds says he welches on his promise

and if there is no reward in his arguing with lies and deception maybe he should change tacts

I wish he would stay around. I wish he would also not be so abrasive. I realize that some members are less than hospitable, but multiple people have tried to reach out and explain that people warm up to you with time.

In the end, if he feels like he can't get a fair shake, and that his best method in response is to just get riled up all the time, then maybe it's best for him that he leaves. People shouldn't subject themselves to things that make them so angry all the time; it's not healthy.

It's too bad he didn't start out in some of the more goofier threads with us, and get to know us first. It's tough for dissenters to start in on this board on topics as heated as religion. Whether he likes it or not, this is a community of sorts, and you need to approach it as such.

 

[manu1959]

I wish he would stay around. I wish he would also not be so abrasive. I realize that some members are less than hospitable, but multiple people have tried to reach out and explain that people warm up to you with time.

In the end, if he feels like he can't get a fair shake, and that his best method in response is to just get riled up all the time, then maybe it's best for him that he leaves. People shouldn't subject themselves to things that make them so angry all the time; it's not healthy.

It's too bad he didn't start out in some of the more goofier threads with us, and get to know us first. It's tough for dissenters to start in on this board on topics as heated as religion. Whether he likes it or not, this is a community of sorts, and you need to approach it as such.

well said.....opposing points of view teach.....however, it always strikes me as odd that people choose to be abrasive and rude as an opening gambit and then get indignant and self righteous when called on it....it is almost as if intollerance has become acceptable behaviour

 

[The ClayTaurus]

well said.....opposing points of view teach.....however, it always strikes me as odd that people choose to be abrasive and rude as an opening gambit and then get indignant and self righteous when called on it....it is almost as if intollerance has become acceptable behaviour

Well, I believe people were fairly indignant and self-righteous to him right off the bat (deserved or not), and so I can understand where he's coming from. At the same time, I also know multiple people have tried to reach out to him, but he got offended too quickly or simply wasn't interested in becoming a respected opinion. He's simply perpetuating the cycle that can happen on this board, and while it might be a bit much to ask that he toss aside the many mounting criticisms against his early opinions here, it would certainly speak volumes about his character if he did. Surely he must realize that one needs a little time on this board to understand the inner workings, and how seriously certain people respond to certain things. I think if he just relaxed a little and tried to have some fun with us first, try and find that sense of humor again, that he'd get along much better. Only so many people can try reaching out to him, though, and if he truly is that easy to rile up, then he should probably consider going on his merry way somewhere else.

 

[manu1959]

Well, I believe people were fairly indignant and self-righteous to him right off the bat (deserved or not), and so I can understand where he's coming from. At the same time, I also know multiple people have tried to reach out to him, but he got offended too quickly or simply wasn't interested in becoming a respected opinion. He's simply perpetuating the cycle that can happen on this board, and while it might be a bit much to ask that he toss aside the many mounting criticisms against his early opinions here, it would certainly speak volumes about his character if he did. Surely he must realize that one needs a little time on this board to understand the inner workings, and how seriously certain people respond to certain things. I think if he just relaxed a little and tried to have some fun with us first, try and find that sense of humor again, that he'd get along much better. Only so many people can try reaching out to him, though, and if he truly is that easy to rile up, then he should probably consider going on his merry way somewhere else.

Not sure his opening post did him any favours

Most wars, but not all.
Uhh, not beleiving something is the default position. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god. I simply don't subscribe to the idea of a giant sky ape simply because of the overwhelming lack of evidence for such an entity.
__________________
kal

plus he strikes me as a guy that finds being a bit of twit funny

 

[MtnBiker]

I have been here long enough to realize that some members are here to mostly be antagonistic.

 

[kal-el]

You didn't answer whether you thought "sky pixie" was insulting or not. Please answer, if you don't mind.

Probably to Christians, hell I would probably be insulted if people called Superman, "that man in spandex that flies". To each is own here.

I wish he would stay around.

Yea I might stick with it, I don't know yet.

I wish he would also not be so abrasive.

Yea I'm working on that. It's not that easy when some continue to spew rabid falshoods.

I realize that some members are less than hospitable, but multiple people have tried to reach out and explain that people warm up to you with time.

I'm sure they do.

In the end, if he feels like he can't get a fair shake, and that his best method in response is to just get riled up all the time, then maybe it's best for him that he leaves.

Yea, like I said, I haven't really figured it out yet, rather than constantly putting myself in check, I might exit the forum.

People shouldn't subject themselves to things that make them so angry all the time; it's not healthy.

You would be correct.

It's too bad he didn't start out in some of the more goofier threads with us, and get to know us first. It's tough for dissenters to start in on this board on topics as heated as religion.

Yes, that's the first rule of a proper debate- never debate about something that you know little about, or else fellow debaters will smell blood in the water, and make you look like an ass. I figued since I am a former Christian, and no my way around scripture, the religion section is a great place to begin. Maybe later I will move on to another forum if I stay.

Whether he likes it or not, this is a community of sorts, and you need to approach it as such.

Ok

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Probably to Christians, hell I would probably be insulted if people called Superman, "that man in spandex that flies". To each is own here.

So you are knowingly and intentionally insulting Christians then. I just wanted to make sure you realized that sky-pixie or sky ape was insulting. Why be intentionally insulting and inflammatory?

Yea I'm working on that. It's not that easy when some continue to spew rabid falshoods.

It's perfectly easy to be respectful with someone who is respectful to you. Just because someone is lying does not give you the right to be an asshole to them. It gives you the right to say "I think you're lying, here's why." I don't see how being insulting and abrasive plays any role in it, other than that it's an emotion you can't seem to control. Then again, you use sky pixie and sky ape knowing they are intentionally insulting, so perhaps you have no interest in being cordial. If that's the case, I'd encourage that you be on your way.

Yea, like I said, I haven't really figured it out yet, rather than constantly putting myself in check, I might exit the forum.

It wouldn't be the end of the world if you learned more self control that wasn't so forced. Don't you find it troubling that you jump to being insulting so quickly? Don't you think that's an attribute worth improving on?

Yes, that's the first rule of a proper debate- never debate about something that you know little about, or else fellow debaters will smell blood in the water, and make you look like an ass. I figued since I am a former Christian, and no my way around scripture, the religion section is a great place to begin. Maybe later I will move on to another forum if I stay.

And the first rule of joining a community is to warm up to it first. Getting into any "serious" debates right off the bat can be a quick recipe for disaster. When I say goofy, I mean the bottom section of the forum. The chat threads, the music threads, the movie threads. The introduction threads. Lurk through some threads, allow people to defend their opinions without interjecting yours. Watch people's thought progressions throughout threads. Step back and observe people before you characterize them in a vacuum, that's all I'm saying.

For all I know, you could be a genius. But you'll never convince anyone continuing the way you are. You'll only get banned, and that's not meant as a threat, just a fact. People uninterested in the relationship aspect of the board do not tend to last long, as they aren't given much slack, or benefit of the doubt.