Penn & Teller - The Bible

He keeps saying "Elvis never did not drugs!" as if it proved his point or something. He also uses the Old Covenant arguments that have been explained on this site before, bringing up the 'purity' laws in the old testament and saying you can't 'throw them away', without regard or understanding of the New Covenant and how it changed those rules.

He does bring up good points about Noah's Ark, and other stories that could not be scientifically factual, but all in all didn't 'debunk' the bible any more than any other person did. At the end, the answer was Faith...

Even the sceptic magazine guy was willing to say there 'Probably was a man named Jesus..."
 
no1tovote4 said:
And the end. Did you watch the whole thing. The Dr. stated at the end that over all there was a need for Faith.
Yeah, I did.

My point was that the started out by saying something to the effect that "this discussion isn't for you Christians who base your beliefs merely on faith... It's for those who think the bible is literally true and base your beliefs on such".

That's not even remotely close to the exact words, but that was the idea.
 
Said1 said:
It was said at the beginning and the end, by different people. :arabia:

I heard it somewhere in the middle, and at the end of the first quarter, and the third quarter.
 
no1tovote4 said:
He keeps saying "Elvis never did not drugs!" as if it proved his point or something. He also uses the Old Covenant arguments that have been explained on this site before, bringing up the 'purity' laws in the old testament and saying you can't 'throw them away', without regard or understanding of the New Covenant and how it changed those rules.

He does bring up good points about Noah's Ark, and other stories that could not be scientifically factual, but all in all didn't 'debunk' the bible any more than any other person did. At the end, the answer was Faith...

Even the sceptic magazine guy was willing to say there 'Probably was a man named Jesus..."

I have talked about Noah's Ark on the board before. Meteorologists currently have a well-supported theory that conditions existed a few thousand years ago that could produce a super hurricane, what they call a 'hypercane." These conditions include a warmer climate (take that, global warming), moister atmosphere, and some stuff I didn't understand about tilt and tidal conditions. Anyway, a 'hypercane' carries enough precipitation that a large one could have flooded the entire world known to the Mesopotamians in the time of Noah, even as high as Mr. Ararat.
 
Hobbit said:
I have talked about Noah's Ark on the board before. Meteorologists currently have a well-supported theory that conditions existed a few thousand years ago that could produce a super hurricane, what they call a 'hypercane." These conditions include a warmer climate (take that, global warming), moister atmosphere, and some stuff I didn't understand about tilt and tidal conditions. Anyway, a 'hypercane' carries enough precipitation that a large one could have flooded the entire world known to the Mesopotamians in the time of Noah, even as high as Mr. Ararat.

What I saw on hyper-canes was that they needed an immense energy source to even form, like for instance a large meteor landing in the ocean. In order to maintain a hyper-cane for any length of time, a series of precisely located meteors would be required to keep "refueling" it.
 
MissileMan said:
What I saw on hyper-canes was that they needed an immense energy source to even form, like for instance a large meteor landing in the ocean. In order to maintain a hyper-cane for any length of time, a series of precisely located meteors would be required to keep "refueling" it.

Wow - some sort of "intelligent design", you're saying.
 
musicman said:
Wow - some sort of "intelligent design", you're saying.

Ummm, no. I'm saying that the Hyper-cane explanation for the "Noah's flood" is probably one of the weaker attempts to come up with a plausible natural explanation for a supposed supernatural event.
 
MissileMan said:
Ummm, no. I'm saying that the Hyper-cane explanation for the "Noah's flood" is probably one of the weaker attempts to come up with a plausible natural explanation for a supposed supernatural event.

I don't see it that way at all. Perhaps a hyper-cane is the method a supernatural intelligence used to accomplish its ends.
 
musicman said:
I don't see it that way at all. Perhaps a hyper-cane is the method a supernatural intelligence used to accomplish its ends.

A supernatural intelligence with the ability of "Let there be light" would not need to use a concerted meteor bombardment to inundate the globe. I would think that "Let there be water" would "Git er done!"
 
MissileMan said:
A supernatural intelligence with the ability of "Let there be light" would not need to use a concerted meteor bombardment to inundate the globe. I would think that "Let there be water" would "Git er done!"

Being thus omnipotent, though, it could accomplish miracles any way it wished. Who are we to say? Some being out there has the recipe for air, and light, and water, and wind. It sure ain't me - and I sure ain't gonna Monday-morning quarterback the dude.
 
MissileMan said:
Ummm, no. I'm saying that the Hyper-cane explanation for the "Noah's flood" is probably one of the weaker attempts to come up with a plausible natural explanation for a supposed supernatural event.

Maybe so, maybe not. But it certainly is much more plausable than a bunch of chemicals wondering around in some primordial soup and forming a single cell capable of creating a mucous membrane, a brain, ability to digest food, and DNA to replicate itself.

Im also wondering when Penn and Teller are gonna do their similiar "expose" on the Koran.

I doubt they have the balls.

But it also shows you which of the three religions is the violent one.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top