[quote='Taqiyya Mockingbird' pid='294301' dateline='1338775798']

Quote:That makes it a polytheism.

Equivocating ad nauseum isn't going to get you anywhere.

You have killed your thesis.

May it rest in pea....the same cesspool from which it came.

Do you honestly think you are the first to think this? Post #9 is the start of your rebuttle. address the points following that post and we can discuss.

Your rebuttal is textbook apologetics-and has no sense. It IS polytheism, but under pretense of something else: Classical Catholic dishonesty.

(June 3, 2012 at 5:59 pm)elunico13 Wrote: An Atheist with a fake profile? Not surprised. Your faith sure matches that of an atheist.

[out of character/]
Gee, what was your first clue? It's not like I'm being subtle here. It just amazes me how long it takes Christians to realize they're being put-on. Are your critical thinking skills so dulled down that... never mind, dumb question.

Here's how it works for future reference: if you're an apologist and your too mind-blowingly stupid for a normal discussion, I'll log in under this account and "agree" with you in-character.

Quote:Are your critical thinking skills so dulled down that.

By George...I think you've got it.

(June 3, 2012 at 4:24 am)aleialoura Wrote: That's not true at all. Christianity didn't gain momentum at all until around 400 B.C.

http://www2.div.ed.ac.uk/courses/Animate...index.html

More than one thousand, which is reasonable if you place 100 in each of twenty cities. That’s not many in comparison to the whole Roman Empire, but still significant considering people in the first fifty years could check primary sources and validate claims simply by talking to witnesses. According to Acts, Paul spoke to many cities and received converts in each. There is no reason to assume the book is lying about the cities, because archeology and early documents confirm Christian presence. In 1 Corinthians Paul writes of his conversion, which is placed around AD35 ( http://www.bibarch.com/chronology/index.htm ). In the same book, he includes early Christian creeds (ch.15). All this and the greetings in chapter 16 indicate the church is well underway. When people fabricate stories they don’t usually make the details as subtle as Paul does, and they do not address several people as in a personal letter. The Quran has one voice aimed at one audience—followers. Christianity has letters that were never intended to go beyond the churches. Either the letters were written to existing churches in the 1st century or these nuances were manufactured hundreds of years later, inexplicably and not to be accepted by conservatives. If you think the evidence is on your side, don’t appeal to gaps. Excuses like “they must have made it up” are unscientific.

Quote:Jesus had to die, but how was his resurrection faked? And who would care if he 'resurrected' unless he was also an influential man? Why would they name him the Messiah unless the title came from his own lips?

Quote:All stupid questions unless you can prove that he ever existed in the first place. Can you? Didn't think so.

These are all legitimate questions because their inability to be answered makes a good case for Christianity.

Quote:How did Jesus (or his writers) manage to fulfill 300+ old testament prophecies, proven by the Dead Sea Scrolls to have been written prior?

Quote:Prove it.

http://www.accordingtothescriptures.org/...ecies.html

Quote:How does one add to the Bible without the express consent of every church in the area, and have it copied by hundreds of dedicated scribes?

Quote:Oh, I dunno... Someone said to do it or off with their heads?

These include the monks in the Dark Ages who lived alone and without military influence. Christianity does not condone violence. The word "love" appears in the NIV Bible 697 times. Anyone who did what was done to Hypatia were not true Christians, or ought to ask for forgiveness. Christians are no more perfect than anyone else, they just recognize it and accept God's gift of salvation.

Quote:Why does the Bible include imperfect people? Why are historically "unreliable" women used as witnesses to the self-proclaimed greatest event in the Bible? How did the idea of salvation by grace originate, when it does not exist in any other religion or philosophy?

Quote:Why don't you make up some answers to those inane questions? That would be acceptable amongst your kind, obviously.

The point is that writing these things makes no sense if your goal is to win people over. You should make the religion attractive in every way, and verify what happened with reliable sources. A nonpartisan scholar would look at this and say, "Some of this has to be historical."

Quote:Why is there no evidence for the legitimacy of the bible. The content itself is the evidence against it.

Enlighten me.

---

(June 3, 2012 at 11:35 pm)Epimethean Wrote: Your rebuttal is textbook apologetics-and has no sense.

God doesn't make sense. If we could understand His nature He would be simpler than us and therefore could not have created us. Ask a watch to explain its watchmaker.

You have hit on the truth at last:

"God doesn't make sense."

Nothing man does, save for major self-deception, losing his sanity, brain injury or drug use, seems to allow god to make sense, and this, therefore, is compelling evidence that letting go of the need for such a creature is a healthy step in the right direction.

(June 3, 2012 at 11:35 pm)Epimethean Wrote: Your rebuttal is textbook apologetics-and has no sense. It IS polytheism, but under pretense of something else: Classical Catholic dishonesty.

Classic Atheist manuver of trivialize and dismiss what he does not or can not argue. Try again if you wish to remain in the conversation.

Did someone elect the superskater an arbiter here? LOL

(June 4, 2012 at 5:22 am)Undeceived Wrote: Christianity does not condone violence.

I've seen Christians get pretty violent though in Modern times. And I've read up on what you lot got up to in the Dark Ages too.

You were just as savage and despicable as everyone else at the time.

Quote:The word "love" appears in the NIV Bible 697 times.

The word sin, and its verbs, past, present and future tense appears in the King James Version some 841 times. What is your point?

Quote:Christians are no more perfect than anyone else, they just recognize it and accept God's gift of salvation.

Atheists never said we were perfect either. We recognise the word "perfect" is merely just a label and the "state" does not actually exist within the demonstrable real universe. What is your point?

Quote:The point is that writing these things makes no sense if your goal is to win people over.

As a Christian you're supposed to. You must believe Christ died for all of mankind's sins and you are here to try and save as many people's souls as possible by turning them back to god. If you do not try, you have abandoned your would-be brothers and sisters, and are in danger of hellfire yourself.

Quote:God doesn't make sense. If we could understand His nature He would be simpler than us and therefore could not have created us. Ask a watch to explain its watchmaker.

Don't make the poor refuted watchmaker argument please. That's a dead horse that ought to be buried, not beaten. Unlike mechanical devices watches, you see we actually have brains, we can work things out for ourselves thank you very much. And what the hell is SIMPLE within reality?

Everything is complex. But our knowledge grows because we WANT to learn. Our goal, the endeavour and enterprise of human efforts in science is to understand phenomena and reality. If god exists, he is natural, therefore is open to investigation and we will seek to understand the entity. If he doesn't, then you have nothing to worry about.

(June 3, 2012 at 10:19 pm)Drich Wrote: [quote='Taqiyya Mockingbird' pid='294301' dateline='1338775798']

Quote:That makes it a polytheism.

Equivocating ad nauseum isn't going to get you anywhere.

You have killed your thesis.

May it rest in pea....the same cesspool from which it came.

Do you honestly think you are the first to think this? Post #9 is the start of your rebuttle. address the points following that post and we can discuss.

There is a reason I am not the only one to point this out. No need to discuss anything anymore, you shot yourself in the foot.

What the hell is a "rebuttle"? I have heard of rebuttals....