(April 14, 2014 at 7:01 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: I was hoping you go see it because I can't adequately describe it.

As I said, I've read detailed descriptions of every argument presented; surely it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to point to your favorites so we can see how well they actually stand up?

Quote:Hope people learn that there is a God.

Remember, knowledge is demonstrated, not just asserted!

Also, I will note the rich, bitter irony of the fact that you apparently have no problems with science books changing the moment they start changing toward positions you already agree with.

(April 14, 2014 at 7:05 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(April 14, 2014 at 7:01 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: I was hoping you go see it because I can't adequately describe it.

As I said, I've read detailed descriptions of every argument presented; surely it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to point to your favorites so we can see how well they actually stand up?

Quote:Hope people learn that there is a God.

Remember, knowledge is demonstrated, not just asserted!

Also, I will note the rich, bitter irony of the fact that you apparently have no problems with science books changing the moment they start changing toward positions you already agree with.

So you won't believe me when I tell you about Cyril the Space Wombat?

Rev rev rev

Quote:If you did some good study in the Dead Sea scrolls you might be surprised how incredibly unchanging it has been through the centuries

Do you ever fucking know what you are talking about?

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily...a-scrolls/

Quote:The Dead Sea Scrolls did not, as some early dreamers speculated, answer the age-old question: Where is the original Bible? Not, as it turns out, in the caves of Qumran. Nor do the scrolls include long lost books of the Bible. Furthermore, the scrolls did not utterly transform our image of the original Hebrew Bible text. Indeed, one of the most important contributions of the scrolls is that they have demonstrated the relative stability of the Masoretic text.

Nevertheless, there are differences (some quite significant) between the scrolls and the Masoretic text. Furthermore, these differences have made scholars rethink variant readings found in other ancient manuscripts.

(April 13, 2014 at 3:28 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: Dear Atheist Friends,
I went and saw the movie, "God Is Not Dead." I would like to encourage you to go see it. In fact, I am willing to pay for the price of your movie ticket as well as a guest who is willing to come with you.

I don't think they'd respect the opinion of a theist in regards to theist movie suggestions.

(April 14, 2014 at 7:05 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(April 14, 2014 at 7:01 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: I was hoping you go see it because I can't adequately describe it.

As I said, I've read detailed descriptions of every argument presented; surely it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to point to your favorites so we can see how well they actually stand up?

Quote:Hope people learn that there is a God.

Remember, knowledge is demonstrated, not just asserted!

Also, I will note the rich, bitter irony of the fact that you apparently have no problems with science books changing the moment they start changing toward positions you already agree with.

I am hoping to focus on something else after this Sunday.

---

(April 14, 2014 at 7:02 am)tor Wrote:

(April 14, 2014 at 6:57 am)Esquilax Wrote: Oh no! Books change to reflect that people are learning! How can this science book be reliable if it doesn't stick to its guns and keep all the demonstrably false information and insist that it's true even though we can all literally prove that it isn't!

Learning new things is bad! hock:

I actually get it too often. One dude said that science is false cause it changes. And truth never changes. So that which never changes is true

I am pro-science but not when others assert their views to make theories as if they are facts.

---

(April 14, 2014 at 9:15 am)Full Circle Wrote:

(April 14, 2014 at 6:54 am)Revelation777 Wrote: no thanks, they change too often

The cognitive dissonance is strong in this one hock:

Let me ask you this, do you follow the Bible to the letter?

It hasn't changed since...wait...let me see...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Eng...anslations

original writings were inspired

(April 14, 2014 at 8:40 pm)Revelation777 Wrote:

(April 14, 2014 at 7:05 pm)Esquilax Wrote: As I said, I've read detailed descriptions of every argument presented; surely it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to point to your favorites so we can see how well they actually stand up?


Remember, knowledge is demonstrated, not just asserted!

Also, I will note the rich, bitter irony of the fact that you apparently have no problems with science books changing the moment they start changing toward positions you already agree with.

I am hoping to focus on something else after this Sunday.

---

(April 14, 2014 at 7:02 am)tor Wrote: I actually get it too often. One dude said that science is false cause it changes. And truth never changes. So that which never changes is true

I am pro-science but not when others assert their views to make theories as if they are facts.

If you're pro-science you then understand the difference between theory in common usage and theory in a scientific context, right?

(April 14, 2014 at 7:07 pm)Beccs Wrote:

(April 14, 2014 at 7:05 pm)Esquilax Wrote: As I said, I've read detailed descriptions of every argument presented; surely it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to point to your favorites so we can see how well they actually stand up?


Remember, knowledge is demonstrated, not just asserted!

Also, I will note the rich, bitter irony of the fact that you apparently have no problems with science books changing the moment they start changing toward positions you already agree with.

So you won't believe me when I tell you about Cyril the Space Wombat?

sounds like a cute critter

---

(April 14, 2014 at 10:28 am)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: So as long as I think I'm about to die, just say a few magic words and it will make me feel better? Is that the point, seriously?

The words need to match what is in your heart

---

(April 14, 2014 at 10:12 am)Crossless1 Wrote:

(April 14, 2014 at 7:34 am)sven Wrote: The film isn't showing here in Sweden

Of course not. Sweden lacks the ready-made audience of rubes and dipshits who would think this ham-fisted, terminally dishonest exercise in propoganda is remotely good cinema.

When it comes to the Big Questions and existential dread, Sweden gave us Ingmar Bergman. The American Christian film industry has given us the likes of Vic Sarin and Harold Cronk.

But Rev loves it.

Amazing how you can just clump all Christians together and stereotype them as dumb and naive. Then to add insult to injury, laugh hysterically over it. Please be nice.

---

(April 14, 2014 at 7:05 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(April 14, 2014 at 7:01 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: I was hoping you go see it because I can't adequately describe it.

As I said, I've read detailed descriptions of every argument presented; surely it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to point to your favorites so we can see how well they actually stand up?

Quote:Hope people learn that there is a God.

Remember, knowledge is demonstrated, not just asserted!

Also, I will note the rich, bitter irony of the fact that you apparently have no problems with science books changing the moment they start changing toward positions you already agree with.

Thank you for at least not using name calling and insults.

---

(April 14, 2014 at 8:22 pm)Polaris Wrote:

(April 13, 2014 at 3:28 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: Dear Atheist Friends,
I went and saw the movie, "God Is Not Dead." I would like to encourage you to go see it. In fact, I am willing to pay for the price of your movie ticket as well as a guest who is willing to come with you.

I don't think they'd respect the opinion of a theist in regards to theist movie suggestions.

Point well taken

(April 14, 2014 at 8:40 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: I am pro-science but not when others assert their views to make theories as if they are facts.

Scientific theories are made up of facts. Do five seconds of googling on "scientific theory" to see that. When you say "it's just a theory, not a fact!" you are just making yourself sound more ignorant and unwilling to learn. It's not a good look.

Having said all that, evolution is a fact, and I've already shown you lists of examples of it happening live, so let's not get back into that, because if you did, you would literally just be lying to all of us.

(April 14, 2014 at 8:22 pm)Polaris Wrote:

(April 13, 2014 at 3:28 pm)Revelation777 Wrote: Dear Atheist Friends,
I went and saw the movie, "God Is Not Dead." I would like to encourage you to go see it. In fact, I am willing to pay for the price of your movie ticket as well as a guest who is willing to come with you.

I don't think they'd respect the opinion of a theist in regards to theist movie suggestions.

There are a few film critics -- Anthony Lane, David Denby, A.O. Scott -- whose opinions I consider when pre-sorting the wheat from the chaff. I haven't the slightest idea whether any of them are theists and couldn't care less. I value their ability to intelligently discuss films on the films' own terms and to pan or recommend a film on grounds other than "I agree with its message."

When it comes to "theist movies," my hackles go up because I dislike didactic art in any form. I especially dislike didactic garbage that fundamentally misrepresents the "bad guys". God Is Not Dead, by all accounts I've read of it, is both didactic and dishonest and is obviously intended for an audience that has already drunk the Kool-Aid and is prepared to believe that the strawman atheist played by Sorbo is a fair representation of real life atheists. It's bullshit.

As for the OP's recommendation, I don't dismiss it because he's a theist. I dismiss it because he can't or won't provide a single good reason for me to see the film. His desire to convert people is well noted, as is his refusal or inability to provide good reasons for converting. His recommendation is just more of the same: assertions without justification.