The Bible

[Rayaan]

The copyrighted material is free for anyone to use as per the source. It is exactly what I would say but is much easier to just copy. Is that against the rules?

Yes, the copyrighted material is free to use.

However, if you're going to quote something from an external website, we suggest that you post a link to the source, and also put the copied material inside quotation tags. Otherwise, we can't always if you typed it yourself or got it from somewhere else. Here's a link to the forum rules:

http://atheistforums.org/rules.php

And no offense, Stucky, but atheists are actually interested in reading your own comments and reasoning rather than reading something which has been posted in many other websites. Unfortunately, you won't like many of the responses from members which start with an original post in a thread such as this one.

[The Grand Nudger]

In case my post gets lost in the Sauce....

Daniel was not written when you claim it was written, and the predictions made therein that did not amount to "prophecy after the fact" failed to come to pass, gloriously, dramatically, irrefutably. I personally prefer my prophecies to be spoken before the fact, and it's a plus when they actually come true, as opposed to just being claimed to have come true. Historians do agree that the author(s) knew their history (IE were historically accurate), but not for the reasons you seem to believe. Historians believe they knew their history because the "prophecies" contained therein were written when the events actually were history. This is similar to the situation with the last prophecy you offered up that I responded to.

[Minimalist]

But there's no point in my putting them here because anything I say is wrong.

Whatever you say is wrong regardless of where you put it. That is a fact derived from relying on a preposterous old collection of fairy tales, lad, and there isn't anything anyone can do to help you until you get your head out of your ass.

Sorry. But you are far from the first bible-thumping jackass to show up here and most of them were better at it than you.

[Stucky]

In case my post gets lost in the Sauce....

Daniel was not written when you claim it was written, and the predictions made therein that did not amount to "prophecy after the fact" failed to come to pass, gloriously, dramatically, irrefutably. I personally prefer my prophecies to be spoken before the fact, and it's a plus when they actually come true, as opposed to just being claimed to have come true. Historians do agree that the author9s0 knew their history, but not for the reasons you seem to believe. Historians believe they knew their history because the "prophecies" contained therein were written when the events actually were history.

Where are your citations to prove this? All I have is your word and I find that suspect. Don't bother posting an atheist website either because if you won't accept the Bible then I wont accept an atheist website.

---

But there's no point in my putting them here because anything I say is wrong.

Whatever you say is wrong regardless of where you put it. That is a fact derived from relying on a preposterous old collection of fairy tales, lad, and there isn't anything anyone can do to help you until you get your head out of your ass.

Sorry. But you are far from the first bible-thumping jackass to show up here and most of them were better at it than you.

Reported as abusive.

[The Grand Nudger]

Why are you here then, on an atheist website? That the bible is not compatible with archaeology or any sort of collaborative historical record is not really an issue of whether or not one is an atheist (or whether a website is an atheist website). I believe that you believe that it is, but you're going to have to prove it if you wish for this to be anything beyond your own belief. I was actually being nice even engaging you in this, I could just sit here all day and say......


Evidence?

[ElDinero]

All this guy's threads follow the same pattern:

1. Stucky asks a question or makes a point
2. People respond to point or question
3. Stucky is indignant that people would respond to point or question

What a whiner.

[Minimalist]

Reported as abusive.

Sonny, when I get abusive you'll fucking know it.

[ElDinero]

I thought Rhythm and Min were both positively charming to this fuckwad, to be fair. Seen much worse.

[Welsh cake]

I believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God. The reason I believe it is because God gave prophecies to His servants the prophets of Israel and His prophecies have come to pass just as He said.
...
Now, I realize that these prophecies are from the Bible, which you don't acknowledge but it has been accepted by scholars for over 2000 years as historically accurate.

I'd say your standards of evidence are appallingly low. Why don't you believe in Islam as well? Why don't you regard the Holy Quran as another inspired Word of God? Since it also contains prophecies on the establishment of Israel that were also supposedly fulfilled:

And after him We said to the Children of Israel, 'Dwell Ye in the promised land; and when the time of the promise of the Latter Days come, We shall bring you together out of various people." (17:105)

You tell me.

Also, four dissenters with questions all at once and you don't call that gang-banging? Why did I even bother to come back?

You left?

[Minimalist]

I thought Rhythm and Min were both positively charming to this fuckwad, to be fair. Seen much worse.

Well...to be fair...my Douchebag Detector went off on his first post.


It's rarely wrong.

---