RE: The Paradox of Power....
September 26, 2015 at 5:23 pm
(This post was last modified: September 26, 2015 at 5:34 pm by TheRocketSurgeon.
Edit Reason: Couple of formatting errors. Fixt!
)
(September 26, 2015 at 4:27 pm)Believer21u Wrote: If any of you's have any other argument's against the bible please state now so that,I can figure that out.In the mean time I strongly urge you to visit these site's.
PHP Code:https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=9130&v=z6kgvhG3AkI (Bill Nye Debates Ken Ham - HD (Official)))
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=As_tG_rxTaI (40 Archaeology Facts that prove the Bible is True)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zg8TDIdRMag (Common Bible Contradictions Explained - Why Atheism Is Not The Answer)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CY-jX9juoQ (Contradictions in the Bible - Kent Hovind)
[*] Ken Ham got his ass handed to him. No reasonable person thinks Ham looked anything but ridiculous in that "debate". A whole
series of memes have been floating around the internet ever since over how ridiculous Ham made Christians look.
[*] I watched that entire Dogdamned "40 Archaeology Facts" video, and it literally went through 20 facts before I found even one,
not even one, that wasn't just a rehashing of known people in history that the Old Testament writers didn't invent. It's
a laugh to calls those "proofs" of the Bible, only that the Bible isn't 100% historically inaccurate. And every one of those "proofs"
glossed over the places where the Bible gets details that we know from other sources about those Egyptian rulers and other
historical persons wrong. It gets even funnier when you look at the claims about the "Tomb of Joseph Caiphas" because it's a
strongly disputed find (also, the name on it is not Caiphas, it's "Qafa" or "Qofa" or "Qayafa", and Joseph is a common name), and
equally silly is to point to the Pontias Pilate inscription, which actually provided evidence against later writers who mention Jesus (like
Tacitus and Josephus) because it shows the Christians got the info wrong when they talked about the alleged crucifixion.
[*] Your third video is an embarassment. You should feel ashamed to have used it. That guy's arguments are so bad that there are
atheist YouTubers who've made their entire careers out of mocking him! You almost literally picked the worst apologist on YouTube.
Did you watch these videos before you posted them? For instance, this guy says: "Look, it's very simple. The Big Bang doesn't
explain anything. Let me show you why the Big Bang doesn't explain anything. The Big Bang does, uh, it relies on time. It relies
on space. Those are already there for the Big Bang to occur..."
[*] Kent Hovind is even worse than Ken Ham! The man who uses "Doctor" as a title, but got a certificate from here:
![[Image: PatriotUniversity.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=lpetrich.org%2FPix%2FCreationism%2FPatriotUniversity.jpg)
No joke. That's really where "Doctor Dino", as he used to call himself, got his degree. A split-level Ranch that was a "diploma mill".
Look, I know you mean well, and are just trying to do the "raiht thang for Jayzus", but coming in here with weak-ass arguments and a complete misconception about what science is and what it claims just won't cut it around here.
I'm warning you now: I'm a former biologist, and I know what science does and doesn't actually say. Many of us here have degrees in fields related to science and/or mathematics, history, or theology. If you can't bring arguments that are better than that WeakSauce™ you just tried to pawn off on us, you're going to have a very rough life in here.
Go read a book and learn some science. Real science, not the crap Ham and Hovind peddle.
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
