Posts: 639
Threads: 47
Joined: March 7, 2012
Reputation:
34
RE: MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)
December 16, 2014 at 12:47 pm
(December 16, 2014 at 12:43 pm)robvalue Wrote: I dunno, I don't even think he's serious. I'm doubting he's even a theist, this is all just a wind up. He's playing the real long game.
I know. It can be so hard to tell the True Christians ™ from the fake ones sometimes.
"You don't need facts when you got Jesus." -Pastor Deacon Fred, Landover Baptist Church
™: True Christian is a Trademark of the Landover Baptist Church. I have no affiliation with this fine group of True Christians ™ because I can't afford their tithing requirements but would like to be. Maybe someday the Lord will bless me with enough riches that I am able to.
And for the lovers of Poe, here's your winking smiley: 
Posts: 322
Threads: 3
Joined: November 2, 2014
Reputation:
1
RE: MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)
December 16, 2014 at 12:52 pm
(December 15, 2014 at 9:58 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: I don't think he's serious. I think he's trying to play the old Theist's game of "you don't know everything; so how do you know Yahweh isn't in some alternate dimension" or variations on that theme of shifting the burden of proof. His is just a lame, poorly thought out variation.
Yeah, it is a game...it is a game of pointing out flaws in atheists reasoning. You don't know if God is behind the sun...you don't even know if there is a 6'7 guy in China named "Fei Long". So you can't conclusively say "there is no 6'7 guy in China named "Fei Long".
And it wasn't poorly thought out either...all I had to do was pick a location that I am pretty confident you've never been, which is behind the sun  that was richly thought out.
(December 15, 2014 at 9:58 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: I believe we live in a natural universe best understood b y science and reason.
The problem is you would have to use science to explain shit like life from nonlife, and consciousness from matter...and I don't think your or anyone else can do that.
(December 15, 2014 at 9:58 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: I don't have to prove the supernatural isn't real.
You can't even prove that life can come from nonlife naturally...prove that first and then worry about the supernatural...don't take a course in calculus before you've taken algebra.
There are levels to this shit 
(December 15, 2014 at 9:58 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: The fact that all supernatural claims have failed to meet their burden of proof is sufficient to fall within the bounds of rational skepticism.
Subjective. I think supernatural claims meet their burden of proof...to me, but heyyy..I aint mad at cha'.
Posts: 23918
Threads: 300
Joined: June 25, 2011
Reputation:
151
RE: MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)
December 16, 2014 at 12:53 pm
(December 16, 2014 at 12:47 pm)YahwehIsTheWay Wrote: (December 16, 2014 at 12:43 pm)robvalue Wrote: I dunno, I don't even think he's serious. I'm doubting he's even a theist, this is all just a wind up. He's playing the real long game.
I know. It can be so hard to tell the True Christians ™ from the fake ones sometimes.
Word. You're a true xtian, right? (Third best one apparently.) So tell me do you exist? And can you tell me beyond a doubt that God exists and that the bible is the special book?
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)
December 16, 2014 at 12:55 pm
(This post was last modified: December 16, 2014 at 12:56 pm by robvalue.)
Yeah, I don't think he's for real. This has gone on way too long, no one can really think this is a worthwhile argument.
I'm more of a true christian I think. I know my bible well, and I am a very good boy. The bible exists and God is true. He's also false.
Posts: 322
Threads: 3
Joined: November 2, 2014
Reputation:
1
RE: MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)
December 16, 2014 at 12:55 pm
(December 15, 2014 at 10:05 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: Maybe we can create a rule that limits the number you can use each year?
There are some rare occasions I've been inspired enough to use it. When it appears in every other post, sometimes multiple times, you're abusing it.
You people are campaigning to create rules to limit my effectiveness. Kinda reminds me of the Great Wilt Chamberlain..and how he used to dominate the NBA during the early days...the league implemented the 3 second rule in the paint because they couldn't let one man just completely dominate the rest of the league.
What a bunch of crybabies.
Posts: 23026
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)
December 16, 2014 at 12:56 pm
(December 16, 2014 at 12:52 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: You don't know if God is behind the sun...
Actually, we do know that your little god isn't hiding behind the sun. We send spacecraft behind the sun regularly for gravitational boosts when sending them to the outer Solar System.
There's nothing in the Earth's orbit on the opposite side of the Sun ... just empty space.
Posts: 5336
Threads: 198
Joined: June 24, 2010
Reputation:
77
RE: MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)
December 16, 2014 at 12:58 pm
(December 16, 2014 at 12:33 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Evidence is subjective. No, it isn't always. There are objective measurements. One can test how quickly two different weights fall to see if they fall at the same speed. It's not a matter of opinion if they do.
Star Wars is fiction but one scene is a possible elaboration of my point. In the scene where an admiral mocks Darth Vader's religious conviction, Darth Vader didn't say, "you can't prove The Force isn't real." He didn't quote scripture. He didn't cite the Ontological Argument for the Force. Darth Vader accepted the burden of proof and provided a compelling demonstration. I promise if that scene had been real, not a single aforcist admiral would have left that briefing room that day.
Quote:Obviously, there is enough evidence to convince me...so what evidence YOU think is sufficient enough FOR you is entirely up to YOU...but as for me, I am very much convinced...about 99.9% convinced
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This is how we operate in all areas outside religious faith. So far, I have seen NO evidence at all and plenty to the contrary.
Your god isn't real. I don't have to prove he's not real. The complete absence of evidence is sufficient to rationally make that skeptical claim. You have to prove he is real.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
Posts: 7045
Threads: 20
Joined: June 17, 2014
Reputation:
55
RE: MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)
December 16, 2014 at 12:58 pm
There's only so long for which you can listen to a toddler's tantrum before you put him in timeout, HM.
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 322
Threads: 3
Joined: November 2, 2014
Reputation:
1
RE: MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)
December 16, 2014 at 12:59 pm
(December 15, 2014 at 10:27 pm)Beccs Wrote: A wet noodle "spanking" really doesn't count as a spanking.
And I don't think the cool-aid you're drinking can be counted as "pimp juice".
Beccs you have about a 1/20 ratio of making me laugh..this post was kind of funny and I give you props.
I will see you again in 20 posts 
Posts: 23026
Threads: 26
Joined: February 2, 2010
Reputation:
106
RE: MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)
December 16, 2014 at 12:59 pm
(December 16, 2014 at 12:55 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: (December 15, 2014 at 10:05 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: Maybe we can create a rule that limits the number you can use each year?
There are some rare occasions I've been inspired enough to use it. When it appears in every other post, sometimes multiple times, you're abusing it.
You people are campaigning to create rules to limit my effectiveness. Kinda reminds me of the Great Wilt Chamberlain..and how he used to dominate the NBA during the early days...the league implemented the 3 second rule in the paint because they couldn't let one man just completely dominate the rest of the league.
What a bunch of crybabies.
First you compare yourself to Jesus, now you compare yourself to Wilt.
I wonder what your Bible says about pride?
|
