Plagiarism in the NT

[Astonished]

It's hard to take it seriously from a guy who owned slaves (and illegitimately fathered children with at least one of them). Hardly makes sense for him to re-write the story of Jeebus as a moral teacher when his own morals are so fucked-up.

Nobody is or should justify his ownership of slaves. But it still remains that it was a far different time back then. And many of the founders back then wanted to end slavery at the signing of the Constitution, but could not gain the full support. Slavery however had ended in the North for the most part by the time he died. 

I would not scrap the constitution because of the bad things the founders were still doing at the time. That same constitution was written in such a way for future generations to use free speech, protest and courts to gain rights. Even with that inability to end it at the signing of the Constitution, I do think they had the foresight knowing it could eventually be used to expand rights. 

No it is not a perfect history one bit. Our country has lots of horrible things in it's history sure. But the concept of checks and balances and the ability to appeal to government is what also brought us progress.

The constitution wasn't made up in the stone-age and based on pure bullshit. Bad analogy.

[RoadRunner79]

I think the problem such as your post here, is that you don't understand context.  As I told you before, I'll post or comment on what I like when I like.  I don't think that I should be expected to jump off topic, and dance for you, just because I'm a Christian.  Or is that what my problem is, that merits such insult?  I think the problem is in your assumptions of me, and the mental dissonance, when I don't follow your expectations.

Unless you violate the TOS and the admins catch you, sure of course you can post what you like when you like, but don't confuse that as constituting evidence. And again, we've seen this before countless times from many people prior to you over the years.

Theist in one thread, " I am not here to"

Same theist in another thread, "My book says".

I am not asking you to follow my expectations. But if you want to prove to me what you claim, you DO have to meet the expectations of what universal scientific method demands. Don't accuse me of being the inventor of scientific method. I simply see it as currently humanity's best tool to gain factual knowledge on the nature of reality.

Yes, as I mentioned, you seem to have a difficulty with context.  Normally when I am replying I am discussing what is immediately being talked about.   Irregardless of whatever you imagine my motives are.  And no, I don't think that other discussions, count as me giving evidence.  I'm more interested in the good or bad reasoning behind the acceptance or rejection of what most reasonable people think is evidence.
I believe, that I have rarely; if ever stated here  "my book says", unless the context of the discussion is about the Bible.

[Astonished]

Unless you violate the TOS and the admins catch you, sure of course you can post what you like when you like, but don't confuse that as constituting evidence. And again, we've seen this before countless times from many people prior to you over the years.

Theist in one thread, " I am not here to"

Same theist in another thread, "My book says".

I am not asking you to follow my expectations. But if you want to prove to me what you claim, you DO have to meet the expectations of what universal scientific method demands. Don't accuse me of being the inventor of scientific method. I simply see it as currently humanity's best tool to gain factual knowledge on the nature of reality.

Yes, as I mentioned, you seem to have a difficulty with context.  Normally when I am replying I am discussing what is immediately being talked about.   Irregardless of whatever you imagine my motives are.  And no, I don't think that other discussions, count as me giving evidence.  I'm more interested in the good or bad reasoning behind the acceptance or rejection of what most reasonable people think is evidence.
I believe, that I have rarely; if ever stated here  "my book says", unless the context of the discussion is about the Bible.

"I have thought through the issue, and I'm happy to defend my position and walk through the reasoning, various options, and why I think what I do is the best choice."

Those are your words. How in the goddamn mother FUCK are you going to tell us that with a straight face? Do you not understand the very, very simple concept of what actual evidence is? The hierarchy of what the least convincing and least reliable forms of argument and evidence? You can not, for one minute, expect a single person on here to think you are not stark raving mad to have that position and claim in all honesty to believe you sincerely have good reasons for holding it.

But, just humor us. There's plenty of websites out there that will specifically list the things that are not evidence/bad evidence. If you have a single reason that is not on any of those, or which is not based on a hoax that has been debunked (shroud of turin comes to mind) then, sorry (not sorry at all, actually), you're a fucking moron.

So go on, then, smart guy. Enlighten us. What's this 'evidence' you speak of? Must be goddamn fucking BRILLIANT if it's what convinced you from adulthood and a rational skeptic worldview; or were you indoctrinated from the cradle and never saw things from the outside in? Because I'll let you in on a little secret: The things that convince five-year-olds that fantasies are real, aren't what those adults use to become convinced. They're already convinced via what is indistinguishable from mental abuse. So expecting that kind of shit to impress critical thinkers is a waste of your, and more importantly, everyone else's time. Put up or shut up time, brah. Out with it, or shut the fuck up and hold it.

[Amarok]

Yes, as I mentioned, you seem to have a difficulty with context.  Normally when I am replying I am discussing what is immediately being talked about.   Irregardless of whatever you imagine my motives are.  And no, I don't think that other discussions, count as me giving evidence.  I'm more interested in the good or bad reasoning behind the acceptance or rejection of what most reasonable people think is evidence.
I believe, that I have rarely; if ever stated here  "my book says", unless the context of the discussion is about the Bible.

"I have thought through the issue, and I'm happy to defend my position and walk through the reasoning, various options, and why I think what I do is the best choice."

Those are your words. How in the goddamn mother FUCK are you going to tell us that with a straight face? Do you not understand the very, very simple concept of what actual evidence is? The hierarchy of what the least convincing and least reliable forms of argument and evidence? You can not, for one minute, expect a single person on here to think you are not stark raving mad to have that position and claim in all honesty to believe you sincerely have good reasons for holding it.

But, just humor us. There's plenty of websites out there that will specifically list the things that are not evidence/bad evidence. If you have a single reason that is not on any of those, or which is not based on a hoax that has been debunked (shroud of turin comes to mind) then, sorry (not sorry at all, actually), you're a fucking moron.

So go on, then, smart guy. Enlighten us. What's this 'evidence' you speak of? Must be goddamn fucking BRILLIANT if it's what convinced you from adulthood and a rational skeptic worldview; or were you indoctrinated from the cradle and never saw things from the outside in? Because I'll let you in on a little secret: The things that convince five-year-olds that fantasies are real, aren't what those adults use to become convinced. They're already convinced via what is indistinguishable from mental abuse. So expecting that kind of shit to impress critical thinkers is a waste of your, and more importantly, everyone else's time. Put up or shut up time, brah. Out with it, or shut the fuck up and hold it.

Again astonished by your patience at dealing with Road. He's immune to evidence .And is only interested in maintaining his own internal narrative .

[Astonished]

"I have thought through the issue, and I'm happy to defend my position and walk through the reasoning, various options, and why I think what I do is the best choice."

Those are your words. How in the goddamn mother FUCK are you going to tell us that with a straight face? Do you not understand the very, very simple concept of what actual evidence is? The hierarchy of what the least convincing and least reliable forms of argument and evidence? You can not, for one minute, expect a single person on here to think you are not stark raving mad to have that position and claim in all honesty to believe you sincerely have good reasons for holding it.

But, just humor us. There's plenty of websites out there that will specifically list the things that are not evidence/bad evidence. If you have a single reason that is not on any of those, or which is not based on a hoax that has been debunked (shroud of turin comes to mind) then, sorry (not sorry at all, actually), you're a fucking moron.

So go on, then, smart guy. Enlighten us. What's this 'evidence' you speak of? Must be goddamn fucking BRILLIANT if it's what convinced you from adulthood and a rational skeptic worldview; or were you indoctrinated from the cradle and never saw things from the outside in? Because I'll let you in on a little secret: The things that convince five-year-olds that fantasies are real, aren't what those adults use to become convinced. They're already convinced via what is indistinguishable from mental abuse. So expecting that kind of shit to impress critical thinkers is a waste of your, and more importantly, everyone else's time. Put up or shut up time, brah. Out with it, or shut the fuck up and hold it.

Again astonished by your patience at dealing with Road. He's immune to evidence .And is only interested in maintaining his own internal narrative .

Oh, I have less patience than anyone on here (except maybe Min...but that's something I admire), I'm just calling this fuckass out on his bullshit once and for all. He's in the corner now, he can either own up and reveal his own stupidity, or change the subject and as good as admit it. There is no third option.

[The Grand Nudger]

Unfortunately, RR, you're out of luck.  No matter what route you go..be it "my book says"(let's not pretend you don't do that) or "I have an argument" you will never get me to agree to beating a jew to death for my sins.  Not now, not ever. If you somehow managed to establish that the entirety of your fairy tale were true...it would be the single best reason for me -not- to be a christian.

[Astonished]

Unfortunately, RR, you're out of luck.  No matter what route you go..be it "my book says"(let's not pretend you don't do that) or "I have an argument" you will never get me to agree to beating a jew to death for my sins.  Not now, not ever.  If you somehow managed to establish that the entirety of your fairy tale were true...it would be the single best reason for me -not- to be a christian.

Let him try to answer my challenge. I'd love to see that. I'll let you have first crack at demolishing it if he tries.

[Minimalist]

So far all I see is that in his tortured reasoning he thinks Ps. 22 is a prophecy about fucking jesus but Jews don't buy that and, you know, it is their fucking book.

But as Bishop Spong has pointed out what halfwit fundies can't seem to grasp is that the people who wrote this gospel shit knew what they had to say in order to pretend that their fairy tale was fulfilling "prophecy."

Hence "jesus" ends up going to Bethlehem because there is a half assed line in Micah that says a leader shall arise in Bethlehem....even though it is clearly discussing the Assyrian invasion...700 years earlier.

But, jesus freaks are so easily impressed.

[Astonished]

So far all I see is that in his tortured reasoning he thinks Ps. 22 is a prophecy about fucking jesus but Jews don't buy that and, you know, it is their fucking book.

But as Bishop Spong has pointed out what halfwit fundies can't seem to grasp is that the people who wrote this gospel shit knew what they had to say in order to pretend that their fairy tale was fulfilling "prophecy."

Hence "jesus" ends up going to Bethlehem because there is a half assed line in Micah that says a leader shall arise in Bethlehem....even though it is clearly discussing the Assyrian invasion...700 years earlier.

But, jesus freaks are so easily impressed.

Aren't most of the names he's called by nowhere near the right one they're supposed to have for him, too?

[GUBU]

I once said of Jose Mourinho that he has three tactics to win a soccer match, viz a) cheat, b) cheat some more, and when a) & b) don't work c) accuse others of cheating. You, my dear turd are the Jose Mouinho of christian apologetics, you a) make up stories, b) make up some more stories, and when nobody believes you, c) you throw your nappies out of the pram and accuse everybody else of making things up.

I would challenge you to support any of this.    Or have we regressed further from the 12 year old's argument of swearing and name calling, to the 3 year old's argument where you just parrot back and say "I know you are... but what am I"

Also keep in mind the context that you left out of the quote:  I had said prior to what you quoted "Actually wasn't even going to post, until you called me out and started speaking for me".   In retrospect, it may not of been clear, that I intended the last part to also fall under the probably or if condition.  



And here we are... you still focusing on me, appear to be following my prediction, and avoiding the ideas and discussion.

Firstly Idon't have to prove anything, your posting history does an excellent job of that. Second, just because you've your knickers in a twist over me deconstructing your post doesn't make your assertion that I'm obsessed with you true. You're free to post bullshit (of which you post copious amounts) on this site. I'm free to point out tuhat bullshit.

If you don't like me or others ridiculing your obvious nonsense you can always stop posting.