Jump to content

Blasphemy and Duck Rape


Yorkshire Saint

Recommended Posts

When people claim humans bred with fallen angel giants like he just did then it is not unreasonable to think there should be DNA evidence to back that claim up.

 

If he answers you'll only challenge every nuance of the answer, and when you get answers you don't like, you'll ask another question that's equally pointless about something equally irrelevant to you and everyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he answers you'll only challenge every nuance of the answer, and when you get answers you don't like, you'll ask another question that's equally pointless about something equally irrelevant to you and everyone else.

 

If his beliefs stand up to questions then it is worthwhile believing in them. If your world view does not hold up to questioning then is it worthwhile continuing with it? Beliefs influence actions, actions impact on others and wider society.

 

To believe without evidence that humans interbred with fallen angel giants like he claims doesn't hold up... unless he can prove otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you really not see the flaw in that? You are essentially saying I have to believe in something to believe in something. It is circular and illogical.

 

If god exists and is all knowing he would know what level of evidence I would require to believe in him and he chooses not to provide it, instead all we have is an old book with unknown authors that is not testable or supported by external evidence.

 

Matthew, this is as simple as if you do not wish to believe in God or the works of the Bible, then you don't have to. That's your choice. Others can believe in one or more of those 3 things if they wish.

 

It's genuinely very sad that you cannot see the futility of arguing against other peoples choice to believe in something that millions of people choose to believe in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matthew, this is as simple as if you do not wish to believe in God or the works of the Bible, then you don't have to. That's your choice. Others can believe in one or more of those 3 things if they wish.

 

It's genuinely very sad that you cannot see the futility of arguing against other peoples choice to believe in something that millions of people choose to believe in.

 

1) I think it is healthy to believe in as many true things and as few false things as possible. Would you agree?

2) One of the best ways to reduce the amount of false things you believe in is to see if it holds up to scrutiny under questioning. Would you agree?

3) Beliefs influence actions and actions impact on other people. Would you agree?

4) Reducing the amount of false beliefs reduces the likelihood of negative actions on wider society. Would you agree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If his beliefs stand up to questions then it is worthwhile believing in them. If your world view does not hold up to questioning then is it worthwhile continuing with it? Beliefs influence actions, actions impact on others and wider society.

 

To believe without evidence that humans interbred with fallen angel giants like he claims doesn't hold up... unless he can prove otherwise.

 

It is not "worthwhile" for someone to choose to believe something only if it stands up to questions of others, and definitely not form someone on a footy forum.

 

My beliefs have f*ck all to do with you. Your beliefs have f*ck all to do with me. You're an atheist (or whatever). I wouldn't dream of asking you why and wouldn't be so arrogant as to ask you to explain why. Perhaps try giving others the same respect.

 

Re humans interbreeding. I don't know, but why would anyone be interested. There's more going on in the world than taking an interest in something that is plainly irrelevant to anyones lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not all over the place... you are when not understanding freshwater fish can not live in a salt-water global flood!

 

I asked him to provide evidence of breeding with giants that he claimed, that does not mean he needs to gather the DNA evidence a link to a reliable source that has would suffice.

 

Raging Bull believing in talking snakes, people being created from ribs and dirt, water into wine, healing the sick, burning bushes, 900 year old men, global floods etc etc without evidence is 'all over the place', not me!

 

So you've completely ignored Badgers and my post in reply to you then, now spinning it back to your claims about flood water and fish living in types of water which have been proven wide of the mark, im starting to feel embarrassed for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) I think it is healthy to believe in as many true things and as few false things as possible. Would you agree?

2) One of the best ways to reduce the amount of false things you believe in is to see if it holds up to scrutiny under questioning. Would you agree?

3) Beliefs influence actions and actions impact on other people. Would you agree?

4) Reducing the amount of false beliefs reduces the likelihood of negative actions on wider society. Would you agree?

 

I'm not debating with you. It's pointless. I make the simple point that you can believe what you want re God, religion, and the Bible. Others can have their own beliefs - I repeat it has f*ck all to do with you. Don't be so arrogant as to believe other peoples beliefs have anything to do with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you've completely ignored Badgers and my post in reply to you then

 

Which part of your posts are you claiming I've ignored?

 

now spinning it back to your claims about flood water and fish living in types of water which have been proven wide of the mark, im starting to feel embarrassed for you.

 

No it hasn't! :mcinnes: Not all freshwater life can live in salt-water and not all salt-water life can live in freshwater.

 

Nor has the kangaroo point been answered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not debating with you.

 

It is four yes/no questions.

 

I guess the answers would highlight the flaws in your position...

 

I make the simple point that you can believe what you want re God, religion, and the Bible. Others can have their own beliefs - I repeat it has f*ck all to do with you. Don't be so arrogant as to believe other peoples beliefs have anything to do with you.

 

It is not arrogant to state that the actions of others impact on wider society and that people's actions are influenced by their beliefs. Therefore if someone holds a false belief based on shoddy or no evidence then that can negatively impact society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which part of your posts are you claiming I've ignored?

 

 

 

No it hasn't! :mcinnes: Not all freshwater life can live in salt-water and not all salt-water life can live in freshwater.

 

Nor has the kangaroo point been answered.

 

When you can prove the what the salination was of the water in the flood then we can have a discussion about it. Until then your post is irrelevant and you're making yourself look very arrogant and stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is four yes/no questions.

 

I guess the answers would highlight the flaws in your position...

 

 

 

It is not arrogant to state that the actions of others impact on wider society and that people's actions are influenced by their beliefs. Therefore if someone holds a false belief based on shoddy or no evidence then that can negatively impact society.

 

When you think everyone else is the problem they usually arent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you can prove the what the salination was of the water in the flood then we can have a discussion about it. Until then your post is irrelevant and you're making yourself look very arrogant and stupid.

 

:mcinnes:

 

That fundamentally flawed and illogical as it is based on an unfounded assumption there was a flood in the first place! :D

 

If there was a global flood, whatever the salt level some life would not be able to survive, if it was high, low or somewhere in the middle. Yet all sea life lived through it! As did Chinese civilisation with no record from the Chinese that they drowned. They lived through the global flood!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, looks like i've won again today, 13 years undefeated. Yet another day of MLG mugging himself resorting to questions like "how did Kangeroos get to Australia?" It's the mindset of a 4 year old.

 

Yep, a 4 year old can see the story is bull****!

 

Raging Bull believes all animals were on the ark. Noah lived in the middle east, kangaroos live in Australia... how did they get on the ark and then back to Australia without leaving a trace of their migration? Noah did not know Australia existed! Nor did the people who made up the stories in the Bible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you think everyone else is the problem they usually arent.

 

1) I think it is healthy to believe in as many true things and as few false things as possible. Would you agree?

2) One of the best ways to reduce the amount of false things you believe in is to see if it holds up to scrutiny under questioning. Would you agree?

3) Beliefs influence actions and actions impact on other people. Would you agree?

4) Reducing the amount of false beliefs reduces the likelihood of negative actions on wider society. Would you agree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is four yes/no questions.

 

I guess the answers would highlight the flaws in your position...

 

 

 

It is not arrogant to state that the actions of others impact on wider society and that people's actions are influenced by their beliefs. Therefore if someone holds a false belief based on shoddy or no evidence then that can negatively impact society.

 

We've been here before. I asked how, for example, if someone prays for other people, and feels some peace from doing so, how that prayer could impact on you or others. Whether you ever accepted that the simple answer is that it doesn't, I can't recall and can't be arsed to look. Regardless, it's a personal belief Matthew, a personal choice, and has f*ck all to do with you.

 

Just accept that you're not that important, and that people can believe in God, the Bible, religion if they wish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've been here before. I asked how, for example, if someone prays for other people, and feels some peace from doing so, how that prayer could impact on you or others. Whether you ever accepted that the simple answer is that it doesn't, I can't recall and can't be arsed to look. Regardless, it's a personal belief Matthew, a personal choice, and has f*ck all to do with you.

 

Just accept that you're not that important, and that people can believe in God, the Bible, religion if they wish.

 

At no point have I said every prayer is harmful. You continue to ignore this and appear to think I have.

 

Yes/No answers to these won't take you long...

 

1) I think it is healthy to believe in as many true things and as few false things as possible. Would you agree?

2) One of the best ways to reduce the amount of false things you believe in is to see if it holds up to scrutiny under questioning. Would you agree?

3) Beliefs influence actions and actions impact on other people. Would you agree?

4) Reducing the amount of false beliefs reduces the likelihood of negative actions on wider society. Would you agree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) I think it is healthy to believe in as many true things and as few false things as possible. Would you agree?

2) One of the best ways to reduce the amount of false things you believe in is to see if it holds up to scrutiny under questioning. Would you agree?

3) Beliefs influence actions and actions impact on other people. Would you agree?

4) Reducing the amount of false beliefs reduces the likelihood of negative actions on wider society. Would you agree?

 

Don’t get the answer you want from someone so try the same question on someone else, classic MLG thread losing behaviour

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, a 4 year old can see the story is bull****!

 

Raging Bull believes all animals were on the ark. Noah lived in the middle east, kangaroos live in Australia... how did they get on the ark and then back to Australia without leaving a trace of their migration? Noah did not know Australia existed! Nor did the people who made up the stories in the Bible.

 

:mcinnes:

 

That fundamentally flawed and illogical as it is based on an unfounded assumption there was a flood in the first place! :D

 

If there was a global flood, whatever the salt level some life would not be able to survive, if it was high, low or somewhere in the middle. Yet all sea life lived through it! As did Chinese civilisation with no record from the Chinese that they drowned. They lived through the global flood!

 

Why are you going onto me what raging bull believes that’s his choice nothing to do with me.

 

As for your other point you can’t prove how the fish survived. So you don’t know the answer. Game set and match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At no point have I said every prayer is harmful. You continue to ignore this and appear to think I have.

 

Yes/No answers to these won't take you long...

 

1) I think it is healthy to believe in as many true things and as few false things as possible. Would you agree?

2) One of the best ways to reduce the amount of false things you believe in is to see if it holds up to scrutiny under questioning. Would you agree?

3) Beliefs influence actions and actions impact on other people. Would you agree?

4) Reducing the amount of false beliefs reduces the likelihood of negative actions on wider society. Would you agree?

 

I've told you I'm not debating with you. If I answer one question, I'll be facing 24 more. I can't be arsed. Just accept that other people have opinions that you don't have to agree with. Live and let live pal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are you going onto me what raging bull believes that’s his choice nothing to do with me.

 

It is as you also appear to see no issue with freshwater fish not being able to live in salt-water.

 

As for your other point you can’t prove how the fish survived. So you don’t know the answer. Game set and match.

 

Yet again... you are making a flawed point by assuming the flood happened before proving it did happen. There is no evidence apart from an old book by unknown authors that it happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not all over the place... you are when not understanding freshwater fish can not live in a salt-water global flood!

 

I asked him to provide evidence of breeding with giants that he claimed, that does not mean he needs to gather the DNA evidence a link to a reliable source that has would suffice.

 

Raging Bull believing in talking snakes, people being created from ribs and dirt, water into wine, healing the sick, burning bushes, 900 year old men, global floods etc etc without evidence is 'all over the place', not me!

 

It's rather ironic that the heavy mob on here are god fearing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[/color]It is as you also appear to see no issue with freshwater fish not being able to live in salt-water.

 

 

 

Yet again... you are making a flawed point by assuming the flood happened before proving it did happen. There is no evidence apart from an old book by unknown authors that it happened.

 

As I’ve already told you there is no evidence the flood water was salt and badger has already explained it to you. Yet again you don’t get it. for someone with a masters you’re not very bright are you :mcinnes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I’ve already told you there is no evidence the flood water was salt and badger has already explained it to you. Yet again you don’t get it. for someone with a masters you’re not very bright are you :mcinnes:

 

:mcinnes:

 

There is no evidence there was ever a flood (apart from an old book). This is simple stuff Turkish, you are making the assumption there was a flood despite no evidence.

 

Some sea life can live in salt water or freshwater, some sea life can only live in salt water, some sea life can only live in freshwater. There is no scenario where a global flood can see all three groups survive. It is not me being 'not very bright' on this Turkish... look closer to home!

 

There is lots of evidence there was not a global flood... for example the Chinese & Egyptians existed before, during and after the flood is supposed to have occurred and were not wiped out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol::lol:

 

I’ll leave this for you again http://educatingourworld.com/index.php/coming-books

 

Plenty of answers for you

 

What questions do you think that provides water-tight answers to?

 

Every single 'answer' to the questions is deeply flawed and does not hold up to scrutiny when applying a rational mind to it.

 

Pick any of their answers and I'll explain why it is flawed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear me, you just don’t get it do you. A masters degree :lol:

 

Raging bull claimed that in order to get the evidence required to believe in Christ you need to believe in Christ and it will be revealed to you. That is circular reasoning. So it is you that 'does not get it'... not me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[/color]Yet again... you are making a flawed point by assuming the flood happened before proving it did happen. There is no evidence apart from an old book by unknown authors that it happened.

How about bit of tangential thinking. Perhaps the Flood story, in part, is an attempt by an ancient society to explain something they experienced when their 'world' was affected by a catastrophic event. Lacking the scientific knowledge to explain what had happened they put it down to an act of whatever God they worshipped. ( The God of the Gaps theological perspective ). Being superstitious, scientifically naive, and without a secure written history, the passing on of their oral history gradually embellished and extended the story. As far as these people were concerned the entire world was flooded.

The Old Testament is not entirely fictitious, there is plenty of achaeological evidence to support aspects of it. You just have to accept that it is a translation of a translation, ( etc, etc ), of an oral history originating with a less sophisticated and far more superstitious society. You also have to accept that a very large number of people have faith in it's content, and you are on the verge of coming over not only as arrogant in dismissing their views, but insulting.

Edited by badgerx16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about bit of tangential thinking. Perhaps the Flood story, in part, is an attempt by an ancient society to explain something they experienced when their 'world' was affected by a catastrophic event. Lacking the scientific knowledge to explain what had happened they put it down to an act of whatever God they worshipped. ( The God of the Gaps theological perspective ). Being superstitious, scientifically naive, and without a secure written bhistory, the passing on of their oral history gradually embellished and extended the story. As far as these people were concerned the entire world was flooded.

 

Quite possibly... but Raging Bull and a significant number of people on this planet believe it literally happened as described in the old book. Despite there both being a lack of evidence for it and lots of evidence against it.

 

You also have to accept that a very large number of people have faith in it's content, and you are on the verge of coming over not only as arrogant in dismissing their views, but insulting.

 

Why is it insulting to highlight flaws? If it really is the word of god then it should hold up to scrutiny... but it doesn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is God that conceited that he gives Mankind the gift of free will, then dictates what Man has to do with it ?

 

Worse than that surely, otherwise why would 'Hell' exist? If God created man, knowing how he would live his life, then why the need to punish people in Hell for something he has pre-ordained?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You also have to accept that a very large number of people have faith in it's content, and you are on the verge of coming over not only as arrogant in dismissing their views, but insulting.

 

It's not even as if the scientific explanation is any less fantastic and unlikely. So we're on one of a trillion rocks hurtling through a black vacuum of space lit only by vast fireballs, and oh by the way we evolved from a fish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Why is it insulting to highlight flaws? If it really is the word of god then it should hold up to scrutiny... but it doesn't.

 

They are flaws from your perspective, they are Truth from Raging Bull's, and continually trying to nit-pick at his beliefs most certainly verges on insult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not even as if the scientific explanation is any less fantastic and unlikely. So we're on one of a trillion rocks hurtling through a black vacuum of space lit only by vast fireballs, and oh by the way we evolved from a fish.

 

How have you determined the likelihood of one vs the other?

 

Evolution by natural selection is an observed fact, it is not fanciful.

 

The Bible claims man came from clay and woman came from a rib. That is fanciful and not supported by evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are flaws from your perspective, they are Truth from Raging Bull's, and continually trying to nit-pick at his beliefs most certainly verges on insult.

 

Not simply 'my perspective', they are demonstrably 100% false either due to contradictions meaning it cannot be correct or evidence that shows it is false.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lighthouse changed the title to Blasphemy and Duck Rape

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})