Jump to content

Blasphemy and Duck Rape


Yorkshire Saint

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Turkish said:

Simply pointing out the one sided argument pal, he's quoted lots of ones that say about repenting of sins but ignored the ones which give the command not to kill and those that do will not inherit gods kingdom. Which is inconsistent with the claim that a serial murderer on death row can be forgiven over a bucket of fried chicken.

I am well aware of what he quoted, pal.  He quoted an awful lot of claims.  In your world where stories don't need to be justified but claims do, I merely pointed out that you don't seem to be demading that any of these claims have been checked and verified.  Hypocritcal wouldn't you say?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

I am well aware of what he quoted, pal.  He quoted an awful lot of claims.  In your world where stories don't need to be justified but claims do, I merely pointed out that you don't seem to be demading that any of these claims have been checked and verified.  Hypocritcal wouldn't you say?

How and why would you verify a fictional story? It’s fictional! Really odd you say it’s hypocritical to request something that is fictional be verified as to its facts. Not having a good day are you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Turkish said:

How and why would you verify a fictional story? It’s fictional! Really odd you say it’s hypocritical to request something that is fictional be verified as to its facts. Not having a good day are you.

Why would you believe a fictional story, it's fictional?  Why would you live your life around the values / morals from a fictional story, it's fictional?

The point, which once again you have magnificently missed, is that you stated claims (not stories) need to be verified with facts.  All of the verses quoted were claims as to what would happen if a person repented.  The hypocrisy lies in the fact that you have not asked for verification of these particular claims.  It's really not that difficult to comprehend.

Unless of course you are now stating that the bible is just a series of made up stories?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Why would you believe a fictional story, it's fictional?  Why would you live your life around the values / morals from a fictional story, it's fictional?

The point, which once again you have magnificently missed, is that you stated claims (not stories) need to be verified with facts.  All of the verses quoted were claims as to what would happen if a person repented.  The hypocrisy lies in the fact that you have not asked for verification of these particular claims.  It's really not that difficult to comprehend.

Unless of course you are now stating that the bible is just a series of made up stories?

Dear me, do you understand what a parable is? 
 

it’s you that’s spectacularly missing the point fella,  not me, which is proven by the fact you don’t even understand that basics of what we are discussing. You even say you don’t need to verify stories so completely contradict yourself. Verify a parable, LOL

Edited by Turkish
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Why would you believe a fictional story, it's fictional?  Why would you live your life around the values / morals from a fictional story, it's fictional?

The point, which once again you have magnificently missed, is that you stated claims (not stories) need to be verified with facts.  All of the verses quoted were claims as to what would happen if a person repented.  The hypocrisy lies in the fact that you have not asked for verification of these particular claims.  It's really not that difficult to comprehend.

Unless of course you are now stating that the bible is just a series of made up stories?

Because the stories are allegory. Not factual. The fiction is added to give context. It's a simple notion, but alas it gets lost on the simple. 

This thread has got more ridiculous. Non believers in God getting bogged down by the text of a book that they a) don't understand, b) don't recognise and c) seemingly think was written by the God that they don't recognise! You couldn't make it up.

That's all whist losing sight of the fact that millions of people believe in a God but have no interest in the bible and/or do not recognise the existence of Jesus or any foot soldier of God - organised religion, the Bible and God do not have to go hand in hand. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, egg said:

Because the stories are allegory. Not factual. The fiction is added to give context. It's a simple notion, but alas it gets lost on the simple. 

This thread has got more ridiculous. Non believers in God getting bogged down by the text of a book that they a) don't understand, b) don't recognise and c) seemingly think was written by the God that they don't recognise! You couldn't make it up.

That's all whist losing sight of the fact that millions of people believe in a God but have no interest in the bible and/or do not recognise the existence of Jesus or any foot soldier of God - organised religion, the Bible and God do not have to go hand in hand. 

 

Which kind of sums up why this thread has got ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, egg said:

Because the stories are allegory. Not factual. The fiction is added to give context. It's a simple notion, but alas it gets lost on the simple. 

This thread has got more ridiculous. Non believers in God getting bogged down by the text of a book that they a) don't understand, b) don't recognise and c) seemingly think was written by the God that they don't recognise! You couldn't make it up.

That's all whist losing sight of the fact that millions of people believe in a God but have no interest in the bible and/or do not recognise the existence of Jesus or any foot soldier of God - organised religion, the Bible and God do not have to go hand in hand. 

 

Which kind of suggests it is just purely subjective fantasy inside people's heads. 

Which gives it as much ontological gravitas as a flying spaghetti monster. 

I think that is precisely the point MLG is making. So you agree.

Which is nice.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, benjii said:

Which kind of suggests it is just purely subjective fantasy inside people's heads. 

Which gives it as much ontological gravitas as a flying spaghetti monster. 

I think that is precisely the point MLG is making. So you agree.

Which is nice.

Not sure how you lurch to that Benjii. 

An allegory which a person can't make sense of because they aren't open minded does not make the parable "purely subjective fantasy". It makes it unrecognisable to an individual because of their closed beliefs. 

Nobody has argued on here that there is any ontological evidence in support of a God. Or indeed any any evidence to verify the parables in the bible. 

I do not agree with MLG. He has shown himself time and again to fail to understand the subject. Your comments suggests you may not be far behind. 

Edited by egg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, egg said:

Not sure how you lurch to that Benjii. 

An allegory which a person can't make sense of because they aren't open minded does not make the parable "purely subjective fantasy". It makes it unrecognisable to an individual because of their closed beliefs. 

Nobody has argued on here that there is any ontological evidence in support of a God. Or indeed any any evidence to verify the parables in the bible. 

I do not agree with MLG. He has shown himself time and again to fail to understand the subject. Your comments suggests you may not be far behind. 

His position is that it is logical not to express strong belief that something is the case without corroboration. You seem to be saying there is no corroboration. So if you differ, then the difference must be that you think it is logical to believe that something is the case without corroboration.  Now, no evidence for something is not the same as evidence that there is not something, but as a general maxim it seems entirely sensible to generally base knowledge and belief on what can be corroborated, whilst recognising the potential for inductive knowledge to sometimes be misleading.

I don't think you fundamentally disagree at all. The difference is whether you want to lay a blanket of superstition on top of that or not.

Edited by benjii
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Turkish said:

Dear me, do you understand what a parable is? 
 

it’s you that’s spectacularly missing the point fella,  not me, which is proven by the fact you don’t even understand that basics of what we are discussing. You even say you don’t need to verify stories so completely contradict yourself. Verify a parable, LOL

At no point have I said that stories should be verified - that's just you making stuff up again. 

I have, however, asked why you have stated that some claims need absolute verification (the ones you don't believe), but you have ignored the question why others (the ones you do believe), don't need to be verified.

These are two seperate things - stories being one and claims being another.

Do try and keep up and answer this very simple question - why do you state that some claims need to be verified but others don't?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

At no point have I said that stories should be verified - that's just you making stuff up again. 

I have, however, asked why you have stated that some claims need absolute verification (the ones you don't believe), but you have ignored the question why others (the ones you do believe), don't need to be verified.

These are two seperate things - stories being one and claims being another.

Do try and keep up and answer this very simple question - why do you state that some claims need to be verified but others don't?

so when you said "take your example of the 'Good Samaritan story' have those claims been 'checked out properly'?  Presumably, if they have, they will have produced some evidence which can be examined"

That was me making stuff up that you never said stories should be verified, right? Got it.

The one thing you are right about though is stories being one thing and claims being another. Stories for the purpose of allegory dont need to be checked for evidence they are true, claims made about what millions of people are meant to be believe should be. 

You're having a shocker pal. 

 

Edited by Turkish
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Turkish said:

so when you said "take your example of the 'Good Samaritan story' have those claims been 'checked out properly'?  Presumably, if they have, they will have produced some evidence which can be examined"

That was me making stuff up that you never said stories should be verified, right? Got it.

The one thing you are right about though is stories being one thing and claims being another. Stories for the purpose of allegory dont need to be checked for evidence they are true, claims made about what millions of people are meant to be believe should be. 

You're having a shocker pal. 

 

The good samaritan story is based on a claim.  This really is simple stuff.

Quote

25 On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

26 “What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”

27 He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’[a]; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b]

28 “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke 10%3A25-37&version=NIV

The 'claim' is very simple but I'll spell it out for you - Love the Lord God and you will live.  That is a pretty important claim as the converse would imply that if you DON'T love the Lord God, then you will not live for eternity.

Has this 'claim' been 'checked out properly', if so, what evidence was produced to either confirm or deny the claim?

Yes, I'm fully aware that the initial claim has been expanded and embellished to produce the parable / story of the good samaritan but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Will you at any point answer the question why do you state that some claims need to be verified but others don't?

Edited by Weston Super Saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

The good samaritan story is based on a claim.  This really is simple stuff.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke 10%3A25-37&version=NIV

The 'claim' is very simple but I'll spell it out for you - Love the Lord God and you will live.  That is a pretty important claim as the converse would imply that if you DON'T love the Lord God, then you will not live for eternity.

Has this 'claim' been 'checked out properly', if so, what evidence was produced to either confirm or deny the claim?

Yes, I'm fully aware that the initial claim has been expanded and embellished to produce the parable / story of the good samaritan but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Very simple, yet you seem to be struggling so let me make it easy

The Parable of the Good Samaritan https://www.christianity.com/wiki/bible/the-story-of-the-good-samaritans-deeper-meaning.html

Definition of parable https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/parable

 

I really cant make it any clearer, if you dont get it now then i am afraid i cant help you any more and i doubt anyone can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Turkish said:

Very simple, yet you seem to be struggling so let me make it easy

The Parable of the Good Samaritan https://www.christianity.com/wiki/bible/the-story-of-the-good-samaritans-deeper-meaning.html

Definition of parable https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/parable

 

I really cant make it any clearer, if you dont get it now then i am afraid i cant help you any more and i doubt anyone can.

Can you tell me on what page in the Bible it states which bits are parables and which bits are supposed to be the literal truth?

Bible warning label | Quantum Moronics

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Matthew Le God said:

Can you tell me on what page in the Bible it states which bits are parables and which bits are supposed to be the literal truth?

Bible warning label | Quantum Moronics

You've got a masters degree Matthew, im sure you can work it out for yourself young man. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Turkish said:

You've got a masters degree Matthew, im sure you can work it out for yourself young man. 

The Bible claims...

1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion

If that is true, then why is it for humans to decide themselves which bits are parable and which are literal? That is how confusion and schisms start! This character God is very inept at getting his message across!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/08/2020 at 17:00, Matthew Le God said:

1) Do you or do you not agree Luke says repenting no matter what the sin is a way into heaven?

2) Do you agree that contradicts with the verse you quoted from Galatians?

They can't both be true... hence they contradict each other.

Bump!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Matthew Le God said:

The Bible claims...

1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion

If that is true, then why is it for humans to decide themselves which bits are parable and which are literal? That is how confusion and schisms start! This character God is very inept at getting his message across!

If it interests you so much, which it evidently does, why dont you go and chat to some religious leaders about it rather than boring everyone on here and constantly making yourself look silly? That's my suggestion, as Egg said, this thread gets increasingly more ridiculous, being driven by people who dont even accept there is a god. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Matthew Le God said:

The Bible claims...

1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion

If that is true, then why is it for humans to decide themselves which bits are parable and which are literal? That is how confusion and schisms start! This character God is very inept at getting his message across!

If it interests you so much, which it evidently does, why dont you go and chat to some religious leaders about it rather than boring everyone on here and constantly making yourself look silly? That's my suggestion for you. As Egg said, this thread gets increasingly more ridiculous, being driven by people who dont even accept there is a god. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Matthew Le God said:

The Bible claims...

1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion

If that is true, then why is it for humans to decide themselves which bits are parable and which are literal? That is how confusion and schisms start! This character God is very inept at getting his message across!

If it interests you so much, which it evidently does, why dont you go and chat to some religious leaders about it rather than boring everyone on here and constantly making yourself look silly? That's my suggestion for you. As Egg said, this thread gets increasingly more ridiculous, being driven by people who dont even accept there is a god. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Turkish said:

If it interests you so much, which it evidently does, why dont you go and chat to some religious leaders about it rather than boring everyone on here and constantly making yourself look silly? That's my suggestion for you. As Egg said, this thread gets increasingly more ridiculous, being driven by people who dont even accept there is a god. 

Answer a question for once! 🙄

1) Do you agree that if it is up to individuals to decide for themselves which bits are parable and which bits are literal then that is opening up for a disater of people disagreeing which is which?

2) Do you agree that such a book where it is unclear which is which is incompatible with the statement...?

1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

@Turkish won't answer it. He doesn't answer questions that show him out to be wrong!

I might start copying you and answering every post with a load more questions, very hypocritical to assume me of not answering questions! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Matthew Le God said:

Answer a question for once! 🙄

1) Do you agree that if it is up to individuals to decide for themselves which bits are parable and which bits are literal then that is opening up for a disater of people disagreeing which is which?

2) Do you agree that such a book where it is unclear which is which is incompatible with the statement...?

1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion

You obviously have a lot of questions you need answering, you've also obviously looked for the answers and not found them yet, my advice remains as per the last post, go and ask a religious leader at your local church or whatever, it'll stop you looking silly on here, stop you boring everyone and you may find what you seek. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Turkish said:

I might start copying you and answering every post with a load more questions, very hypocritical to assume me of not answering questions! 

No it isn't. I have answered every question that can be answered. I only answer questions with a question if it is an ill-formed question. The question @Golactico wants you to answer is a question that has an answer. So it is not hypocritical. I think we can add hypocritical to your word list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Matthew Le God said:

Answer a question for once! 🙄

1) Do you agree that if it is up to individuals to decide for themselves which bits are parable and which bits are literal then that is opening up for a disater of people disagreeing which is which?

2) Do you agree that such a book where it is unclear which is which is incompatible with the statement...?

1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion

You obviously have a lot of questions you need answering, you've also obviously looked for the answers and not found them yet, my advice remains as per the last post, go and ask a religious leader at your local church or whatever, it'll stop you looking silly on here, stop you boring everyone and you may find what you seek. Everyone is a winner! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Very simple, yet you seem to be struggling so let me make it easy

The Parable of the Good Samaritan https://www.christianity.com/wiki/bible/the-story-of-the-good-samaritans-deeper-meaning.html

Definition of parable https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/parable

 

I really cant make it any clearer, if you dont get it now then i am afraid i cant help you any more and i doubt anyone can.

Didn't I cover this with this bit Yes, I'm fully aware that the initial claim has been expanded and embellished to produce the parable / story of the good samaritan but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Can you point out where, in either of your links, it states that the story cannot be based on a claim which is then further embellished?

Do you understand what the claim is in the parable of the good samaritan - or are you denying that there is one?

Will you ever answer the question why do you state that some claims need to be verified but others don't?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Turkish said:

You obviously have a lot of questions you need answering, you've also obviously looked for the answers and not found them yet, my advice remains as per the last post, go and ask a religious leader at your local church or whatever.

They won't be able to say where it says which is parable and which is literal in the Bible... because it doesn't say. So there is no point asking them. Despite what the book claims about God not being the author of confusion... the book is riddled with confusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Turkish said:

I might start copying you and answering every post with a load more questions, very hypocritical to assume me of not answering questions! 

 

33 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Will you at any point answer the question why do you state that some claims need to be verified but others don't?

Lol :mcinnes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Lighthouse changed the title to Christmas/Blasphemy/Duck Rape
5 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

The Bible claims...

1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion

If that is true, then why is it for humans to decide themselves which bits are parable and which are literal? That is how confusion and schisms start! This character God is very inept at getting his message across!

1 Corinthians 14:33, NIV: "For God is not a God of disorder but of peace--as in all the congregations of the Lord's people."

1 Corinthians 14:33, ESV: "For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints,"

1 Corinthians 14:33, KJV: "For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints."

1 Corinthians 14:33, NASB: "for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints."

1 Corinthians 14:33, NLT: "For God is not a God of disorder but of peace, as in all the meetings of God's holy people."

1 Corinthians 14:33, CSB: "since God is not a God of disorder but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints,"

 

Which Bible do you use ?

Anybody claiming that the Bible is the unadulterated Word of God is almost certainly wrong, ( IMO ), as all versions are the result of manipulation by interested parties. However, they are entitled to their views, and you are NOT the Thought Police.

Edited by badgerx16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

1 Corinthians 14:33, NIV: "For God is not a God of disorder but of peace--as in all the congregations of the Lord's people."

1 Corinthians 14:33, ESV: "For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints,"

1 Corinthians 14:33, KJV: "For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints."

1 Corinthians 14:33, NASB: "for God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints."

1 Corinthians 14:33, NLT: "For God is not a God of disorder but of peace, as in all the meetings of God's holy people."

1 Corinthians 14:33, CSB: "since God is not a God of disorder but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints,"

 

Which Bible do you use ?

Anybody claiming that the Bible is the unadulterated Word of God is almost certainly wrong, ( IMO ), as all versions are the result of manipulation by interested parties. However, they are entitled to their views, and you are NOT the Thought Police.

All that does is prove the character of God in the Bible is inept. If he is all knowing then he should know that a daft way to get his message across would be a book which would be copied and translated and differences appear over thousands of years. That is a really stupid way to get your message across. Yet it claims God is not the author of confusion, but a plan to get your message out using an old book that requires translation into many different languages is clearly flawed as the translations from the different versions you use above shows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Anyhing?

What is it you expect me to answer? You don’t know the difference between an allegory and someone claiming what people believe in. Until you can work that out then we aren’t going to progress this point. That’s not my fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Turkish said:

I didn’t. Just because you keep repeating it it doesn’t mean it’s true 

On 12/08/2020 at 09:41, Turkish said:

 quite different to our friend on this thread has simply shouted and point "Look what this guy said" without checking out any of his claims, it seems. Which was the point you seem to be failing to grasp. 

As for your second point, just  🤣 the good Samaritan story doesn't need to be checked out, because it was a story, a story Jesus used to illustrate the importance of kindness, kind of shows where you are with it all doesn't it, not quite at the races pal.

Here is your post stating that a 'claim' needs to be 'checked out' whilst at the same time a story based on a claim doesn't...

On 12/08/2020 at 14:39, Golactico said:
  • If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
  • If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.
  • Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord.
  • Whoever conceals their sins does not prosper,
    but the one who confesses and renounces them finds mercy.
  • Produce fruit in keeping with repentance.
  • For the Lord your God is gracious and compassionate. He will not turn his face from you if you return to him.
  • The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.
  •  
  • ....... (edited to reduce length of post, hopefully you can see that these and the ones edited are 'claims'

Here are lots more claims that are made in the bible

On 12/08/2020 at 15:51, Turkish said:

Did you forget to include the many ones about commanding not to murder and those that do will not inherit gods kingdom?

Here is your post, seemingly accepting these claims from the bible at face value with no hint of a suggestion that they need to be 'checked out'.  Not only that, you make reference to another claim which again, it would appear you are happy to accept at face value and not demand it be 'checked out'.

On 13/08/2020 at 07:15, Weston Super Saint said:

 All of the verses quoted were claims as to what would happen if a person repented. 

Oh look, I've pointed out that they were all 'claims' for your benefit, a fact which you have not disputed.

On 13/08/2020 at 17:26, Weston Super Saint said:

The good samaritan story is based on a claim.  This really is simple stuff.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke 10%3A25-37&version=NIV

The 'claim' is very simple but I'll spell it out for you - Love the Lord God and you will live.  That is a pretty important claim as the converse would imply that if you DON'T love the Lord God, then you will not live for eternity.

 

In this post I even show you how the 'story' that you have stated needs no verification whatsoever because it is merely a 'story', is actually based on a 'claim' made in the bible.  Again, you've completely ignored this prefering your usual insult hurling as an alternative, but appear once more to have accepted the claim made in the bible without demanding that it is 'checked out'.

I look forward to your witty and scathing rebuttal of my presentation showing that you have, indeed, stated that some claims (that you doon't agree with) need absolute verification whilst others (that you do agree with), don't need to be looked at in any detail whatsoever.

In the meantime, and anticipating your inability to answer why do you state that some claims need to be verified but others don't? I'll work on the assumption that it is...

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/08/2020 at 17:00, Matthew Le God said:

1) Do you or do you not agree Luke says repenting no matter what the sin is a way into heaven?

2) Do you agree that contradicts with the verse you quoted from Galatians?

They can't both be true... hence they contradict each other.

Come on Turkish we all want your answer to this question.

It keeps getting asked but for some reason you won't answer it - yet you have answered all the others??

Why is that?

Maybe you keep missing it the multiple times it has been asked.

Just in case this is indeed the situation - here it is for you again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SFC1906 said:

Come on Turkish we all want your answer to this question.

It keeps getting asked but for some reason you won't answer it - yet you have answered all the others??

Why is that?

Maybe you keep missing it the multiple times it has been asked.

Just in case this is indeed the situation - here it is for you again.

Ask someone who gives a sh1t mate. All I’m doing is point out the bo11ocks and inaccuracy spouted by most on here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Here is your post stating that a 'claim' needs to be 'checked out' whilst at the same time a story based on a claim doesn't...

Here are lots more claims that are made in the bible

Here is your post, seemingly accepting these claims from the bible at face value with no hint of a suggestion that they need to be 'checked out'.  Not only that, you make reference to another claim which again, it would appear you are happy to accept at face value and not demand it be 'checked out'.

Oh look, I've pointed out that they were all 'claims' for your benefit, a fact which you have not disputed.

In this post I even show you how the 'story' that you have stated needs no verification whatsoever because it is merely a 'story', is actually based on a 'claim' made in the bible.  Again, you've completely ignored this prefering your usual insult hurling as an alternative, but appear once more to have accepted the claim made in the bible without demanding that it is 'checked out'.

I look forward to your witty and scathing rebuttal of my presentation showing that you have, indeed, stated that some claims (that you doon't agree with) need absolute verification whilst others (that you do agree with), don't need to be looked at in any detail whatsoever.

In the meantime, and anticipating your inability to answer why do you state that some claims need to be verified but others don't? I'll work on the assumption that it is...

spacer.png

The Good Samaritan story is a parable. Google is your friend. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, egg said:

The Good Samaritan story is a parable. Google is your friend. 

Despite being told this by about 4 people a dozen times he still can’t comprehend this, until he does there isn’t much point carrying on. Never underestimate the stupidity of the average person egg.

Edited by Turkish
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Despite being told this by about 4 people a dozen times he still can’t comprehend this, until he does there isn’t much point carrying on. Never underestimate the stupidity of the average person egg.

Every time I come back on here there's someone different trying to prove, or seek proof, of something that they don't understand or claim to have no interest in. It's as funny as it is baffling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, egg said:

Every time I come back on here there's someone different trying to prove, or seek proof, of something that they don't understand or claim to have no interest in. It's as funny as it is baffling. 

Who is the 'different' person asking for proof?  It's certainly not me.

I've asked Turkish to answer the question why HE believes some claims need to be proven whilst others don't, but that is very different from ME seeking or demanding proof.

Perhaps you've managed to get yourself all confused and that's why it is 'baffling'?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Who is the 'different' person asking for proof?  It's certainly not me.

I've asked Turkish to answer the question why HE believes some claims need to be proven whilst others don't, but that is very different from ME seeking or demanding proof.

Perhaps you've managed to get yourself all confused and that's why it is 'baffling'?

I didn’t say that, repeating it over and over and over again doesn’t mean I did. I said you can’t prove a fictional story. I’m not sure why you’re struggling to grasp that but You’re making yourself look very stupid pal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Turkish said:

Ask someone who gives a sh1t mate. All I’m doing is point out the bo11ocks and inaccuracy spouted by most on here.

Someone that gives a shit like, I don't know, someone who has posted at least a hundred times on this thread for example?

Do you know anyone that fits that bill? Clearly that sort of person would give a shit - else why would they bother eh?

Could the question that you refuse to answer from MLG (because you don't give a shit apparently lol) qualify as the bollocks and inaccuracy that you are trying to highlight? You know the example of direct contradiction 'spouted' by the Bible?

If so why not just answer/clarify?

You've stated that all you are doing 'is pointing out the bo11ocks and inaccuracy spouted by most on here.' Surely the example given by MLG is a clear example of this is it not?

Why are you not pointing out this clear and obvious bollocks and inaccuracy?

You don't seem to have any issues whatsoever answering/commenting on literally hundreds of other posts on this thread - so why not this one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is this big contradiction question that the Saintsweb geniuses needs answering? Sorry haven’t got the will to wade too far back but sure it is supersmart and exposes faith/Christianity as a hoax. Cos we have some great minds on here.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Turkish said:

I didn’t say that, repeating it over and over and over again doesn’t mean I did. I said you can’t prove a fictional story. I’m not sure why you’re struggling to grasp that but You’re making yourself look very stupid pal. 

You keep telling yourself that Princess.

spacer.png

Edited by Weston Super Saint
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...