tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post2122892464319861468..comments2023-12-01T18:05:24.875-05:00Comments on Debunking Christianity: What Motivates Me?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger49125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-72021813103161788322007-10-17T10:03:00.000-04:002007-10-17T10:03:00.000-04:00rockingchair, most of us here have led a relativel...rockingchair, most of us here have led a relatively fortunate life. Talk to the tsunami survivors in Indonesia and tell them how Jesus would never flood their homes and sweep their mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, sons, and daughters out to sea to drown.Shygetzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12587529149916263563noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-9106569821158706692007-10-17T02:10:00.000-04:002007-10-17T02:10:00.000-04:00whatever has been done to you, may God forgive us....whatever has been done to you, may God forgive us. Jesus would not have done that to you, His beloved.rockingchairhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00105416375434331378noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-4103466454130809572007-10-16T17:18:00.000-04:002007-10-16T17:18:00.000-04:00"Lev. 11:20-3 All fowls that creep, going upon all..."Lev. 11:20-3 All fowls that creep, <B>going upon all four</B>, shall be an abomination unto you. Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that <B>goeth upon all four</B>, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth; even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind <I>(which does not leap--ed)</I>, and the grasshopper after his kind. But all other flying creeping things, <B>which have four feet</B>, shall be an abomination unto you."<BR/><BR/>See there, Dan, if you look at the actual Bible, you see that the part saying insects have four feet is NOT the part talking about legs above the feet. Insects with legs above the feet are kosher (except beetles, which are not leapers); all other flying creeping things <B>that have four feet</B> are not kosher. <BR/><BR/>Your "interpretation" would mean that locusts are both kosher (having legs above the feet and being specifically mentioned) AND not kosher (having four feet without legs over them). And you accuse me of underestimating the ancient Hebrews?<BR/><BR/><I>Indeed my source for the population doubling <BR/><BR/>Here is the article: Billions of People in Thousands of Years?<BR/><BR/>Doubling every 150 years is a very conservative figure.</I><BR/><BR/>In that article, just like in the other AiG article you listed, they pulled the 150 year figure out of their bottoms. You <B>claim</B> it is a conservative figure, but you don't back it up. Also, you ignore the fact that this figure would mean that the Bible lied about the time of Moses and the Biblical flood of Noah, just for starters.<BR/><BR/>Did you not read your link and see that it had no source for the 150 year doubling figure? Can you not do the math yourself and figure out that there would have been 8 people at the time of Noah, and only a few thousand at the time of Moses? Can you physically not see arguments against your predetermined "faith" that you cannot answer?<BR/><BR/><I>God is who He is because he says He is who He is. <BR/><BR/>Just because mankind calls that possibly circular doesn't mean anything.</I><BR/><BR/>Mankind doesn't "possible" call that circular; mankind explicitly calls that circular.<BR/><BR/>I could just as easily say that I am who I say I am because I say I am who I am. It's just as meaningless.<BR/><BR/><I>Although you remind me of the Rich Man and Lazarus</I><BR/><BR/>That's ok...you remind me of the <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor's_New_Clothes" REL="nofollow">court of the naked emperor.</A>Shygetzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12587529149916263563noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-59078527839634890542007-10-15T16:05:00.000-04:002007-10-15T16:05:00.000-04:00"Quite simply, the big back legs on the locust, et..."Quite simply, the big back legs on the locust, etc. were not counted as "legs" in the same sense as the other legs.<BR/><BR/>note the differentiation in Leviticus above -- referring to "legs above the feet" for leaping.<BR/><BR/>The "feet" are being differentiated from the "legs above the feet" because of their difference in function."<BR/><BR/>Come on Shygetz are you trying to miss the point of it on purpose to claim fallacy? <BR/><BR/>God is who He is because he says He is who He is. <BR/><BR/>Just because mankind calls that possibly circular doesn't mean anything. <BR/><BR/>God is in charge and it is what it is, like it or not that is another gift of Gods called free will.D. A. N. https://www.blogger.com/profile/11745259115723860852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-19224175444866028802007-10-15T12:15:00.000-04:002007-10-15T12:15:00.000-04:00Quite simply, the big back legs on the locust, etc...<I>Quite simply, the big back legs on the locust, etc. were not counted as "legs" in the same sense as the other legs.</I><BR/><BR/>Where does it state this in the Bible? Where have anthropologists stated this elsewhere? No where. There is no evidence to back this up.<BR/><BR/>Seriously, this is the entirety of their argument:<BR/><BR/><I>Unacceptable? The alternative is to say that the Hebrews - who ate these things raw, for crying out loud - didn't see that these bugs had six legs. Maybe they closed their eyes before putting them in their mouths...?</I><BR/><BR/>See! They say that this MUST be the explanation because the Bible MUST be inerrant, and if this wasn't the explanation then the Bible would CLEARLY be falst.<BR/><BR/>Nice try, but no dice buddy. <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question" REL="nofollow">You can't prove inerrancy by assuming inerrancy.</A>Shygetzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12587529149916263563noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-75949487012290549022007-10-13T17:50:00.000-04:002007-10-13T17:50:00.000-04:00Here it is, AGAIN!Have a great weekend Shygetz. I ...<A HREF="http://www.tektonics.org/af/buglegs.html" REL="nofollow">Here it is, AGAIN!</A><BR/><BR/>Have a great weekend Shygetz. I will pray that God will reveal himself to you in a special way so that even you can't deny Him. Although you remind me of the <A HREF="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2016:19-31&version=9" REL="nofollow">Rich Man and Lazarus</A>D. A. N. https://www.blogger.com/profile/11745259115723860852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-53923350240003049892007-10-12T22:34:00.000-04:002007-10-12T22:34:00.000-04:00I did a search in both of those linked sites for "...I did a search in both of those linked sites for "insect" and "feet". I didn't see anything that told me why the Bible mentions insects with four feet.<BR/><BR/>Can you not pay attention long enough to read the question I'm asking, or are you so used to just running to apologist websites for answers that you've forgotten how to think for yourself?Shygetzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12587529149916263563noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-40086543373697394272007-10-12T21:00:00.000-04:002007-10-12T21:00:00.000-04:00"For myself, I must say, that having for many year..."For myself, I must say, that having for many years made the evidences of Christianity the subject of close study,...It is indeed the Word of God."<BR/><BR/>- Simon Greenleaf<BR/>Harvard Law<BR/>Professor Royall<BR/><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.provethebible.net/prooftest.htm" REL="nofollow">Determining the authority of the Bible</A>D. A. N. https://www.blogger.com/profile/11745259115723860852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-36478385105454999772007-10-12T20:54:00.000-04:002007-10-12T20:54:00.000-04:00Even more! Wow are these misconceptions really thi...Even more! Wow are these misconceptions really this common?<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.ovrlnd.com/Apologetics/101contradictions.html" REL="nofollow">101 Clear Contradictions in the Bible</A>D. A. N. https://www.blogger.com/profile/11745259115723860852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-50889143023535597572007-10-12T20:41:00.000-04:002007-10-12T20:41:00.000-04:00Shygetz: "Until you can, cut the inerrantist crap....Shygetz: <B>"Until you can, cut the inerrantist crap."</B><BR/><BR/>More help!<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/bible.htm" REL="nofollow">Countering Bible Contradictions</A>D. A. N. https://www.blogger.com/profile/11745259115723860852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-53870553579596342702007-10-12T20:38:00.000-04:002007-10-12T20:38:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.D. A. N. https://www.blogger.com/profile/11745259115723860852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-29017059372235366382007-10-12T19:57:00.000-04:002007-10-12T19:57:00.000-04:00Meant to say "Indeed my source for the population ...Meant to say "Indeed my source for the population doubling <B>was AIG</B>"<BR/><BR/>I think it's a young earth not an old one. If you take these numbers and extrapolate anything out, even cockroaches, over millions of years it just doesn't fit. If you take these numbers in the 6000 year time frame it’s a plausible fit. All of it was reset and started over with Noah's flood 4500 years ago. <BR/><BR/>Earth's oldest living inhabitant "Methuselah" at 4,767 years, has lived more than a millennium longer than any other tree. Everything was destroyed before that, in the flood, nothing is older because of that reason. You want to know when the flood was, just look at that one Bristlecone Pine in California.<BR/><BR/>There is an exponential acceleration after a certain point. One can conclude that after a short time there had to be catastrophic events to reset the numbers, along with it being a young earth. Why aren’t we finding trillions of animals before a certain point because of the “millions” of years or any evidence to support it?D. A. N. https://www.blogger.com/profile/11745259115723860852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-41015714471877024892007-10-12T19:51:00.000-04:002007-10-12T19:51:00.000-04:00Indeed my source for the population doubling Here ...Indeed my source for the population doubling <BR/><BR/>Here is the article: <A HREF="http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/billions-of-people" REL="nofollow">Billions of People in Thousands of Years?</A><BR/><BR/>Doubling every 150 years is a very conservative figure.D. A. N. https://www.blogger.com/profile/11745259115723860852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-45682021092302498252007-10-12T19:30:00.000-04:002007-10-12T19:30:00.000-04:00OK one thing at a time"Show me a four-footed insec...OK one thing at a time<BR/><BR/>"Show me a four-footed insect. Until you can, cut the inerrantist crap."<BR/><BR/>Sure no problem <A HREF="http://www.tektonics.org/af/buglegs.html" REL="nofollow">Here it is</A><BR/><BR/>There is an explanation for everything in the Bible. You also must correctly understand hermeneutics.D. A. N. https://www.blogger.com/profile/11745259115723860852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-44208063904091826632007-10-11T20:19:00.000-04:002007-10-11T20:19:00.000-04:00"Lets use mathematics: Let’s say the population do...<I>"Lets use mathematics: Let’s say the population doubled ever 150 years. And we start at Adam and Eve and after 32 doublings at 4800 years we get around 8.6 billion people but if we take the “Flood” in account at 4500 years ago we get a number around 6.5 billion people. Assuming the conservative growth rate the current population can be reached well within a 6000 year period.</I><BR/><BR/>I just couldn't get over the silliness of this remark, so I did some quick calculations. Noah's flood would have occurred two doublings after Adam and Eve (300 years=two doublings). So, at that time, there would have been 8 people in the world, <B>the same number as was on the Ark</B>! So, God sent his flood to kill ABSOLUTELY NO ONE. Maybe He's not such an asshole. At the time of Exodus, there would have been 9 (count 'em, NINE) doublings between Adam and Eve and Moses. That means that when Moses led 600,000 Israelites out of slavery in Egypt, there was a total of 1024 people in the world. This puts the Bible off by, well, almost 600,000 Israelites and an assumedly much greater number of Egyptians, not to mention everyone else in the world. And the number you get, Flood or no, is the same (Noah took 8 people including himself, and there were two doublings between Noah and Adam).<BR/><BR/>Seriously, Dan, are you that stupid?<BR/><BR/>Also, I checked out that so-called "fossil hat". That's NOT a fossil; that hat has been <B>impregnated</B> by calcium, not <B>replaced</B>. I can do the same thing in my lab in a day, but it isn't a fossil (which you would know if you bothered to check out what a fossil actually is).<BR/><BR/>Methusalah, the bristlecone pine, is hundreds of years older than the flood. The King Clone creosote bush in the Mojave Desert is 11,700 years old, which predated your flood by some 7,000 years. <BR/><BR/>Seriously, how does ANYONE fall for this crap anymore?<BR/><BR/>Dan, I have shown you numerous times that your sources cannot be trusted, yet you keep going back to them. Fool you once, shame on them, fool you twice, shame on you. <BR/><BR/>At some point, you start taking moral responsibility for intentionally spreading misinformation from a source that has been proven unreliable. From now on, when you approvingly cite YEC junk from AiG or similar organizations without checking your facts, I am going to accuse you of Lying for Jesus.Shygetzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12587529149916263563noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-28875778372837911442007-10-11T19:11:00.000-04:002007-10-11T19:11:00.000-04:00The odds of something happening that actually happ...The odds of something happening <I>that actually happened</I> are 1:1.Speedwellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03183564986255249281noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-86241143749455755732007-10-11T17:29:00.000-04:002007-10-11T17:29:00.000-04:00Wow Dan, nice straw man argument. When have you E...Wow Dan, nice straw man argument. When have you EVER heard any scientist state that the average doubling time for a human population is 150 years? I'll give you a hint; never. And where did you get the figure of 150 years from? Anthropoligists? Biologists? Let me guess; an apologetics website. But where did they get it from? I'll tell you; they worked backwards from their predetermined date of the flood. Unfortunately, they did not figure the black plague, the influenza epidemics, famines, droughts, wars, etc. that wiped out HUGE swaths of the population in one swoop into their calculations, and since you did not think about the data on your own but rather just parroted figures that supported your predetermined conclusion, neither did you.<BR/><BR/>It may not take millions of years to fossilize hats; show me an evolutionary conclusion that is based on the rate of fossilization of felt and you might have a point. Oh wait, you can't--they all use bones. Hmmm, tough break there.<BR/><BR/><I>I have been called Jesus freak, a-hole and the most common "Troll" an many other ad hominem attacks </I><BR/><BR/>It's only <I>ad hominem</I> if they say you are incorrect <B>because</B> you are a freak, etc. Seems like most people here at least say you are wrong AND a freak, which is just name-calling.<BR/><BR/><I>The odds of this universe just happening by accident and chance is one in a googol (my guess, it may be more).</I><BR/><BR/>And your uninformed guess is worth one billionth of a fake penny (my guess, may be less).<BR/><BR/><I>That alone should show that that life is too precious to throw away in vain explanations of evolution and chance.</I><BR/><BR/>Your guess should show us? <B>Your ignorant, uninformed GUESS!?!?</B> You can't make dumb arrogance like this up, folks.<BR/><BR/><I>What does not make sense is the entire universe happened by accident and then, by accident also, our earth thrived. All of this by chance, now that's the true non sequitur.</I><BR/><BR/>Do you even <B>know</B> what a <I>non sequitur</I> is? Based on your use, I doubt it.<BR/><BR/><I>Anyone who understands mathematical odds would conclude that these odds are too great to consider seriously.</I><BR/><BR/>Because you, who CLEARLY understands nothing of probability theory, has conluded that? Give me a break.<BR/><BR/><I>There has to be a better explanation and the infallible, inspired, and inerrant word of God does it without fail.</I><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://bible.cc/leviticus/11-23.htm" REL="nofollow">Show me a four-footed insect.</A> Until you can, cut the inerrantist crap.Shygetzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12587529149916263563noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-18827201549498165472007-10-11T16:16:00.000-04:002007-10-11T16:16:00.000-04:00I was out of pocket for a few. Thanks for the opin...I was out of pocket for a few. Thanks for the opinions on the presented "scientific proof of God". Although I didn't agree with some of the things that was presented, I think that it was an interesting way to present the case. Anything that would help someone to draw them to Christ is worth an attempt, in my opinion. My presupposition of the Bible being infallible, inspired, and inerrant word of God is, and always will, be intact. I am sure all of your presupposition that there is no God is in tact also. Common sense and logic just points to a Creator and most points were covered here. Most of you including Dan and Shygetz just had typical responses to counter it. <BR/><BR/>Dan said <B>"I just read through Hugh Ross's article you referenced, and it is, like most "scientific apologetics" full of the most glaring logical fallacies and non sequiturs when trying to bloat claims like "time had a beginning" into "therefore Jesus". </B> Yawn!<BR/><BR/>Shygetz suggested <B>"there are NUMEROUS and INDEPENDENT physical and biological measurements that clearly state that the humankind is much more than 6,000 to 60,000 years old; falsifiable mathematical models can give us insight into the existence of other universes, even if we can't measure them;</B><BR/><BR/>OK Shygetz I have used this before on other blogs but it is worth posting again to counter your point: <BR/><BR/>"Lets use mathematics: Let’s say the population doubled ever 150 years. And we start at Adam and Eve and after 32 doublings at 4800 years we get around 8.6 billion people but if we take the “Flood” in account at 4500 years ago we get a number around 6.5 billion people. Assuming the conservative growth rate the current population can be reached well within a 6000 year period.<BR/><BR/>Now evolutionists say mankind has been around for hundreds of thousands of years. Let’s take that same equation and use just 50,000 years. So we extrapolate that out 50,000 doublings every 150 years (332 doublings) and we get one followed by 100 zero’s. That figure is unimaginable, for it is billions of times greater then the number of atoms that are in the entire universe!<BR/><BR/>Google “Fossil hat” and you will see it does not take millions of years to create fossils either."<BR/><BR/><BR/>At least the effort to show you that God is in charge (including friends of yours, relatives, and strangers) is being made. <BR/> <BR/>I have been called Jesus freak, a-hole and the most common "Troll" an many other ad hominem attacks but what matters is that all of you are getting the proper Gospel and information to get saved. Standing idly by and watching people perish is not kosher to me. I understand most Christians are probably viewed as pests by most of you, but you should see it from our point of view. We are trying to get all of you to understand that if you are wrong that you will perish, now I'm not trying to force a pascal's wager but I am trying to appeal to your logical conscience. You must be perfect to enter heaven, there is only "one way" to do that and as we all know, we must all repent and trust in Jesus to do this. <BR/><BR/>The odds of this universe just happening by accident and chance is one in a googol (my guess, it may be more). That alone should show that that life is too precious to throw away in vain explanations of evolution and chance. Dan throws the term "non sequitur" at Creation, are you kidding, you have that flipped Dan. What does not make sense is the entire universe happened by accident and then, by accident also, our earth thrived. All of this by chance, now that's the true non sequitur. Anyone who understands mathematical odds would conclude that these odds are too great to consider seriously. There has to be a better explanation and the infallible, inspired, and inerrant word of God does it without fail.D. A. N. https://www.blogger.com/profile/11745259115723860852noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-76189851470895402772007-10-11T02:41:00.000-04:002007-10-11T02:41:00.000-04:00So Josh, when did you quit beating your wife?So Josh, when did you quit beating your wife?Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07058424176773515878noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-90414729476816208472007-10-11T02:39:00.000-04:002007-10-11T02:39:00.000-04:00shygetz- I've learned the hard way not to drink co...shygetz- I've learned the hard way not to drink coffee while reading your comments. Shame on you.zilchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01695741977946935771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-65778440919061847272007-10-10T23:00:00.000-04:002007-10-10T23:00:00.000-04:00Josh, it is clear from your comment that, while th...Josh, it is clear from your comment that, while the Flying Spaghetti Monster (Parmesean Be Upon Him) has clearly touched your heart with His noodly appendage, you are running from that truth and hiding among the apastates in the so-called "Christian" religion. But you remain under the judgement of FSM (PBUH). You are guilty before Him. The anger of the FSM (PBUH) is all around you, like the crust on a well-baked meatball. He will not be mocked!<BR/><BR/>Wake up and beg Him for forgiveness! Beg him to bathe you in His holy marinara and embrace you in his doughy noodle. Confess your apastasy, ask the FSM (PBUH) to clean the dirty alfredo from your soul, so that you might start clean at the buffet of eternal life.Shygetzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12587529149916263563noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-24605605235153036622007-10-10T22:27:00.000-04:002007-10-10T22:27:00.000-04:00Mr. Loftus,It seems to me that, from what I have b...Mr. Loftus,<BR/><BR/>It seems to me that, from what I have been told, ever since you committed adultery on your wife, you have been running from God. But you remain under His wrath. You are guilty before Him. There is God's anger all around you. Wake up and beg Him for repentance! Confess to Him that you are a sinner. Ask Christ to cleanse you of your adulteries, and all of your sin.Josh Brisbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03053697004185211021noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-74294027125736209512007-10-10T16:27:00.000-04:002007-10-10T16:27:00.000-04:00Even though we're on opposite sides of the table, ...Even though we're on opposite sides of the table, I think we're something of kindred spirits. The continual naysaying for me tends to be a motivational factor... How did the Bible term it "Make a table for me in the presence of my enemies".<BR/><BR/>I'm not afraid to be wrong, because I won't stop trying, and eventually I'll get it right.<BR/><BR/>Don't let the morons get to you (as if you would), typically they're just here because their christian audiences won't listen to them.<BR/><BR/>Here's looking forward to interesting conversation<BR/><BR/>-Joemetaphyzxxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02702037868258045003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-33347267012245136082007-10-10T12:08:00.000-04:002007-10-10T12:08:00.000-04:00"Why give them any thrills from feedback?" You're..."Why give them any thrills from feedback?" You're right. It's a weakness of mine!Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07058424176773515878noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-62059964747350765852007-10-10T06:40:00.000-04:002007-10-10T06:40:00.000-04:00I second Caleb's thoughts. If you get online to e...I second Caleb's thoughts. If you get online to enjoy thinking and exchanging challenges and arguments to one another, then the trolls are just annoyances that are easily ignored. Making things personal, or allowing them to become that way, is probably not a good idea online. Those who remain anonymous and drive-by to fling insults are usually insecure and have little better to do with their lives. Why give them any thrills from feedback?<BR/><BR/>Engaging them (as you do in this very thread) only encourages them. You should simply delete their posts without comment.<BR/><BR/>Dan Marvin is a nice enough guy, I guess, but he shows some characteristics of <I>ad hom</I> also. I had an exchange with him a while back:<BR/><A HREF="http://blog.danielmorgan.name/2007/04/exchange-with-dan-marvin.html" REL="nofollow">HERE</A><BR/>(private blog, by invite only)<BR/><BR/>Anyway, Dan, I wanted to say that I just read through Hugh Ross's article you referenced, and it is, like most "scientific apologetics" full of the most glaring logical fallacies and <I>non sequiturs</I> when trying to bloat claims like "time had a beginning" into "therefore Jesus". If you really want to read a thorough shredding of cosmological arguments for God's existence, read Victor Stenger.nsflhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04129382545589470620noreply@blogger.com