Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell is that not Christians burning people at the stake, or am I terminally confused again. Thomas Moore (a man for all seasons) was quite fond of burning a heretic.
Calvin burned a man at the stake, Michael Servetus for publishing a pamphlet on the
errors of the trinity (De trinitatis erroribus) which he held was a non Biblical teaching,
Tyndale was also executed for his opposition to the church and no doubt there are
many others.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by kevcvs57Robbie is excessively fond of 'no true Scotsman' arguments.
Well is that not Christians burning people at the stake, or am I terminally confused again. Thomas Moore (a man for all seasons) was quite fond of burning a heretic.
Anyone who does anything he doesn't approve of isn't a Christian so any argument you make
where you say well here are some Christians doing something bad he just says, well they aren't
Christians.
1 edit
Originally posted by googlefudgeI wondered why that phrase kept popping up and what it referred to.
Robbie is excessively fond of 'no true Scotsman' arguments.
Anyone who does anything he doesn't approve of isn't a Christian so any argument you make
where you say well here are some Christians doing something bad he just says, well they aren't
Christians.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by kevcvs57Ah it's a formal logical fallacy that Robbie can't stop using.
I wondered why that phrase kept popping up and what it referred to.
It's one of several.
The straw man is his other favourite.
Along with
Argument from Ignorance
Argument from incredulity
Argument from popularity
ad hominems
And well, bald faced lying.
But apart from that he's a great guy...
2 edits
Originally posted by googlefudgeRobbie is excessively fond of 'no true Scotsman' arguments
Robbie is excessively fond of 'no true Scotsman' arguments.
Anyone who does anything he doesn't approve of isn't a Christian so any argument you make
where you say well here are some Christians doing something bad he just says, well they aren't
Christians.
this is a lie, and i can prove its a lie,
please demonstrate which part of of the Biblical cannon, (on which a Christians
teaching is based), indicates either directly or indirectly, that its permissible for a
Christian to burn people at the stake, if you cannot or will not, then the statement that
you have uttered is a lie, proving that you are a slanderous liar and cannot be trusted
and you will publicly admit that those who perpetrated the crimes were not Christians
but something else, regardless of any other consideration.
Here is your chance to vindicate your assertion where is the teaching? or are you a liar?
Originally posted by googlefudgeyour chance to exonerate yourself, where is the Christian teaching to be found which
Ah it's a formal logical fallacy that Robbie can't stop using.
It's one of several.
The straw man is his other favourite.
Along with
Argument from Ignorance
Argument from incredulity
Argument from popularity
ad hominems
And well, bald faced lying.
But apart from that he's a great guy...
states thats its acceptable to burn people at the stake? produce it, or, be henceforth
known as a slanderous liar (we know that already, but now we are going to prove it), so
where is it?
1 edit
Originally posted by kevcvs57Slander is the best he can do, in effect, he knows nothing about spirituality, nothing
I wondered why that phrase kept popping up and what it referred to.
about scripture even less about history and is a sad and pathetic fellow best left to his
own devices. Plus he covets my material possessions.
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe straw man is his other favourite. [Googlefudge]
your chance to exonerate yourself, where is the Christian teaching to be found which
states thats its acceptable to burn people at the stake? produce it, or, be henceforth
known as a slanderous liar (we know that already, but now we are going to prove it), so
where is it?
And, right on cue, there it is.
The accusation was not that the Bible says burning at the stake is acceptable, it was that people were burned at the stake for criticising things that the Bible did say.
--- Penguin.
Originally posted by Penguinsigh if rhetorical tricks is the best you can do, then its the best you can do.
[b]The straw man is his other favourite. [Googlefudge]
And, right on cue, there it is.
The accusation was not that the Bible says burning at the stake is acceptable, it was that people were burned at the stake for criticising things that the Bible did say.
--- Penguin.[/b]
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by PenguinYes he does seem to have trouble opening his mouth without uttering a logical fallacy.
[b]The straw man is his other favourite. [Googlefudge]
And, right on cue, there it is.
The accusation was not that the Bible says burning at the stake is acceptable, it was that people were burned at the stake for criticising things that the Bible did say.
--- Penguin.[/b]
He actually commits several in his responses but the straw man was certainly in there.
However if he wants the bible talking about who should be burned to death...
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/burning.html
"If a man take a wife and her mother, it is wickedness: they shall be burnt with fire, both he and they; that there be no wickedness among you." -- Leviticus 20:14
"And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire." -- Leviticus 21:9
"Tamar thy daughter in law hath played the harlot; and also, behold, she is with child by whoredom. And Judah said, Bring her forth, and let her be burnt." -- Genesis 38:24
"He that is taken with the accursed thing shall be burnt with fire, he and all that he hath. ... And Joshua ... took Achan ... and his sons, and his daughters ... And all Israel stoned him with stones, and burned them with fire." -- Joshua 7:15, 24-25
It doesn't actually say that they should be tied to a stake to be burned but it's a bit hard to do it otherwise
because people have a tendency not to stand still while you burn them to death.
Originally posted by googlefudgeSo not only did did Robbie produce a Straw Man argument rather than addressing the actual argument, since you have produced the biblical sources he demanded, he has also failed to topple even the straw man!
Yes he does seem to have trouble opening his mouth without uttering a logical fallacy.
He actually commits several in his responses but the straw man was certainly in there.
However if he wants the bible talking about who should be burned to death...
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/burning.html
"If a man take a wife and her m ...[text shortened]... wise
because people have a tendency not to stand still while you burn them to death.
I nearly LOLed out loud.
--- Penguin.
7 edits
Originally posted by googlefudgeHere is the actual statement AGAIN which in your inability to comprehend a simple
Yes he does seem to have trouble opening his mouth without uttering a logical fallacy.
He actually commits several in his responses but the straw man was certainly in there.
However if he wants the bible talking about who should be burned to death...
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/burning.html
"If a man take a wife and her m wise
because people have a tendency not to stand still while you burn them to death.
statement you yourself are producing more straw than the first little pig and he
managed to build an entire house
that its permissible for a Christian to burn people at the stake!
Please note the term, Christian, it may prove helpful to you, but I dont hold out any
real hope.
Your Biblical statements are without exception ALL taken from the Mosaic law which,
because of your ignorance you fail to perceive is no longer applicable to Christians
in practice although in principle it remains to an extent binding, a rather damning
and fundamental flaw in your stupid and ill informed reasoning, in fact its akin to
someone asking, please tell, where does the Christian belief on the second coming
of Christ arise from in the ancient text and you respond by handing them the phone
book.
Now I understand that attacks on my person really are the best you can do, after
all, you dont know anything about scripture, but if you are going to make a mockery
of a christians beliefs (it really is the best you can hope for) then make sure that
you really understand the basis for that belief, not on some text which is no longer
applicable in practice.
Now let me reiterate the point and lets see if you can comprehend it this time, ill put
it in bold as an aid,
Please tell us where it is permissible for a Christian to burn people at the stake!
[b]note: the Mosaic Law was only applicable to the ancient Hebrews, Christians are
different, like Muslims and Hindus, or Sikhs and Buddhists. Christians are not Jews.