20 Apr '11 14:23>
Originally posted by RJHindsno indeed the more the merrier !
Sorry, I will not butt in anymore. You seem to know the
subject well enough that you don't need my help.
Originally posted by Agergyes they are unsubstatiated pure and utter bumf, you called for the references, now
As others have shown, this game goes along the lines of looking at these references, pointing out that they could have been `written true' afterwards, and/or fail to specifically mention Jesus such that they could have been matched to any number of different people - and then you come along and call these objections unsubstantiated bumf.
Show us some exce ...[text shortened]... n we can look at the rest of this tripe and see if they weren't 'written true' afterwards.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo we explain how the fabricated nonsense in your Bible could easily have been rendered true by later authors and then you call our arguments unsubstantiated?
yes they are unsubstatiated pure and utter bumf, you called for the references, now
you have been given them and you proffer what in return, super hyper bumf. Lets
see what has transpired so far,
twithead claims the 'obvious', either the events themselves were engineered or that
persons knew of the prophesies themselves and engineered thei ...[text shortened]... ther Christ was the Messiah or that prophecy is sure proof of
inspiration. Let it be known!
Originally posted by PenguinPenguin you are the most honourable of the forces of Atheism, it is refreshing to hear
Fair enough, the Bethlehem city/tribe argument is a bit weak, I will accept that.
The Joshua / Jesus complaint was also nit-picking but if both names have similar meanings. They are still different though so I don't think it is entirely invalid. The important bit of that prophesy is the virgin birth and we have no reliable evidence that such an event happ ...[text shortened]... eader (albeit spiritual rather than political/military) was born in that town.
--- Penguin.
Originally posted by Agergnope your lack of anything contrary to the claims of scripture is a joke, at least penguin
So we explain how the fabricated nonsense in your Bible could easily have been rendered true by later authors and then you call our arguments unsubstantiated?
This thread is a joke 😵
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou have offered us nothing than a collection of fragmented references that could *easily* be identified with characters other than Jesus, and could *easily* have been written true or engineered true by later authors or people.
nope your lack of anything contrary to the claims of scripture is a joke, at least penguin
is prepared to admit the weakness of his arguments, but then again, hes the only one
from the forces of atheism that has tried to proffer a credible argument, all you have
done is strut around like professor yattle the carved wooden bookend from bagpuss
and claim of the mice and the mice organ that magic doesn't happen.
Originally posted by Agergfragmented references? they are found in the scripture, strange how a number of
You have offered us nothing than a collection of fragmented references that could *easily* be identified with characters other than Jesus, and could *easily* have been written true or engineered true by later authors or people.
I know you set low standards for evidence and proof, and it's ok - you're a JW, it comes with the territory. We atheists however need something a little bit stronger ;]
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBut they don't point to "Jesus"...any idiot can back up any other number of idiots who write about some magical flying horse - it then just takes one chump (having read what others wrote about magic horses) to write about a magic horse called Lucy and suddenly, by your reasoning, all of these idiots were talking about Lucy!!! 😵
fragmented references? they are found in the scripture, strange how a number of
fragmented references, written by different others, over differing epochs could all
point to one personage, the Christ, that is without inspiration, funny that, now how do
you explain it? evidence for your claims of engineering, zilch, centre of the worlds
larges ...[text shortened]... t, what heresy and make it up as you go along atheism will you apply in its
instance, do tell.
Originally posted by Agergthey dont point to Jesus, evidence nil, references nil, reasoning nil, content nil, you see
But they don't point to "Jesus"...any idiot can back up any other number of idiots who write about some magical flying horse - it then just takes one chump to write that this magic horse was called lucy and suddenly all of these idiots were talking about lucy!!! 😵
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell then for the third time now, please present us with
they dont point to Jesus, evidence nil, references nil, reasoning nil, content nil, you see
dear Agers, why should we take your word for it, its not that we are more sceptical
than others, simply that we prefer broadsheets to tabloids, you know something we
can read besides the cartoon pages.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieand I'll say it again because you missed the point first time round:
they dont point to Jesus, evidence nil, references nil, reasoning nil, content nil, you see
dear Agers, why should we take your word for it, its not that we are more sceptical
than others, simply that we prefer broadsheets to tabloids, you know something we
can read besides the cartoon pages.
Originally posted by Agergill say it again seeing that you missed it the first time, you have proffered no
and I'll say it again because you missed the point first time round:
any idiot can back up any other number of idiots who write about some magical flying horse - it then just takes one chump (having read what others wrote about magic horses) to write about a magic horse called Lucy and suddenly, by your reasoning, all of these idiots were talking about Lucy!!! 😵
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBut again you're missing the point - the point being that the structure of my rebuttal about magic horses matches the structure of your Christ prophecies. Your arguments are flawed, I and many others are showing you *how* they are flawed.
ill say it again seeing that you missed it the first time, you have proffered no
evidence, no references, no content, absolutely nil, and here you are making
references about idiots this and idiots that, Agers, will you please post something with
content, you have proffered nothing, its absolutely empty and deviod, and the more
this is drawn ...[text shortened]... on the less and less credible your arguments, or in this
instance, lack of, becomes apparent.