Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-10-2011, 09:35 AM   #61
thomastwo
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Irreligious wrote View Post
Well, that's mighty generous of you to play along. You're very good at answering questions. I can hardly wait for more of your in depth explanations of how an alleged Jesus completely fullfilled Mosaic law and how heaven on Earth now exists for those who can find it.
Cool

Quote:
Irreligious wrote View Post
And which of my many claims would that be? My claim to know the alleged mind of the alleged creator of the universe?
No, the claim that I had no positive interactions with folks here.
thomastwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 09:35 AM   #62
thomastwo
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Irreligious wrote View Post
Let's not spoil T2's enjoyment of this forum. You know the Raving Atheists forum was created specifically for him to come here and preach, unfettered by atheistic cynicism.
When did I preach?
thomastwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 09:43 AM   #63
Irreligious
I Live Here
 
Irreligious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Around the way
Posts: 12,641
Quote:
thomastwo wrote View Post
No, the claim that I had no positive interactions with folks here.
Ah! Well, I am so glad to see that you and Demigod, and you and fiatlux have come to such an amicable meeting of the minds. Long may it last.

So the best way to get along with you is to pretend to not notice that you consistently evade direct questions and copiously indulge in non sequiturs?

Got it.

"So many gods, so many creeds! So many paths that wind and wind, when just the art of being kind is all this sad world needs."
--Ella Wheeler Wilcox
Irreligious is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 09:49 AM   #64
Irreligious
I Live Here
 
Irreligious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Around the way
Posts: 12,641
Quote:
thomastwo wrote View Post
When did I preach?
That's all you do here, T2. And to be fair, that's all any theist who comes here ever does.

However, I can believe that you don't realize that that is what you do. You never actually consider any argument made by the atheist posters here. You're just here to defend you religion. At all costs.

If we had more Muslim interlopers on this forum, they would, no doubt, be doing the same. I also have little doubt that the same could be said of Voodoo practioners and Scientologists if they were invested enough to come here and offer apologias for their belief systems. And nothing that we would have to say would penetrate either.

"So many gods, so many creeds! So many paths that wind and wind, when just the art of being kind is all this sad world needs."
--Ella Wheeler Wilcox
Irreligious is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 09:58 AM   #65
thomastwo
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Irreligious wrote View Post
That's all you do here, T2. And to be fair, that's all any theist who comes here ever does.

However, I can believe that you don't realize that that is what you do. You never actually consider any argument made by the atheist posters here. You're just here to defend you religion. At all costs.

If we had more Muslim interlopers on this forum, they would, no doubt, be doing the same. I also have little doubt that the same could be said of Voodoo practioners and Scientologists if they were invested enough to come here and offer apologias for their belief systems. And nothing that we would have to say would penetrate either.
So, representing my opinion is preaching?
thomastwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 10:04 AM   #66
Irreligious
I Live Here
 
Irreligious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Around the way
Posts: 12,641
Quote:
thomastwo wrote View Post
So, representing my opinion is preaching?
When you ignore the merits of what others are saying in response to your opinions, yes.

"So many gods, so many creeds! So many paths that wind and wind, when just the art of being kind is all this sad world needs."
--Ella Wheeler Wilcox

Last edited by Irreligious; 05-10-2011 at 10:06 AM. Reason: for clarity
Irreligious is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 10:24 AM   #67
thomastwo
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Irreligious wrote View Post
When you ignore the merits of what others are saying in response to your opinions, yes.
You can see examples in this thread of where I have acknowledged the correctness of others arguments, and acknowledged my errors.

Just because I don't think your arguments have any merit doesn't mean you can project that onto others. Especially when the evidence points the other way. That would be, according to your definition, intellectually dishonest.
thomastwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 10:45 AM   #68
babrock
New Member!
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 23
Quote:
thomastwo wrote View Post
I've got another response for you. It doesn't say it's OK to beat your slave to death.

I did forget theists other response-to deny it says what it says.

Exodus 21:20-21*(King James Version)
*20And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
*21Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

How is 21:21 anything but permission to beat ones slave to death? One obviously was allowed back then to beat their slave with a rod, but if this slave manages to hang on for "a day or two, he (the owner) shall not be punished: for he is his own money."

Does "not be punished" not equate to permission in your mind? And just for good measure this verse even gives a rational for it being permisable. It is that it is viewed that the owner is the injured party in this affair being as he has suffered such a property loss and all.
babrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 11:08 AM   #69
thomastwo
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
babrock wrote View Post
I did forget theists other response-to deny it says what it says.

Exodus 21:20-21*(King James Version)
*20And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
*21Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

How is 21:21 anything but permission to beat ones slave to death? One obviously was allowed back then to beat their slave with a rod, but if this slave manages to hang on for "a day or two, he (the owner) shall not be punished: for he is his own money."

Does "not be punished" not equate to permission in your mind? And just for good measure this verse even gives a rational for it being permisable. It is that it is viewed that the owner is the injured party in this affair being as he has suffered such a property loss and all.
The way I read it is that if the owner kills the slave deliberately then he is to be punished. This is in no way permission to kill a slave. If however the slave dies a couple of days later, which I take to be an unintended consequence (i.e. manslaughter), then the punishment is the loss of the value of the slave. In neither instance is there no punishment for the act. And in neither instance is there any sense of permission being given.
thomastwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 11:22 AM   #70
Irreligious
I Live Here
 
Irreligious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Around the way
Posts: 12,641
Quote:
thomastwo wrote View Post
You can see examples in this thread of where I have acknowledged the correctness of others arguments, and acknowledged my errors.

Just because I don't think your arguments have any merit doesn't mean you can project that onto others. Especially when the evidence points the other way. That would be, according to your definition, intellectually dishonest.
OK T2. I'll go searhing for all the mutliple instances of where you have acknowledged the correctness of other atheists' arguments on this forum and all those many, many occasions where you've acknowledged your own errors in reasoning.

That ought to keep me busy, like forever.

"So many gods, so many creeds! So many paths that wind and wind, when just the art of being kind is all this sad world needs."
--Ella Wheeler Wilcox
Irreligious is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 11:29 AM   #71
fiatlux
Member
 
fiatlux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 135
Quote:
thomastwo wrote View Post
Daniel 9:26-27 predicts the end of animal sacrifice. Jesus linked this prophecy to the destruction of the temple in AD70.
Hence, "everything is not yet accomplished" by christ saying "it is finished on the cross." Because, obviously, the temple hadn't been destroyed yet.

Quote:
thomastwo wrote View Post
Matthew 24:6-7 predicts wars and rumors of wars with the rider "but the end is not yet"
Hence, "everything is not yet accomplished"

Quote:
thomastwo wrote View Post
Luke 17:20-21 - Jesus says that the Kingdom of God has already arrived.
Yet later in the same passage he goes into detail about how the "day of the son of man" is still coming.

Hence, everything is not yet accomplished.

Plus, this was before he said "it is finished." Which you cited as proof of everything being accomplished. Gaping continuity error in your little movie.

It's really pretty simple to understand. Yet you have too twist yourself into a pretzel or grasp at straws to arrive at your doctrine.

Face it. Jesus looks down on you for not following the Jewish law. And cries like a little baby girl, every time you eat a bacon bit.

Oh, fuck. I overwound the toybot.
fiatlux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 11:35 AM   #72
Kate
Mistress Monster Mod'rator Spy
 
Kate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The North Coast
Posts: 15,428

"I do not intend to tiptoe through life only to arrive safely at death."
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Kate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 11:45 AM   #73
thomastwo
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Irreligious wrote View Post
OK T2. I'll go searhing for all the mutliple instances of where you have acknowledged the correctness of other atheists' arguments on this forum and all those many, many occasions where you've acknowledged your own errors in reasoning.

That ought to keep me busy, like forever.
Try post #17 and post #33 in this thread.
thomastwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 11:59 AM   #74
thomastwo
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
fiatlux wrote View Post
Hence, "everything is not yet accomplished" by christ saying "it is finished on the cross." Because, obviously, the temple hadn't been destroyed yet.

Hence, "everything is not yet accomplished"

Yet later in the same passage he goes into detail about how the "day of the son of man" is still coming.

Hence, everything is not yet accomplished.

Plus, this was before he said "it is finished." Which you cited as proof of everything being accomplished. Gaping continuity error in your little movie.

It's really pretty simple to understand. Yet you have too twist yourself into a pretzel or grasp at straws to arrive at your doctrine.

Face it. Jesus looks down on you for not following the Jewish law. And cries like a little baby girl, every time you eat a bacon bit.
He says that he has come to fulfil it. He doesn't say that he is coming back to fulfil it. The natural reading of "it is finished" is that he has done what he came to do. One of those things is to fulfil the law.
thomastwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2011, 12:04 PM   #75
Kate
Mistress Monster Mod'rator Spy
 
Kate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The North Coast
Posts: 15,428

"I do not intend to tiptoe through life only to arrive safely at death."
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Kate is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:44 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin - Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2000 - , Raving Atheists [dot] com frequency-supranational frequency-supranational