Total Posts:49|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Infestation

bulproof
Posts: 25,250
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
whiteflame
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 10:06:59 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Broad attacks on the community, such as you've made here, are similarly unacceptable, bulproof. Characterizing every theist who has a problem with you as children is destructive to conversation here. If you have concerns about how other members are treating you, do not try to ramp up the conversation in this way. If someone insults you, let me know rather than returning the favor.
bulproof
Posts: 25,250
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 11:06:46 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 10:06:59 AM, whiteflame wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Broad attacks on the community, such as you've made here, are similarly unacceptable, bulproof. Characterizing every theist who has a problem with you as children is destructive to conversation here. If you have concerns about how other members are treating you, do not try to ramp up the conversation in this way. If someone insults you, let me know rather than returning the favor.

Here we go again.
Support your claims or run away.
Show me every theist? No then I guess you are a liar.
Show where it has anything to do with me? No I guess you are lying than.
You need to examine the ages of the children I reference or your argument is fallacious.
I don't need a little brother for protection. I understand that all of the theist do, but they have you for that and you are now doing the absolute best you can to protect them from the truth.
You were sadly mistaken if you thought you could intimidate me.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
whiteflame
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 11:23:28 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 11:06:46 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 12/28/2014 10:06:59 AM, whiteflame wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Broad attacks on the community, such as you've made here, are similarly unacceptable, bulproof. Characterizing every theist who has a problem with you as children is destructive to conversation here. If you have concerns about how other members are treating you, do not try to ramp up the conversation in this way. If someone insults you, let me know rather than returning the favor.

Here we go again.
Support your claims or run away.
Show me every theist? No then I guess you are a liar.
Show where it has anything to do with me? No I guess you are lying than.
You need to examine the ages of the children I reference or your argument is fallacious.
I don't need a little brother for protection. I understand that all of the theist do, but they have you for that and you are now doing the absolute best you can to protect them from the truth.
You were sadly mistaken if you thought you could intimidate me.

I'm not acting as a little brother. I'm not protecting anyone, just merely ensuring a better quality of conversation on this forum. I'm stating something you've done wrong, and trying to ensure that it doesn't happen again. It is not my goal to intimidate you, merely to reason with you. Apparently, your response is to call me a liar and call my conduct into question.

Suit yourself, but attacking me isn't going to do you any favors.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 11:37:10 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.tuT
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"

What distortion of the Bible's origin would lead you to believe that you know anything Jesus might have said? This falls under not making assertions you can't support. Or does that apply only to one side of the debate?
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 11:42:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 11:37:10 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.tuT
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"

What distortion of the Bible's origin would lead you to believe that you know anything Jesus might have said? This falls under not making assertions you can't support. Or does that apply only to one side of the debate?

If I said Pinnochio said something in a book would you seriously say "well Pinnochio is fake"?

Look at the quote and analyze it's meaning. Whether or not Jesus actually stated that at any point is beyond the scope of this conversation.
bulproof
Posts: 25,250
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 11:45:44 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 11:23:28 AM, whiteflame wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:06:46 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 12/28/2014 10:06:59 AM, whiteflame wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Broad attacks on the community, such as you've made here, are similarly unacceptable, bulproof. Characterizing every theist who has a problem with you as children is destructive to conversation here. If you have concerns about how other members are treating you, do not try to ramp up the conversation in this way. If someone insults you, let me know rather than returning the favor.

Here we go again.
Support your claims or run away.
Show me every theist? No then I guess you are a liar.
Show where it has anything to do with me? No I guess you are lying than.
You need to examine the ages of the children I reference or your argument is fallacious.
I don't need a little brother for protection. I understand that all of the theist do, but they have you for that and you are now doing the absolute best you can to protect them from the truth.
You were sadly mistaken if you thought you could intimidate me.

I'm not acting as a little brother. I'm not protecting anyone, just merely ensuring a better quality of conversation on this forum. I'm stating something you've done wrong, and trying to ensure that it doesn't happen again. It is not my goal to intimidate you, merely to reason with you. Apparently, your response is to call me a liar and call my conduct into question.

Suit yourself, but attacking me isn't going to do you any favors.
ooh scary, just like the boogieman god
Ummmm yeah when your conduct is questionable nay deceitful then I don't call it into question I challenge you to support it and as we see you can't so you just threaten.
Well here we have yet another LIE.
In another thread you have told me that you are not interested in discussion just in threats.
I mean really.
You were chosen as an attack dog?
Were you the best they had.
Pathetic.
Do you see how scared I am?
I've seen shitzu's more frightening.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 11:51:14 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 11:45:44 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:23:28 AM, whiteflame wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:06:46 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 12/28/2014 10:06:59 AM, whiteflame wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Broad attacks on the community, such as you've made here, are similarly unacceptable, bulproof. Characterizing every theist who has a problem with you as children is destructive to conversation here. If you have concerns about how other members are treating you, do not try to ramp up the conversation in this way. If someone insults you, let me know rather than returning the favor.

Here we go again.
Support your claims or run away.
Show me every theist? No then I guess you are a liar.
Show where it has anything to do with me? No I guess you are lying than.
You need to examine the ages of the children I reference or your argument is fallacious.
I don't need a little brother for protection. I understand that all of the theist do, but they have you for that and you are now doing the absolute best you can to protect them from the truth.
You were sadly mistaken if you thought you could intimidate me.

I'm not acting as a little brother. I'm not protecting anyone, just merely ensuring a better quality of conversation on this forum. I'm stating something you've done wrong, and trying to ensure that it doesn't happen again. It is not my goal to intimidate you, merely to reason with you. Apparently, your response is to call me a liar and call my conduct into question.

Suit yourself, but attacking me isn't going to do you any favors.
ooh scary, just like the boogieman god
Ummmm yeah when your conduct is questionable nay deceitful then I don't call it into question I challenge you to support it and as we see you can't so you just threaten.
Well here we have yet another LIE.
In another thread you have told me that you are not interested in discussion just in threats.
I mean really.
You were chosen as an attack dog?
Were you the best they had.
Pathetic.
Do you see how scared I am?
I've seen shitzu's more frightening.

He's the least controversial they had and though I agree with the choice AirMax makes a huge mistake when he equates non controversial with more effective or competent somehow.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 12:48:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 11:42:50 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:37:10 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.tuT
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"

What distortion of the Bible's origin would lead you to believe that you know anything Jesus might have said? This falls under not making assertions you can't support. Or does that apply only to one side of the debate?

If I said Pinnochio said something in a book would you seriously say "well Pinnochio is fake"?

Look at the quote and analyze it's meaning. Whether or not Jesus actually stated that at any point is beyond the scope of this conversation.

If the quotation stands on it's own, why present a proclaimed origin with no credible support? It only undermines the value of the statement. And you might consider that this is a religious debate forum.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 12:50:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 12:48:02 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:42:50 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:37:10 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.tuT
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"

What distortion of the Bible's origin would lead you to believe that you know anything Jesus might have said? This falls under not making assertions you can't support. Or does that apply only to one side of the debate?

If I said Pinnochio said something in a book would you seriously say "well Pinnochio is fake"?

Look at the quote and analyze it's meaning. Whether or not Jesus actually stated that at any point is beyond the scope of this conversation.

If the quotation stands on it's own, why present a proclaimed origin with no credible support? It only undermines the value of the statement. And you might consider that this is a religious debate forum.

You mention the quotes origins so it isn't plagiarism. You're taking this off topic a bit.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 1:03:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 12:50:59 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 12:48:02 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:42:50 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:37:10 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.tuT
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"

What distortion of the Bible's origin would lead you to believe that you know anything Jesus might have said? This falls under not making assertions you can't support. Or does that apply only to one side of the debate?

If I said Pinnochio said something in a book would you seriously say "well Pinnochio is fake"?

Look at the quote and analyze it's meaning. Whether or not Jesus actually stated that at any point is beyond the scope of this conversation.

If the quotation stands on it's own, why present a proclaimed origin with no credible support? It only undermines the value of the statement. And you might consider that this is a religious debate forum.

You mention the quotes origins so it isn't plagiarism. You're taking this off topic a bit.

No one suggested that it was plagiarism. That makes your statement a strawman - a fallacious deception.

Is this, or is this not the religion debate forum? I think you're the one off topic.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 1:06:14 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 1:03:20 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 12:50:59 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 12:48:02 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:42:50 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:37:10 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.tuT
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"

What distortion of the Bible's origin would lead you to believe that you know anything Jesus might have said? This falls under not making assertions you can't support. Or does that apply only to one side of the debate?

If I said Pinnochio said something in a book would you seriously say "well Pinnochio is fake"?

Look at the quote and analyze it's meaning. Whether or not Jesus actually stated that at any point is beyond the scope of this conversation.

If the quotation stands on it's own, why present a proclaimed origin with no credible support? It only undermines the value of the statement. And you might consider that this is a religious debate forum.

You mention the quotes origins so it isn't plagiarism. You're taking this off topic a bit.

No one suggested that it was plagiarism. That makes your statement a strawman - a fallacious deception.

Is this, or is this not the religion debate forum? I think you're the one off topic.

I asked Bulprof to treat others as he would want to be treated which is just the decent thing to do.

I also credited the quote. Using the quote without giving it credit is plagiarism in my book. I'm not sure where you're going with this.

I never accused anyone of saying the quote was plagiarism. Where did you get that ideal? It's beyond comprehension as to where you would get that from.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 1:13:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 1:06:14 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 1:03:20 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 12:50:59 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 12:48:02 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:42:50 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:37:10 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.tuT
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"

What distortion of the Bible's origin would lead you to believe that you know anything Jesus might have said? This falls under not making assertions you can't support. Or does that apply only to one side of the debate?

If I said Pinnochio said something in a book would you seriously say "well Pinnochio is fake"?

Look at the quote and analyze it's meaning. Whether or not Jesus actually stated that at any point is beyond the scope of this conversation.

If the quotation stands on it's own, why present a proclaimed origin with no credible support? It only undermines the value of the statement. And you might consider that this is a religious debate forum.

You mention the quotes origins so it isn't plagiarism. You're taking this off topic a bit.

No one suggested that it was plagiarism. That makes your statement a strawman - a fallacious deception.

Is this, or is this not the religion debate forum? I think you're the one off topic.

I asked Bulprof to treat others as he would want to be treated which is just the decent thing to do.
You're assuming that they share his relative intellect, his adherence to logic and his wit. Most do not. But I'm well aware of how this started and I'm aware that you've been straining to find ways to avoid admitting that I'm correct.

I also credited the quote. Using the quote without giving it credit is plagiarism in my book. I'm not sure where you're going with this.
If you don't know the actual source of a quotation, it's not plagiarism to not present a fraudulent, or unsupportable source. It's actually the appropriate thing to do. Proclaiming an unsupportable source is fraudulent.

I never accused anyone of saying the quote was plagiarism. Where did you get that ideal? It's beyond comprehension as to where you would get that from.
I'm going to ask that you back up and re-read the last few posts. YOU were the only one to mention plagiarism. I only mentioned it after you acted as though I'd accused you of plagiarism because I didn't.

How badly would it destroy your self-esteem to simply acknowledge that I was correct?
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 1:19:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 1:13:29 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 1:06:14 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 1:03:20 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 12:50:59 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 12:48:02 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:42:50 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:37:10 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.tuT
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"

What distortion of the Bible's origin would lead you to believe that you know anything Jesus might have said? This falls under not making assertions you can't support. Or does that apply only to one side of the debate?

If I said Pinnochio said something in a book would you seriously say "well Pinnochio is fake"?

Look at the quote and analyze it's meaning. Whether or not Jesus actually stated that at any point is beyond the scope of this conversation.

If the quotation stands on it's own, why present a proclaimed origin with no credible support? It only undermines the value of the statement. And you might consider that this is a religious debate forum.

You mention the quotes origins so it isn't plagiarism. You're taking this off topic a bit.

No one suggested that it was plagiarism. That makes your statement a strawman - a fallacious deception.

Is this, or is this not the religion debate forum? I think you're the one off topic.

I asked Bulprof to treat others as he would want to be treated which is just the decent thing to do.
You're assuming that they share his relative intellect, his adherence to logic and his wit. Most do not. But I'm well aware of how this started and I'm aware that you've been straining to find ways to avoid admitting that I'm correct.

Admitting you're correct about what? I told him to treat others as he wants to be treated. That is the extent to what I participated in this thread before you can along, but the quote about not admitting you're right about something is confusing me. You seem to have a mind that is very jumpy and can't focus.

I also credited the quote. Using the quote without giving it credit is plagiarism in my book. I'm not sure where you're going with this.
If you don't know the actual source of a quotation, it's not plagiarism to not present a fraudulent, or unsupportable source. It's actually the appropriate thing to do. Proclaiming an unsupportable source is fraudulent.

This is the earliest known source that I'm aware of. I credited it in an appropriate manner. I refer you to the latest MLA guide.

I never accused anyone of saying the quote was plagiarism. Where did you get that ideal? It's beyond comprehension as to where you would get that from.
I'm going to ask that you back up and re-read the last few posts. YOU were the only one to mention plagiarism. I only mentioned it after you acted as though I'd accused you of plagiarism because I didn't.

I never acted as you accused me of it. I stated why I credited the quote was to avoid plagiarism and you some how interpreted that to mean I was accusing you of accusing me of plagiarism. Your interpretation of what I said is nonsensical.

How badly would it destroy your self-esteem to simply acknowledge that I was correct?

Correct about what? I'm not seeing what you're getting at. You seem to be off on some wierd tangents and not focused on the conversation taking place. Are you perhaps confusing me with another conversation you have happening?
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 1:53:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 1:19:55 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 1:13:29 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 1:06:14 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 1:03:20 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 12:50:59 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 12:48:02 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:42:50 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:37:10 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.tuT
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"

What distortion of the Bible's origin would lead you to believe that you know anything Jesus might have said? This falls under not making assertions you can't support. Or does that apply only to one side of the debate?

If I said Pinnochio said something in a book would you seriously say "well Pinnochio is fake"?

Look at the quote and analyze it's meaning. Whether or not Jesus actually stated that at any point is beyond the scope of this conversation.

If the quotation stands on it's own, why present a proclaimed origin with no credible support? It only undermines the value of the statement. And you might consider that this is a religious debate forum.

You mention the quotes origins so it isn't plagiarism. You're taking this off topic a bit.

No one suggested that it was plagiarism. That makes your statement a strawman - a fallacious deception.

Is this, or is this not the religion debate forum? I think you're the one off topic.

I asked Bulprof to treat others as he would want to be treated which is just the decent thing to do.
You're assuming that they share his relative intellect, his adherence to logic and his wit. Most do not. But I'm well aware of how this started and I'm aware that you've been straining to find ways to avoid admitting that I'm correct.

Admitting you're correct about what?
Have you forgotten already? You told bulproof that you were quoting Jesus. I corrected you.

I told him to treat others as he wants to be treated.
No, you actually told him that Jesus said to treat others as you would like to be treated.

That is the extent to what I participated in this thread before you can along, but the quote about not admitting you're right about something is confusing me. You seem to have a mind that is very jumpy and can't focus.
I'm focused quite sharply. I'm making EXACTLY the same point I was making on my first post to you - Jesus is not a credible source. And you've spent an inordinate amount of time and effort avoiding the ethical thing to do - admit that I was right. If you think you'd choke trying to admit that just tell me "point taken". But no, you don't seem capable of honesty.

I also credited the quote. Using the quote without giving it credit is plagiarism in my book. I'm not sure where you're going with this.
If you don't know the actual source of a quotation, it's not plagiarism to not present a fraudulent, or unsupportable source. It's actually the appropriate thing to do. Proclaiming an unsupportable source is fraudulent.

This is the earliest known source that I'm aware of. I credited it in an appropriate manner. I refer you to the latest MLA guide.
And I refer you to the known origins of the Bible, which provide no link to Jesus whatsoever.

I never accused anyone of saying the quote was plagiarism. Where did you get that ideal? It's beyond comprehension as to where you would get that from.
I'm going to ask that you back up and re-read the last few posts. YOU were the only one to mention plagiarism. I only mentioned it after you acted as though I'd accused you of plagiarism because I didn't.

I never acted as you accused me of it. I stated why I credited the quote was to avoid plagiarism and you some how interpreted that to mean I was accusing you of accusing me of plagiarism. Your interpretation of what I said is nonsensical.
You were providing a defense against an allegation of plagiarism in post #11 when you stated; "You mention the quotes origins so it isn't plagiarism." Why are you defending yourself against an allegation of plagiarism when no one has presented any such allegation? The obvious reason that you would to that is to attempt to provide an excuse as to why you would provide a source devoid of credibility, while avoiding having to admit that I was correct. But you end up committing fraud in the process of defending yourself against an allegation no one offered. If I present something properly credited to Samuel Clemons and credit it instead to Zeus, I haven't committed plagiarism, I've committed fraud. That's what you did.

Then you tried to divert by claiming, "You're taking this off topic a bit", despite the fact that this is the religion debate forum, and I was disputing your religious reference as the supposed source of the quotation.

And now, despite your attempts to claim your fraudulent credit was an attempt to avoid committing plagiarism (which is untrue), and despite your claims that I'm off topic in discussing the religious aspects of your unsupportable credit while in the religion forum, you're now accusing me of losing focus, when you're the only one zig-zagging back and forth like a lost soldier trying to avoid enemy machine gun fire.

How badly would it destroy your self-esteem to simply acknowledge that I was correct?

Correct about what?
How many times must you be reminded? Correct in stating that you can't credibly provide Jesus as the source for the quotation.

I'm not seeing what you're getting at.
And despite the fact that you've already lost sight of the issue twice, you still find it appropriate to suggest that I'm losing focus.

You seem to be off on some wierd tangents and not focused on the conversation taking place. Are you perhaps confusing me with another conversation you have happening?
I assure you, the only one demonstrating confusion here is you.

- You claimed the quotation was properly credited to Jesus.
- I stated that to be untrue, offering that the origin of the Bible demonstrates no credible link to Jesus as the source.
- I'm right. Just admit that and then let it go.

Or you can continue to demonstrate the problems people like you create in this forum by refusing even to give an inch despite having no credible argument or defense - which you think you can fix by kicking out others - while continuing to demonstrate that you are the problem.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,789
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 2:22:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 12:48:02 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:42:50 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:37:10 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.tuT
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"

What distortion of the Bible's origin would lead you to believe that you know anything Jesus might have said? This falls under not making assertions you can't support. Or does that apply only to one side of the debate?

If I said Pinnochio said something in a book would you seriously say "well Pinnochio is fake"?

Look at the quote and analyze it's meaning. Whether or not Jesus actually stated that at any point is beyond the scope of this conversation.

If the quotation stands on it's own, why present a proclaimed origin with no credible support? It only undermines the value of the statement. And you might consider that this is a religious debate forum.

As he cited the "Golden Rule," I thought that he had it wrong too.

So I Googled it.

Luke 6:31

"And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise. "


Here's a link to the full chapter: http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org...
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 2:30:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 1:19:55 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 1:13:29 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 1:06:14 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 1:03:20 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 12:50:59 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 12:48:02 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:42:50 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:37:10 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.tuT
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"

What distortion of the Bible's origin would lead you to believe that you know anything Jesus might have said? This falls under not making assertions you can't support. Or does that apply only to one side of the debate?

If I said Pinnochio said something in a book would you seriously say "well Pinnochio is fake"?

Look at the quote and analyze it's meaning. Whether or not Jesus actually stated that at any point is beyond the scope of this conversation.

If the quotation stands on it's own, why present a proclaimed origin with no credible support? It only undermines the value of the statement. And you might consider that this is a religious debate forum.

You mention the quotes origins so it isn't plagiarism. You're taking this off topic a bit.

No one suggested that it was plagiarism. That makes your statement a strawman - a fallacious deception.

Is this, or is this not the religion debate forum? I think you're the one off topic.

I asked Bulprof to treat others as he would want to be treated which is just the decent thing to do.
You're assuming that they share his relative intellect, his adherence to logic and his wit. Most do not. But I'm well aware of how this started and I'm aware that you've been straining to find ways to avoid admitting that I'm correct.

Admitting you're correct about what? I told him to treat others as he wants to be treated. That is the extent to what I participated in this thread before you can along, but the quote about not admitting you're right about something is confusing me. You seem to have a mind that is very jumpy and can't focus.

I also credited the quote. Using the quote without giving it credit is plagiarism in my book. I'm not sure where you're going with this.
If you don't know the actual source of a quotation, it's not plagiarism to not present a fraudulent, or unsupportable source. It's actually the appropriate thing to do. Proclaiming an unsupportable source is fraudulent.

This is the earliest known source that I'm aware of. I credited it in an appropriate manner. I refer you to the latest MLA guide.

I never accused anyone of saying the quote was plagiarism. Where did you get that ideal? It's beyond comprehension as to where you would get that from.
I'm going to ask that you back up and re-read the last few posts. YOU were the only one to mention plagiarism. I only mentioned it after you acted as though I'd accused you of plagiarism because I didn't.

I never acted as you accused me of it. I stated why I credited the quote was to avoid plagiarism and you some how interpreted that to mean I was accusing you of accusing me of plagiarism. Your interpretation of what I said is nonsensical.

How badly would it destroy your self-esteem to simply acknowledge that I was correct?

Correct about what? I'm not seeing what you're getting at. You seem to be off on some wierd tangents and not focused on the conversation taking place. Are you perhaps confusing me with another conversation you have happening?

Just ignore Beastt. He has nothing valuable to contribute and thus he is not worth anyone's time.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 2:59:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 2:22:02 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/28/2014 12:48:02 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:42:50 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:37:10 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.tuT
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"

What distortion of the Bible's origin would lead you to believe that you know anything Jesus might have said? This falls under not making assertions you can't support. Or does that apply only to one side of the debate?

If I said Pinnochio said something in a book would you seriously say "well Pinnochio is fake"?

Look at the quote and analyze it's meaning. Whether or not Jesus actually stated that at any point is beyond the scope of this conversation.

If the quotation stands on it's own, why present a proclaimed origin with no credible support? It only undermines the value of the statement. And you might consider that this is a religious debate forum.

As he cited the "Golden Rule," I thought that he had it wrong too.

So I Googled it.

Luke 6:31

"And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise. "


Here's a link to the full chapter: http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org...
Wow! Okay... read Luke 1:1-4.

Did Luke write "The Gospel of Luke"? Of course not. It was an anonymous writing. I know the claim of the church is that the quote is attributed to Jesus. But there isn't any credible link between any writing in the Bible, and Jesus.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,789
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 3:22:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 2:59:45 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 2:22:02 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/28/2014 12:48:02 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:42:50 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:37:10 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.tuT
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"

What distortion of the Bible's origin would lead you to believe that you know anything Jesus might have said? This falls under not making assertions you can't support. Or does that apply only to one side of the debate?

If I said Pinnochio said something in a book would you seriously say "well Pinnochio is fake"?

Look at the quote and analyze it's meaning. Whether or not Jesus actually stated that at any point is beyond the scope of this conversation.

If the quotation stands on it's own, why present a proclaimed origin with no credible support? It only undermines the value of the statement. And you might consider that this is a religious debate forum.

As he cited the "Golden Rule," I thought that he had it wrong too.

So I Googled it.

Luke 6:31

"And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise. "


Here's a link to the full chapter: http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org...

Wow! Okay... read Luke 1:1-4.

Okay. Done.

Did Luke write "The Gospel of Luke"? Of course not. It was an anonymous writing.

Okay, and. . .

I know the claim of the church is that the quote is attributed to Jesus. But there isn't any credible link between any writing in the Bible, and Jesus.

Credibility is subjective. You may be right in saying that 2nd or 3rd person testimony is tenuous at best (esp. in a courtroom) but that doesn't mean it is always completely unreliable or not the truth - either.

As you have shown yourself, the scriptures quoted do in fact "attribute" that quote to Christ. That attribution can be and inevitably will be cited. Your claims that it's not credible not withstanding.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 7:02:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 3:22:15 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/28/2014 2:59:45 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 2:22:02 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/28/2014 12:48:02 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:42:50 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:37:10 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.tuT
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"

What distortion of the Bible's origin would lead you to believe that you know anything Jesus might have said? This falls under not making assertions you can't support. Or does that apply only to one side of the debate?

If I said Pinnochio said something in a book would you seriously say "well Pinnochio is fake"?

Look at the quote and analyze it's meaning. Whether or not Jesus actually stated that at any point is beyond the scope of this conversation.

If the quotation stands on it's own, why present a proclaimed origin with no credible support? It only undermines the value of the statement. And you might consider that this is a religious debate forum.

As he cited the "Golden Rule," I thought that he had it wrong too.

So I Googled it.

Luke 6:31

"And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise. "


Here's a link to the full chapter: http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org...

Wow! Okay... read Luke 1:1-4.

Okay. Done.

Did Luke write "The Gospel of Luke"? Of course not. It was an anonymous writing.

Okay, and. . .

I know the claim of the church is that the quote is attributed to Jesus. But there isn't any credible link between any writing in the Bible, and Jesus.

Credibility is subjective. You may be right in saying that 2nd or 3rd person testimony is tenuous at best (esp. in a courtroom) but that doesn't mean it is always completely unreliable or not the truth - either.
"The Gospel of Luke" is a compilation of information gathered from other documents and none of those documents were written by eyewitnesses. It contains about 300 verses which are parallels to the same verses in "The Gospel of Mark" (which wasn't written by Mark or any other former Jew), verses it shares with "The Gospel of Matthew" believed to have come from a document now referred to as "Q" (for Quell, meaning source), and Luke/Acts contains specific information taken from two writings of Flavius Josephus ("Antiquity of the Jews" and "Jewish War"). Those writings were completed in 93CE, some 60-years after the approximate time of the crucifixion in the Bible. There exists not a single contemporaneous writing which even mentions Jesus. No one seems to have written anything about him until decades after the time the Bible claims he existed. "The Gospel of Mark" contains information regarding an event which occurred around 70CE, was written in Greek (not Hebrew), and offers credit to Moses for statements religious Jews always carefully credit to God. "The Gospel of Luke" even contains a "fingerprint" showing that the author was utilizing a copy of "Mark" which was damaged or missing 74.5 verses between Mark 6:46 and Mark 8:27, and the resulting merged verse in "Luke" (Luke 9:18), makes no sense because it first claims that Jesus is alone, and in the same breath he is with his disciples. None of the gospels were written by eyewitnesses and all of them appear to have utilized other writings which are of no greater credibility. There is no link between the phrase Wylted posted and Jesus of the Bible.

As you have shown yourself, the scriptures quoted do in fact "attribute" that quote to Christ.
And as I have also shown, this is due to the fact that church fathers simply accepted assumed authorships and they were wrong on all four counts. Meanwhile, they discounted about 30 other gospels which had commonly been read by Christians prior to the 4th century, which presented multiple different portrayals of Jesus (gnostic Jesus, ascetic Jesus, pedophile Jesus, a warrior Jesus, etc.), usually without credible ideas of authorships.

That attribution can be and inevitably will be cited. Your claims that it's not credible not withstanding.
I stated that it's not credible because it isn't. And I've provided the background to support that statement. (Something theists rarely seem to do.)
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,789
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2014 8:21:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 7:02:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 3:22:15 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/28/2014 2:59:45 PM, Beastt wrote:

Did Luke write "The Gospel of Luke"? Of course not. It was an anonymous writing.

Okay, and. . .

I know the claim of the church is that the quote is attributed to Jesus. But there isn't any credible link between any writing in the Bible, and Jesus.

Credibility is subjective. You may be right in saying that 2nd or 3rd person testimony is tenuous at best (esp. in a courtroom) but that doesn't mean it is always completely unreliable or not the truth - either.

"The Gospel of Luke" is a compilation of information gathered from other documents and none of those documents were written by eyewitnesses. It contains about 300 verses which are parallels to the same verses in "The Gospel of Mark" (which wasn't written by Mark or any other former Jew), verses it shares with "The Gospel of Matthew" believed to have come from a document now referred to as "Q" (for Quell, meaning source), and Luke/Acts contains specific information taken from two writings of Flavius Josephus ("Antiquity of the Jews" and "Jewish War"). Those writings were completed in 93CE, some 60-years after the approximate time of the crucifixion in the Bible. There exists not a single contemporaneous writing which even mentions Jesus. No one seems to have written anything about him until decades after the time the Bible claims he existed. "The Gospel of Mark" contains information regarding an event which occurred around 70CE, was written in Greek (not Hebrew), and offers credit to Moses for statements religious Jews always carefully credit to God. "The Gospel of Luke" even contains a "fingerprint" showing that the author was utilizing a copy of "Mark" which was damaged or missing 74.5 verses between Mark 6:46 and Mark 8:27, and the resulting merged verse in "Luke" (Luke 9:18), makes no sense because it first claims that Jesus is alone, and in the same breath he is with his disciples. None of the gospels were written by eyewitnesses and all of them appear to have utilized other writings which are of no greater credibility. There is no link between the phrase Wylted posted and Jesus of the Bible.

Okay. . .

I'll take 'otherwise useless information' for $300, Alex.

As you have shown yourself, the scriptures quoted do in fact "attribute" that quote to Christ.

And as I have also shown, this is due to the fact that church fathers simply accepted assumed authorships and they were wrong on all four counts.

If we hold that their "belief" is only a human construct of their own doing. . . How can their construct be "wrong?" Also, I dount very much that you can prove the negative. You can't PROVE that Christ never ever expressed that sentiment.

As I said. It is ATTRIBUTED to him and it is that attribution that can be cited, quoted, etc.

Meanwhile, they discounted about 30 other gospels which had commonly been read by Christians prior to the 4th century, which presented multiple different portrayals of Jesus (gnostic Jesus, ascetic Jesus, pedophile Jesus, a warrior Jesus, etc.), usually without credible ideas of authorships.

While interesting, it doesn't change the discussion here.

That attribution can be and inevitably will be cited. Your claims that it's not credible not withstanding.

I stated that it's not credible because it isn't. And I've provided the background to support that statement. (Something theists rarely seem to do.)

If we were talking about anything other than religion and faith - you might have a point. As it is a matter of religion, belief and faith it's not that literal or simple.

Furthermore, you seem to think there is a magic bullet that says "if I can disprove or discredit religious claims - believers will automatically abandon their beliefs." I don't see that happening - any more so - than someone proving that God is absolute and REAL would automatically make everyone a believer.

The words of the Golden Rule is religiously attributed to "Christ." Whether he actually said them or even whether Christ actually ever REALLY existed. . . or not; It doesn't take the attribution away.
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
bulproof
Posts: 25,250
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2014 5:48:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
As popeye said
" I oughta busk you right in the mush."
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Gentorev
Posts: 2,925
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2014 10:55:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Here's one little bible believing kid that no bunch of ignorant atheists are ever going to frighten off with their foul mounted insults and their childish attempts to denigrate my God.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2014 11:05:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/29/2014 10:55:44 PM, Gentorev wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Here's one little bible believing kid that no bunch of ignorant atheists are ever going to frighten off with their foul mounted insults and their childish attempts to denigrate my God.

Or even with their well-reasoned debates, the validity of their evidence, the complete and utter failure of biblical origins to support anything but the position that the Bible is the beliefs of men, written by men, and promoted by men, the fact that the evidence for Jesus is insufficient to support any claim that he existed, or the fact that in a comparison between atheists and theists, atheists continue to show a distinct intellectual advantage.

So adherence to a totally failed proposition is your prerogative, but do try to understand the associations which go with that.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2014 2:25:34 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 2:22:02 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/28/2014 12:48:02 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:42:50 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:37:10 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.tuT
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"

What distortion of the Bible's origin would lead you to believe that you know anything Jesus might have said? This falls under not making assertions you can't support. Or does that apply only to one side of the debate?

If I said Pinnochio said something in a book would you seriously say "well Pinnochio is fake"?

Look at the quote and analyze it's meaning. Whether or not Jesus actually stated that at any point is beyond the scope of this conversation.

If the quotation stands on it's own, why present a proclaimed origin with no credible support? It only undermines the value of the statement. And you might consider that this is a religious debate forum.

As he cited the "Golden Rule," I thought that he had it wrong too.

So I Googled it.

Luke 6:31

"And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise. "


Here's a link to the full chapter: http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org...

It depends on the translation. I think the King James version does a horrible job at not only the actual translation but with wording stuff in an easy to understand way. Not to mention, I was just paraphrasing, tough it wouldn't surprise me if it was word for word what the new international version says.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2014 2:30:09 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/28/2014 7:02:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 3:22:15 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/28/2014 2:59:45 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 2:22:02 PM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/28/2014 12:48:02 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:42:50 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:37:10 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/28/2014 11:26:28 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.tuT
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Can you just explain why you have a problem with acting civil and not insulting people?

Just like Jesus said:

"Do onto others as you would have done onto you"

What distortion of the Bible's origin would lead you to believe that you know anything Jesus might have said? This falls under not making assertions you can't support. Or does that apply only to one side of the debate?

If I said Pinnochio said something in a book would you seriously say "well Pinnochio is fake"?

Look at the quote and analyze it's meaning. Whether or not Jesus actually stated that at any point is beyond the scope of this conversation.

If the quotation stands on it's own, why present a proclaimed origin with no credible support? It only undermines the value of the statement. And you might consider that this is a religious debate forum.

As he cited the "Golden Rule," I thought that he had it wrong too.

So I Googled it.

Luke 6:31

"And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise. "


Here's a link to the full chapter: http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org...

Wow! Okay... read Luke 1:1-4.

Okay. Done.

Did Luke write "The Gospel of Luke"? Of course not. It was an anonymous writing.

Okay, and. . .

I know the claim of the church is that the quote is attributed to Jesus. But there isn't any credible link between any writing in the Bible, and Jesus.

Credibility is subjective. You may be right in saying that 2nd or 3rd person testimony is tenuous at best (esp. in a courtroom) but that doesn't mean it is always completely unreliable or not the truth - either.
"The Gospel of Luke" is a compilation of information gathered from other documents and none of those documents were written by eyewitnesses. It contains about 300 verses which are parallels to the same verses in "The Gospel of Mark" (which wasn't written by Mark or any other former Jew), verses it shares with "The Gospel of Matthew" believed to have come from a document now referred to as "Q" (for Quell, meaning source), and Luke/Acts contains specific information taken from two writings of Flavius Josephus ("Antiquity of the Jews" and "Jewish War"). Those writings were completed in 93CE, some 60-years after the approximate time of the crucifixion in the Bible. There exists not a single contemporaneous writing which even mentions Jesus. No one seems to have written anything about him until decades after the time the Bible claims he existed. "The Gospel of Mark" contains information regarding an event which occurred around 70CE, was written in Greek (not Hebrew), and offers credit to Moses for statements religious Jews always carefully credit to God. "The Gospel of Luke" even contains a "fingerprint" showing that the author was utilizing a copy of "Mark" which was damaged or missing 74.5 verses between Mark 6:46 and Mark 8:27, and the resulting merged verse in "Luke" (Luke 9:18), makes no sense because it first claims that Jesus is alone, and in the same breath he is with his disciples. None of the gospels were written by eyewitnesses and all of them appear to have utilized other writings which are of no greater credibility. There is no link between the phrase Wylted posted and Jesus of the Bible.

As you have shown yourself, the scriptures quoted do in fact "attribute" that quote to Christ.
And as I have also shown, this is due to the fact that church fathers simply accepted assumed authorships and they were wrong on all four counts. Meanwhile, they discounted about 30 other gospels which had commonly been read by Christians prior to the 4th century, which presented multiple different portrayals of Jesus (gnostic Jesus, ascetic Jesus, pedophile Jesus, a warrior Jesus, etc.), usually without credible ideas of authorships.

That attribution can be and inevitably will be cited. Your claims that it's not credible not withstanding.
I stated that it's not credible because it isn't. And I've provided the background to support that statement. (Something theists rarely seem to do.)

Just as you would credit Darth Vader with saying "Luke I'm your Father" without trying to find the script writers name or even care what it is, the same is done with the bible.

It's incredibly dumb to quote the golden rule and then write a thesis explaining the origin of the quote.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2014 2:35:22 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/29/2014 11:05:32 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 12/29/2014 10:55:44 PM, Gentorev wrote:
At 12/28/2014 6:09:25 AM, bulproof wrote:
There appears to be a swarm of children intent on infesting the religion forum but are frightened off by the big bad atheist adults who already occupy it.
They think that the beliefs they have been indoctrinated with are unquestionable and those big bad atheist adults not only question them but will laugh in the kiddies faces if they present them.
So the kiddies would like all the big bad atheist adults to please leave. Oh and leave the lights on because, well, their scared of the dark too.

Yes I know.
It's great comedy all the different ways.
Thank you, throw money not flowers.

Here's one little bible believing kid that no bunch of ignorant atheists are ever going to frighten off with their foul mounted insults and their childish attempts to denigrate my God.

Or even with their well-reasoned debates, the validity of their evidence, the complete and utter failure of biblical origins to support anything but the position that the Bible is the beliefs of men, written by men, and promoted by men, the fact that the evidence for Jesus is insufficient to support any claim that he existed, or the fact that in a comparison between atheists and theists, atheists continue to show a distinct intellectual advantage.

So adherence to a totally failed proposition is your prerogative, but do try to understand the associations which go with that.

I wish you'd stop saying Jesus doesn't exist and embarrassing atheists. This conspiracy theory is silly and it should be dismissed as easily as any other conspiracy theory.

Do you do his with Joseph Smith, Budda, Muhammad and David Koresh also?
dee-em
Posts: 6,474
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2014 2:55:32 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/30/2014 2:35:22 AM, Wylted wrote:

I wish you'd stop saying Jesus doesn't exist and embarrassing atheists.

Please don't speak for atheists. I'm one and I'm not embarassed.

This conspiracy theory is silly and it should be dismissed as easily as any other conspiracy theory.

You labelling it a conspiracy theory doesn't make it one. I challenge you to cite where any Jesus mythicist historical scholar has put forward a case that there was a conspiracy to invent and humanize Jesus. Has Beastt ever suggested a conspiracy? Have I?

It's my experience that when people use dismissive language such as "conspiracy theory" it's because they are intellectually lazy. They can't be bothered finding out the actual arguments made by Jesus mythicists, but instead toss out "conspiracy theory" to hide their ignorance.

Do you do his with Joseph Smith, Budda, Muhammad and David Koresh also?

That's a great way to avoid the subject and it's typical of what people like you do to derail any discussion. The historicity of any of these examples is totally unrelated to the historicity or otherwise of Jesus.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2014 2:59:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/30/2014 2:55:32 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 12/30/2014 2:35:22 AM, Wylted wrote:

I wish you'd stop saying Jesus doesn't exist and embarrassing atheists.

Please don't speak for atheists. I'm one and I'm not embarassed.

This conspiracy theory is silly and it should be dismissed as easily as any other conspiracy theory.

You labelling it a conspiracy theory doesn't make it one. I challenge you to cite where any Jesus mythicist historical scholar has put forward a case that there was a conspiracy to invent and humanize Jesus. Has Beastt ever suggested a conspiracy? Have I?

It's my experience that when people use dismissive language such as "conspiracy theory" it's because they are intellectually lazy. They can't be bothered finding out the actual arguments made by Jesus mythicists, but instead toss out "conspiracy theory" to hide their ignorance.

Do you do his with Joseph Smith, Budda, Muhammad and David Koresh also?

That's a great way to avoid the subject and it's typical of what people like you do to derail any discussion. The historicity of any of these examples is totally unrelated to the historicity or otherwise of Jesus.

You do realize that just about every scholar in relevant fields agrees that Jesus existed, right?

This includes many Jews and atheists. If mythicism is true than it naturally follows that these Jewish people and atheists that have nothing to gain from maintaining the myth would have to actively be engaging in a cover up?