Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Bill Joey · 05-20-2009, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Bloe

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Joey

Okay guys. Lets discuss this method.

All right. Say something about it and we'll discuss it. What do you like about it and why, is there anything about it you disagree with and why, that sort of thing.

The method is to stick to the Word of God and it alone in debates. The way He and I debate is to use the Bible and it alone. The Bible is the authority and the only authority. God will convict the skeptic, but that skeptic needs to be elected. God from the begginning of time knew who would choose him, and so he better enables the elect to make the decision to accept the gospel and spend eternity with him. But unfortunately most skeptics reject him, and choose hellfire and brimestone and an eternity burning in a fire. This is a horrid and horrible fate that no skeptic or anyone wants. This is the method that we use.

Bill Joey · 05-20-2009, 06:55 PM

I did not know that you were a Fundamentalist. I hope we have the terms right here on the def of a Fundamentalist and the def of a new Evangelical. The main difference is in the doctrine of Inerrancy. New Evangelicals mostly do not believe in full inerrancy which I do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

At the website that Bill Joey mentioned, if you click on "articles," this is what you will find:

Quote:

Originally Posted by farrellministries.org

God's Compassion in Revival

Repentance and Revival

Revival and Prayer

The Conditions for Revival (part I)

The Conditions for Revival (part II)

The Consecration of the Soulwinner

Some Encouragement from Discouragement, pt. I

The New Year

Some Encouragement from Discouragement, pt. II

Some Encouragement from Discouragement, pt. III

The Biggest Business in All the World

That is nothing more than preaching, and preaching is not allowed at these forums.

Since preaching is easily accessible everywhere, we certainly do not need Bill Joey to preach to us. I was a fundamentalist Christian for over 30 years, and I already know the Bible very well, as do many if not most other skeptics at this forum. Skeptics do not need to know what the Bible says, they need evidence that the Bible is true.

Bill Joey · 05-20-2009, 07:00 PM

Why is preaching not allowed on these forums? Is it because skeptics know they will be convicted if Christians were allowed to preach?

Perhaps the only way the skeptics can win, is by tying our hands up. This is like a parent sending their child to day care and then suing the day care center because they disciplined the child. The parent has the day care centers hands tied.

Telling Christians that we cannot preach is tying our hands up.

But I found a weakness in the skeptics and this is the preaching of the Bible. They do not allow this on this forum, because its the Word of God that convicts hearts and enlightens eyes, (Psa 19:7-8).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

At the website that Bill Joey mentioned, if you click on "articles," this is what you will find:

Quote:

Originally Posted by farrellministries.org

God's Compassion in Revival

Repentance and Revival

Revival and Prayer

The Conditions for Revival (part I)

The Conditions for Revival (part II)

The Consecration of the Soulwinner

Some Encouragement from Discouragement, pt. I

The New Year

Some Encouragement from Discouragement, pt. II

Some Encouragement from Discouragement, pt. III

The Biggest Business in All the World

That is nothing more than preaching, and preaching is not allowed at these forums.

Since preaching is easily accessible everywhere, we certainly do not need Bill Joey to preach to us. I was a fundamentalist Christian for over 30 years, and I already know the Bible very well, as do many if not most other skeptics at this forum. Skeptics do not need to know what the Bible says, they need evidence that the Bible is true.

Back Again · 05-20-2009, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Joey

God from the begginning of time knew who would choose him, and so he better enables the elect to make the decision to accept the gospel and spend eternity with him. But unfortunately most skeptics reject him, and choose hellfire and brimestone and an eternity burning in a fire. This is a horrid and horrible fate that no skeptic or anyone wants. This is the method that we use.

Simply brilliant.

Why not just create everyone to choose Him and save a lot of trouble? God doesn't make the rules?

My neighbor Ted has a similar view of women he meets. They should just choose to spend their life with him but unfortunately they all reject them. He torments them eternally. It's a horrible fate that no one (not even the skeptics about him as a romantic partner) wants. What's wrong with all of those stupid women?

Your imaginary god is a sicko like Ted.

Bill Joey · 05-20-2009, 07:04 PM

You tie christians hands up and do not allow us to quote scripture, because it alone is powerful and effective and can convert your soul, enlighten your eyes, make wise the simple, & convict your heart (Psa 19:7-8).

The Word of God is like a fire and a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces (Jer 23:18).

Telling us we cant quote scripture or debate in this way is the only way you skeptics will win as you are afraid of the Word.

Well since there are demons in moderation here working inside of skeptics, I'd see why they would make such a rule. Demons do not like the Word of God for its the way they are defeated.

Jesus used the word of God to defeat Satan when he was confronted by the devil.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Why don't you ask Pastor Farrell.......

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Bloe

That wouldn't be Pastor Farrell Till, would it? I like his take on apologetics.

Farrell Till is one of my favorite skeptics. He demolished James Holding in many debates. I think that is was he who first exposed Holding's real name, which is Robert Turkel, or is it Robert Turkelbuzzard? Oh well, it doesn't make any difference, except possibly to some offended turkey buzzards, in which case I would like to offer my apologies to any offended turkey buzzards.

On one hilarious occasion, Farrell Till posted a picture of Holding at the Internet that looked awful. Till said something like "Behold the hideous visage of Robert Turkel, aka James Holding, aka Jabba the Hut."

show_no_mercy · 05-20-2009, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Joey

The method is to stick to the Word of God and it alone in debates. The way He and I debate is to use the Bible and it alone. The Bible is the authority and the only authority.

But how do you know that the Bible is any sort of authority? Oh wait...

Nothing else to see here, folks. Move along.

Johnny Skeptic · 05-20-2009, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Joey

The method is to stick to the Word of God and it alone in debates.

Obviously not. Consider the following:

http://www.freeratio.org//showthread.php?t=268280

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Joey

The external evidences in support of a global flood are many. For example, researches have found animal remains in unusual locations near the Saar Valley and giant boulders near Malta whose presence can only be explained through the violent actions of water. Another convincing geological discovery in favor of the flood is found in the United States. Lake Bonneville once occupied a part of Utah, Nevada, & Idaho. But today only, the Salt Lake in Utah is all that is left of this great body of water. The worldwide flood of the Bible is the only explanation for this shift in geology. Plenty of other evidence in support of a flood has been discovered all over the world, and all the scientific evidences point to that of a great flood many years ago.

That obviously is not the Bible, it is science, rather pseudoscience. In that same thread, you also said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Joey

The solution to the alleged scientific discrepancy in Joshua 10 can be found in Norman L. Geisler and Ronald M. Rhodes book, When Skeptics Ask (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1990), 177

Please be advised that Norman Geisler, Ph.D., philosphy, frequently uses lots of non-biblical evidence to defend the Bible, which means that your own source does not agree with your method of debating. Why are you concerned with scientific discrepancies? After all, you said "The method is to stick to the Word of God and it alone in debates."

On May 18, I started a thread at http://www.freeratio.org//showthread.php?t=268281at the Evolution/Creation forum. The title is "Another fundie global flood advocate at the GRD forum." You made one post in that thread. You said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Joey

It does not matter [how old I am] as the Lord is my helper. I know Him and preach His word.

Quote:

II Tim 4

I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; 2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

I am older than 25.

It is apparent that your only intention at these forums is to preach, and preaching is not allowed. If you wish to have a battle of quotes, I will be happy to reply to all of your quotes will quotes from many other religious books. How about it? Do you really expect that you will be able to get away with always choosing whose arguments get discussed? If so, you are mistaken.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Joey

The way He and I debate is to use the Bible and it alone. The Bible is the authority and the only authority.

But that is preaching, and preaching is not allowed at these forums. If you wish to preach, why don't you get a seminary degree.

You are probably aware of Romans 10:17, which says "So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ." (NASB)

If the verse was inspired by God, then just hearing the Bible would be sufficient for a person to become a Christian, but if the verse was not inspired by God, obviously Christianity is not a valid religion.

Since the Bible, sermons, and teaching are already available everywhere, why should anyone listen to you?

Johnny Skeptic · 05-20-2009, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Joey

Telling us we can't quote scripture or debate in this way is the only way you skeptics will win as you are afraid of the Word.

Obviously not. Genesis 1:1 says "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." What evidence do you have that the verse is true?

The Bible says that Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit. What evidence do you have that the claim is true?

The Bible says that Jesus was born of a virgin. What evidence do you have that the claim is true?

The Bible says that Jesus' shed blood and death atoned for the sins of mankind. What evidence do you have that the claim is true?

No matter what you post, all that I have to do is ask you "What evidence do you have that the claim is true?"

If I quote a number of other religious books, will you discuss what I post? If so, get ready to discuss a lot of other religious books. If you refuse to discuss a lot of other religious books, then you are afraid of them.

Johnny Skeptic · 05-20-2009, 07:23 PM

Message to Bill Joey. Consider the following Bible contradictions and errors:

http://www.freethoughtdebater.com/te...radictions.htm

Quote:

Originally Posted by freethoughtdebater.com

Item 1

2 Kings 8:26 says "Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign..."

2 Chronicles 22:2 says "Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign..."

Item 2

2 Samuel 6:23 says "Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death"

2 Samuel 21:8 says "But the king took...the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul"

Item 3

2 Samuel 8:3-4 says "David smote also Hadadezer...and took from him...seven hundred horsemen..."

1 Chronicles 18:3-4 says "David smote Hadarezer...and took from him...seven thousand horsemen..."

Item 4

1 Kings 4:26 says "And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots..."

2 Chronicles 9:25 says "And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots..."

Item 5

2 Kings 25:8 says "And in the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month...Nebuzaradan...came...unto Jerusalem"

Jeremiah 52:12 says "...in the fifth month, in the tenth day of the month...came Nebuzaradan...into Jerusalem"

Item 6

1 Samuel 31:4-6 says "...Saul took a sword and fell upon it. And when his armourbearer saw that Saul was dead and...died with him. So Saul died..."

2 Samuel 21:12 says "...the Philistines had slain Saul in Gilboa."

Item 7

James 1:13 says "..for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man."

Gen 22:1 says "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham..."

Item 8

Gen 6:20 says "Of fowls after their kind and of cattle [etc.]...two of every sort shall come unto thee..."

Gen 7:2,3 says "Of every clean beast thou shall take to thee by sevens...Of fowls also of the air by sevens..."

Item 9

Luke23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

John 19:30 "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."

Item 10

Gen 32:30 states "...for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved."

John 1:18 states, "No man hath seen God at any time..."

Item 11

Lev 11:6: "And the hare, because he cheweth the cud..."

Hare do not chew the cud.

Item 12

Deut 14:7: " "...as the camel, and the hare, and the coney: for they chew the cud, but divide not the hoof."

For the hare this is wrong on both counts: Hare don’t chew the cud and they do divide the "hoof."

Item 13

Jonah 1:17 says, "...Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights"

Matt 12:40 says "...Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly..."

whales and fish are not related

Why should anyone trust a religious book that contains provable errors?

I added the item numbers myself, and I did not quote all of the contradictions and errors.

Martian Astronomer · 05-20-2009, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Joey

Why is preaching not allowed on these forums? Is it because skeptics know they will be convicted if Christians were allowed to preach?

Perhaps the only way the skeptics can win, is by tying our hands up. This is like a parent sending their child to day care and then suing the day care center because they disciplined the child. The parent has the day care centers hands tied.

Telling Christians that we cannot preach is tying our hands up.

But I found a weakness in the skeptics and this is the preaching of the Bible. They do not allow this on this forum, because its the Word of God that convicts hearts and enlightens eyes, (Psa 19:7-8).

I would like to add, Bill, that there are a lot of us here who are very familiar with the Bible. There's also a lot of us who used to be Christians, but actually reading and studying the Bible play a large role in walking away from Christianity.

You seem to have the idea that all you need to do is keep typing Bible verses and somehow some of us "skeptics" will magically be convinced that it's true - but only those skeptics that God already like ahead of time. If you want people to listen to you, you need to somehow show that the Bible is actually authoritative - not just claim that it is, and call anyone who disagrees with you a servant of the devil.

To my knowledge, preaching is not allowed because this is a discussion forum; in theory, it's supposed to be an exchange of ideas, not a place for one person to spout opinions and ignore all criticism. Preaching is one-way communication: the preacher preaches, and doesn't answer questions or objections. It's certainly not because we view preaching as some kind of kryptonite.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.