offa

Bede
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This thread needs closing forewith. It is useless and full of lying atheists
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Offa) Are there more than one of us lying here?
I wrote
The extra hours of darkness is a play on words (not an eclipse). There was an intercalation. Get you search engines tuned up and look for cockcrowing in the gospels. Look in a dictionary and get cockcrowing defined. The reason the cock crew twice was because the clock was "falling back". The cock had a double duty. And you guys thought Ben Franklin invented daylight savings time


Are you calling me a liar? Go ahead, if it makes you feel better.
I know that Jesus existed and survived the crucifixion and Pontius Pilate knew it too. He was there and was later paid "hush money".

Haran

OH THE IRONY!!! You're killing me, Steven, the one who ceaselessly implies that all Christians are liars!

Layman

Bede

Offa, you may be assured, I am not calling you a liar. I can't understand a word you say but I'm sure you are honest.

Steven, only the most pig headed fool would make the point you do. I will never again respond to one of your posts. You are simply not worth dealing with and an embarressment to these boards.

Steven Carr

Gosh, I point out that Thallus is used as evidence in articles entitled 'The Historical evidence for the resurrection', and Bede calls me a pig-headed fool for drawing the conclusion that Thallus was used as evidence for the resurrection.......




What does Bede think should be the title of those articles? 'The Historical Evidence for the Resurrection (and lots of other stuff which is not remotely historical evidence for the resurrection at all, but is included because web space is pretty cheap, and somebody might think it relevant to something)?

Haran

Steven, you seem to intentionally lay little traps, twist others' words, hound others with trivialities and rhetoric, and insult others in the third person (as if this is supposed to somehow lessen the blows you deal). And all of this is seemingly done in your own "attempts to discredit" Christians.

And you act as if you wonder why you get such reactions...

Bede, Layman, I, and other Christians seem to have better discussions and debates with most others here. Somehow when you enter the fray, it tends to become a fighting match... Would it be possible for you to not act as if Christians are all liars and that all apologists are dishonest and that nothing in the Bible has any truth??

Steven Carr

I did nothing of the sort, and Haran totally fails to quote anything I wrote, almost as though he cannot find anything to back up his claims. If he could quote something of mine to back him up, he would have (or is that an argument from silence)

Bede called people liars for saying that Thallus was used by Christians as evidence for the resurrection.

I showed him Christian web pages entitled 'The Historical evidence for the resurrection', and pointed out that these web pages, laying out the evidence for the resurrection, cited Thallus as evidence.

It was Bede, who claims that Christian web pages entitled 'Historical Evidence for the Resurrection' contain stuff which is not evidence for the resurrection at all.


Now Haran says I am engaging in 'triviliaties' and 'rhetoric' simply because I quote the VERY title of the web pages I cited. Why is it a 'triviality' that the web pages themselves say that they are giving evidence for the resurrection?


Why I am a pig-headed fool (to quote the charming Bede) for assuming the authors of those pages were actually sincere in thinking they should include Thallus as part of their evidence in their web pages listing the evidence for the resurrection?

Why I am a pig-headed fool for thinking that these Christian authors would not pad out their pages with stuff that even they themselves knew was not evidence for the resurrection?

Steven Carr

More slurs by Haran. When did I ever say that nothing in the Bible has any truth?


As for Bede's better discussions. I shall quote his own words in the thread :-

'You give us an OP full of an amazing amount of rubbish for its brevity making unsubstantiated allegations of dishonesty which you then refuse to detail.'


'It is useless and full of lying atheists.'

'Hence, you OP was a lie in itself. And my initial impression of you is reinforced every time you post.'


'I appreciate your efforts but I think, given the OP and the OP's author, we probably are looking in the wrong thread for anything substantive.'

CARR
And let us not forget who posted links to articles which discuss Thallus in great detail? Was it Bede, Haran or I who produced substance to the discussion of Thallus?

Haran

My post was a general one, not specifically about the contents of this thread (although there is plenty of evidence here). My use of "all" (note that I believe that you imply this) is obvious rhetoric. However, my rhetoric is directed specifically toward you to let you know how the many statements that you make about Christians being liars, etc., comes across. It begins to seem like "all" to others.

However, if you want some quotes from this thread, here you go:

Never give an inch, that's what Steven Carr always says. I love this quote, because it is so typical. You back people into a corner with your rhetoric and then act innocent when they've had enough and let you know it. How exactly do you know that Bede "was forced to cut" that out of his post? Huh? Knowing that he is not one of Carr's stereotypical lying Christians, I rather imagine that he either missed that (especially because of the distance you for some reason put between the title and the quote) or because the article itself could be about the resurrection while the quote is not necessarily. I haven't read them, so don't try to drag me into it. I'm just saying that your rhetoric in implying that Bede was dishonest and intentionally cut the title from his post is symptomatic of the problem you have of pushing people to their breaking point... Make no mistake, just because you insult and imply someone's lack of integrity in the third person, it is no less of an insult.

Then, after you've found something you feel you can beat on someone with, you drill it in over and over and over again just to make sure everyone knows that you feel you have gotten the upper hand somehow... Post after post you mention the same thing, using the same words. For example, how many times did you write the name of the title of that article after you implied Bede had intentionally and dishonestly cut it out? Can you be any more irritating and annoying than that?? When you call someone dishonest and then back them into a corner with this kind of irritating repetition, don't be surprised when they talk back.

Do you still want more?

Whatever. That I've seen, Bede tells facts and truth. In the silly vote on what atheists were preferred here at IIDB, he seemed to be prized for his honesty and integrity. Your statement is offensive and groundless.

There are plenty of examples of these kinds of comments in nearly every thread in which you participate.

How about stuff from your own website?

Everything is "a lie" with you. Never mind that the person you responded to might have misinterpreted something, made a mistake, or may simply have been passing on controversial information.

Never mind that you might have been calling the person who asked you the question about transcendental proof arrogant and ignorant.

In his stereotypical fashion, he pronounces the Christian a liar. Never mind that the person might have gotten his data mixed up.

Also, once again. Note the "Christians". "Why do Christians tell so many lies?" And we are not to infer from this and your many similar comments, Steven, that you feel "Christians" are all liars?

Why you've even started to or three threads with titles that seem to imply Christians are liars or stupid, or that there really is no evidence for the Bible..."Christian invention of non-historical people", ""Do Christians understand what they are talking about?", "Evidence for the Bible is made up", " The Role of Evidence in Christian scholarship"...and the list goes on...

Anyway, just why is it that all these Christians (and other theists too) are pronounced by him as liars when they make mistakes and yet he excuses himself of his own mistakes pointed out to him by others:

Make sure you qualify it as a "lapse of memory" now. You wouldn't want us thinking that you were just "lying for atheism".

Good grief... I could go on and on with the examples you didn't seem to think I could provide, but I'll stop there and try not to (for the moderators) respond or post further unless to clarify something I feel needs clarification. I think you'll be going on my ignore list as well and should probably already be there because you seem bitter and only intent on disparaging Christians and their beliefs and not on actually debating issues.

Steven Carr

Here is my posting. As can be seen I put exactly NO distance between the heading the article and the quote from the article, yet Haran says '(especially because of the distance you for some reason put between the title and the quote)'

CARR (previously)
Google, click,click, cut, paste
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/...n-evidence.html

An articles entitled 'THE EVIDENCE FOR JESUS’ HISTORICAL RESURRECTION'



'Numerous contemporaneous non-biblical and secular writers, living within 150 years of Jesus’ life, some of whom are outright hostile, mention Jesus’ existence, including Roman writers Tacitus, Seutonius, Thallus, and Pliny, and the Jewish writings of Josephus and the Talmud.'


CARR (now)
Can the moderators not do something about Haran's continous use of innuendo, insults and distortions? What are the moderators there for, for goodness sake?

As for why Bede was 'forced' to cut it out, he was hardly likely to get away with a claim that Thallus was NOT used in articles about the evidence for the resurrection, while still quoting headings saying that the article was about the evidence for the resurrection?