Sauron

Not confusing at all.

When his argument reached a tight spot, mata leao just fabricated another claim. He's done this several times now - Debate Champ, recently back from Iraq, attended dozens of lectures on Babylon, read hundreds of transcripts on the "forensic" evidence for the resurrection, etc.

He and lee_merrill have at least that much in common: they claim to have all kinds of broad experience that magically gets them out of sticky debate problems -- but neither one of them can provide proof for these convenient credentials.

mata leao

ohh I keep forgetiing, sauron knows everything...... the burden of proof is always on the Christians, even though atheism is in the gutters of public acceptance....okay, sauron is right, the gospel has not yet been preached to every language on earth (not yet!)

Sauron

No, just more than you. But then again, that isn't saying much.

No, it's always on the one making the affirmative claim. It's just that christians are so energetic about making lots of affirmative claims, and then never supporting them.

Like you.

Third time you've tried to defend your weak argument by tossing out aspersons on atheism. Ad hominems against a belief system are a logic fallacy and not a good debate skill. Again I ask: are you *sure* you are a National Debate Champ? I'll repeat the same responses I gave you, since you haven't addressed them yet either:

1. "Public acceptance" is irrelevant. The search for truth is not a popularity contest. If we trusted popular consensus, then Ford is the best car manufacturer, Walmart offers high quality goods, and the Backstreet Boys are the epitome of music.

2. Your statement has not even been supported - and at least in W. Europe, agnosticism/atheism has significant respect.

Actually several people pointed this out, not just me.

I merely reminded everyone of the fact that you tend to make up facts whenever your argument needs one.

vsop44

also in Mark 13 :10

And the gospel must first be preached to all nations

judge

Funny thing is... Jesus is not recorded as attacking those who believed differently. He reserved his criticism for religious folk.

cgordon

Yawn. Me, I'm less interested in over-interpreted and under-understood mythology than in why our prez was making a spectacle of himself in a church in the first place. That little pesky church and state thing, ya know.

Whatever.

luminous

What does public acceptance have to do with who has the burden of proof? I fail to see the connection, please enlighten me. Of course the burden of proof is always on the Christian when it comes to debating Atheists. That's because the Christian is affirming something! The Atheist simply says that he has no reason to accept the affirmation without proof. Our job is to provide the proof, can't you understand that?? It should be common sense! Stop making claims without being ready to back them up.

I'm so frustrated with fellow Christians like you who can't even think straight. How are you going to debate well-informed Atheists if you can't even grasp the simple rule that he who makes an affirmative statement must provide evidence in support of it?

luminous

Let me also point out that this prophecy is useless to the Atheist, so I don't think it was a good idea posting it here. It's useless because it's not falsifiable. As others have already pointed out, it requires no supernatural intervention for it's fulfillment - we're in the process of fulfilling it. Second, it has no time frame to hold it accountable to. Let's say that the Bible is translated in all the languages, yet the end does not come. Is the prophecy false? We'll say - of course not! Because the prophecy simply says that the end will come after the prophecy is fulfilled, not necessarily when the prophecy is fulfilled.

mata leao, let me ask you a question that's related to the topic. Do you believe that the Rapture can happen at any moment, including while you're reading this?

gregor

Is that a Darby-invented rapture hoax or a Millerite failed-Daniel interpretation?

And how did 2 Peter not realize to utilize the "every-language" and "ends of the earth" escape clauses when in 150 CE the people were scoffing at no second coming?

Clivedurdle

I did a mini census of the Somali community last year in a London Borough. Of about 100 households (I have exact figures) about 40 were headed by illiterate people in both English and Somali. Somali was only written down about 1970 - not by Wycliffe!

Before and after WW2 an Italian priest was responsible for a large chunk of Somalia - he had two converts in thirty years!

Not very successful this great commission! And technically, doesn't the whole world need to be literate before the second coming?

And what standard of literacy?