bacht

I hope you're not lumping all skeptics together in this comment. Some of us actually came from faith backgrounds, so it's not like we haven't seen things from the other side.

The issue is that supernaturalism can't be measured or verified. We can listen to testimonies but science can't reproduce or analyse things like miracles or spirits. There may or may not be a God or a Christ or a Holy Ghost, but secular investigation can't reach any conclusion about such things, other than the extreme position that all such things are products of the human mind.

spamandham

He distorted mine as well. I have concluded it's intentional.

Steven Avery

Hi Folks,

Not at all, Toto. Not only did you support the spam forgery/fraud claim of:

fact by fiat .. citing (non-existent) consensus ..

You actually took it two steps further, saying the consensus could be as low as 50% or you tell it when you "see it".

This is precisely the wall that was taken to insist upon my accepting and starting from the absurd (non)factual base of the pastorals being forgeries on the threads here.

If that is a distortion, then please ... tell me why you were so insistent in supporting his fact as a "consensus" and even went to 50% or "see it" as acceptable possibilities for such claims by skeptics.

Shalom,
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Hi Folks,

Jake, please, I do not say that your overall view allies with mine. Simply your very healthy skepticism on using "scholarship consensus" as a bludgeon on the forum.

Shalom,
Steven Avery

Yellum Notnef

You guys do realize that you're arguing with a "Master Fundamentalist" and that he has an impervious mental shield against logic and reality?
http://www.fundamentalforums.com/mem...ven-avery.html


Might as well just lay your head on the street and wait for a truck to run it over. You'll feel pretty much the same either way.

rlogan

<- Impressed by the large bandwidth utilized per unit gain in our understanding


But requesting numerator and denominator of this mathematics be reversed...

Steven Avery

Hi Folks,

Am I appreciated more here than there ? kewl ..

btw, I think the title goes by the number of posts, so if you had the system here my nic might have made "Chief Shindog of Infidelism" .

Shalom,
Steven Avery

spamandham

A fundamentalist? Certainly. A master...I think not. It's pretty easy to see through the shallow arguments, strawmen, and ad homs. A master keeps you engaged and presents new arguments that haven't been rehashed endlessly.

Steven Avery

Hi Folks,

It is certainly true that much of the skeptic mishegas attacking the Bible has been thoroughly disassembled in the past.. thus there are not always going to be "new arguments" on every issue. However, often there will be new presentation, in context, point-to-point, and the readers who are not dyed-in-the-wool skeptics are the ones who can give a better evaluation of the discussions that those who are finding their presuppositions and fiat claims challenged.

Ironically, often the most thorough refutations and clearest understandings of these Bible errancy issues (even authorship and dating and textual history are often covered well) are in the 1800s writings, while the more recent Bible defense material can be on a pablum level and/or crippled by modern version confusions.

Shalom,
Steven Avery

Yellum Notnef

He's a master of something though. Annoyance? Bullshit? Being totally cocksure to the point of offensive while actually being totally wrong about everything? Master of talking right past people while he addresses some phantom audience he believes is hungry for his teaching/preaching?

You decide.