Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Not_Registered · 05-27-2004, 02:53 PM

Sure baiting deleted...Toto...whatever....You can ship this thread to limbo...or wherever

P.S. Toto, I don't think we're in Kansas anymore

Mageth · 05-27-2004, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not_Registered

I see Mageth you are using my logic now and see that I am correct and you are wrong....TO MY KNOWLEDGE

Can't even recognize when your argument's being satirized, eh?

Amaleq13 · 05-27-2004, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not_Registered

There was no PROOF of Jesus' ever denying divinity so one can't say he ever did.

There is no "proof" Jesus claimed divinity.

There is no "proof" Jesus was ever accused of claiming divinity.

There is no "proof" claiming divinity was considered a blasphemous crime.

Vorkosigan · 05-27-2004, 03:25 PM

This looks like ~E~ material to me.

Mageth · 05-27-2004, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not_Registered

Wrong. My logic was that you need actual PROOF to say something happend. There was no PROOF of Jesus' ever denying divinity so one can't say he ever did.

Which is a complete non sequitur because as has been pointed out several times, no one here has claimed that Jesus ever did deny divinity. We don't need to. Your argument is DEAD.

Quote:

In other words, if you want to say something happend you've got to back it up with proof of it happening, not just say well no one knows...maybe..maybe.

Funny that, as that seems to be what your argument consists of.

Quote:

Using the logic given by your statement about Jesus not existing between 12 and 30, then the vast majority of the people in the world don't exist between 12 and 30 because no one included them in an article or wrote about them during that part of their lives.

Umm...as Llyricist pointed out, "We CANNOT assume that something not included in the gospels didn't happen. Jesus didn't exist between the ages of 12 and 30 by your logic." He was applying your logic, not his, and used an extreme example.

Quote:

But now your leaning on extremely prepostorous comments to be your argument. Obviously the proof of their existence between 12 and 30 is the fact that they exist at 30.

No; he was using a preposterous comment to illustrate the fallacy of your logic. I'll continue.

You claim that "My logic [is] that you need actual PROOF to say something happend [sic]." Where's your proof that Jesus existed between the ages of 12-30? It's possible, after all, that he didn't, since we don't have proof. It's possible, being God and all, that God the Father took him up to heaven at age 12 for a little training, and re-deposited him on earth at age 30. It's possible, so where's your proof that Jesus existed, here on earth, between the ages of 12 and 30? There's no record of him existing between the ages of 12-30. So, until you provide the PROOF, some record, then my claim that Jesus was taken up into heaven between the ages of 12-30 stands! And note that Jesus never denied having been taken up into heaven between the ages of 12-30! So you also need to produce a record of him denying that charge.

And where's your PROOF that Jesus existed at 30? For that matter, where's the PROOF that Jesus existed at all? If you turn to the bible, I'll retort with your own statement "Maybe the source that gave you this information is not credible."

Quote:

Now your reaching for something to stand on. That's like someone saying maybe private planes that arent tracked by radar disappear inflight and travel to a 2nd universe. You wouldnt know cause you dont track them with your eyes from lift off the landing. Come on man, OBVIOUSLY....OBVIOUSLY the plane doesn't disappear to 2nd universe and OBVIOUSLY...OBIVOUSLY Jesus existed between 12 and 30.

OBVIOUSLY, Washington didn't go to Nepal, and didn't climb Mt. Everest. There, that's easy.

dado · 05-27-2004, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not_Registered

I am saying there is no record, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, that reports Jesus' denial of divinity.

what a brilliant line of thought! simply...brilliant!

since there is also no record reporting Jesus' denial of bovinity, can i also assume he got milked regularly by Magdalena?

Llyricist · 05-27-2004, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not_Registered

Wrong. My logic was that you need actual PROOF to say something happend. There was no PROOF of Jesus' ever denying divinity so one can't say he ever did. In other words, if you want to say something happend you've got to back it up with proof of it happening, not just say well no one knows...maybe..maybe. Using the logic given by your statement about Jesus not existing between 12 and 30, then the vast majority of the people in the world don't exist between 12 and 30 because no one included them in an article or wrote about them during that part of their lives. But now your leaning on extremely prepostorous comments to be your argument. Obviously the proof of their existence between 12 and 30 is the fact that they exist at 30. Now your reaching for something to stand on. That's like someone saying maybe private planes that arent tracked by radar disappear inflight and travel to a 2nd universe. You wouldnt know cause you dont track them with your eyes from lift off the landing. Come on man, OBVIOUSLY....OBVIOUSLY the plane doesn't disappear to 2nd universe and OBVIOUSLY...OBIVOUSLY Jesus existed between 12 and 30.

what Mageth said

Quote:

I touched on the issue of evidence showing that Jesus was accused of being God earlier. I'll take your stand and "I won't reiterate", and don't blame me. If you want to see the discussion of that go look at some of the earlier post. I already admitted that that was a good point (the point that maybe Jesus wasn't crucified for claiming to be God). But, I also had a rebuttal to that, but "I won't reiterate."

ummmm not reiterating was Mageth's stand... I was the one that reiterated for him....

And I did read the whole thread, and your only rebuttal was to frame your whole point as a big IF... which I addressed with the "well then so what back at ya".

Toto this IS getting pointless. (i know I know.....Getting??

)

Magdlyn · 05-27-2004, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dado

what a brilliant line of thought! simply...brilliant!

since there is also no record reporting Jesus' denial of bovinity, can i also assume he got milked regularly by Magdalena?

hehe, dado. Naughty!

Sven · 05-28-2004, 02:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not_Registered

Nothing is hard to understand about your sentence; it's just deleted . Your defending it is even more ridiculous. It is an "apply to all situation" sayings. It's a saying someone says when they don't want to admit something. By your reasoning ALL criminals would be free or their cases would remain open FOREVER. If a criminal commits a crime and the police interrogate him and, of course he committed the crime, so he doesn't deny it, well all the defense attorney would have to say (even though most of the evidence proves that the criminal is guilty) is "well I don't think the police would admit it even if he denied the crime anyways; so we can conclude nothing from the absence of his denial and he should be free to go"

It's your comment which is ridiculous, not mine. The police would (usually) have no reason to deny that he denied the crime - whereas the gospel writers had very good reason to neglect a denial.

Quote:

All I'm saying is yeah I see your deleted point, but it applies to EVERYTHING deleted.

Not at all. Only if the writers had good reasons.

Quote:

You've never heard me say I hate people from Australia so maybe I do. To phrase it in another way: If I never have said I hate people from Australia you wouldn't and couldn't hear me say that. If I ever did say I hate people from Australia I wouldn't let you find out about it (i.e. "his denial would not have been included in the gospels"). So we can conclude nothing about the absence of a statement where I say I hate people from Australia.

Yes, indeed. I have no idea of you hate them or not. What's your point here?

You continue to ignore the fact that the gospel writers had very good reasons to neglect a denial of Jesus being God.

Edited to add:
Meanwhile, I read the rest of this thread - and I wholeheartedly agree with the move to Elsewhere. I've never seen anyone better at misunderstanding arguments and creating straw mans, despite having explained the argument to him from at least three sides over and over again.
It's a pity I always get too late to a thread when the insults are already deleted

- I never get to know the creative power of others

Sven · 05-28-2004, 03:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Llyricist

We CANNOT assume that something not included in the gospels didn't happen. Jesus didn't exist between the ages of 12 and 30 by your logic.

:notworthy

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

05-27-2004, 02:53 PM	#91
Not_Registered Regular Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: U.S. Posts: 312	Sure baiting deleted...Toto...whatever....You can ship this thread to limbo...or wherever P.S. Toto, I don't think we're in Kansas anymore

05-27-2004, 03:25 PM	#94
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	This looks like ~E~ material to me.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.