Freethought & Rationalism Archive

MrDarwin · 10-24-2002, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vanderzyden:


I just realized something, you are always criticizing. Most often, you don't substantiate your claims. So, why should we take them seriously?

For a hoot, contrast Vanderzyden's comment with his own behavior in the <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=001540" target="_blank">Suboptimal design: the fetal circulatory system</a> thread in E/C. I think I am finally realizing that Vanderzyden has a very subtle (if warped) sense of humor, and behaves as he does quite intentionally, as our reactions provide him with much amusement.

Apikorus · 10-24-2002, 08:06 AM

Of course it is pure fantasy to insist that "scholars attest to the Bible's amazing accuracy". Regarding the Hebrew Bible, there are undoubtedly historical elements, particularly in the Books of Kings, where several names of Judaean/Israelean rulers are corroborated in the extensive Assyrian annals. But scholars also recognize the extremely tendentious and abjectly fictional aspects to the biblical account as well.

There are dozens of ancient historical texts which scholars judge to be more historically reliable than the Bible, including the works of Thucydides, Herodotus, Polybius, Tacitus, Suetonius, Josephus, Diodorus, et al.

As for the biblical statement of the sun going around the earth, see Qohelet 1:5:

v'zarakh hashemesh uva' hashemesh v'el-m'qomo shoef zoreakh hu sham

Another biblical verse indicating a fixed-earth is in Tehillim 82:5c:

yimotu kal-mos'dei aretz

I'm sure a godly man like Vanderzyden will be able to explain these verses and his solution to the problems they pose.

Incidentally, the reason why deutero-Isaiah and his contemporaries apparently thought the earth was shaped as a disk is likely because that is what it looks like when viewed from a high vantage point. I.e. one can see far in every direction, so one appears to be at the center of a disk. This is hardly profound.

[ October 24, 2002: Message edited by: Apikorus ]

blakader · 10-24-2002, 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DivineOb:


Muhammed allegedly caused the moon to be split in two as a sign to unbelievers, as described here <a href="http://www.thewaytotruth.org/prophetmuhammad/splittingofthemoon.html" target="_blank">http://www.thewaytotruth.org/prophetmuhammad/splittingofthemoon.html</a>

I especially like this paragraph

"The majority of the foremost scholars of meticulous research such as Sa�d al-Din al-Taftazani concluded that like the flowing of water from the fingers of the Prophet, upon him be peace, and his satisfying the thirst of a whole army with that water, and the grieving of the dry wooden pole-against which the Prophet used to lean while delivering sermons-because of its separation from him, and its being heard by a whole congregation, the splitting of the moon, too, is mutawatir, that is, it has been transmitted by one truthful group at each period to another, forming such a vast community that their agreement on a lie is inconceivable. It is as certain as a famous comet-named Haley-having appeared a thousand years ago, or as the existence of an island which we have not seen but exists. Therefore, it is unreasonable to foster baseless doubts about such certain, witnessed matters. In fact, it is sufficient for their acceptability that they are not impossible. As for the splitting of the moon, it is quite as possible as a mountain�s being split by a volcanic eruption."

Sound like any reasoning you've heard to describe christian miracles? Do you see now why we don't find such talk compelling?

It was my understanding of the Koran that Mohammad when asked be unbelivers could do no miracles

Vanderzyden · 10-24-2002, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mageth:
The few times I've attempted to have substantial discussions with you, you've ended up with ad hom attacks on me, insults, and finally putting me on your little "black list" because I don't cowtow to your tactics. You deserve criticism.

This last post is yet one more piece of evidence to support my contention: You do not think through the issues yourself. You wait for opportunities to attempt to punch little holes on the periphery of the discussion. You laugh, ridicule, cajole, and divert. Then, you moan and groan when asked tough questions about the lengths you have gone to understand the subjects that you choose to superficially criticize.

The content of your posts is largely distractive, Mageth. You appear at random, pepper your response with insults, and make light of the issue. When your opponent turns on you to force you to commit fully to the discussion and substantiate your claims, you tuck tail and run (or cry foul). This is the mark of a man who thinks life a game. Maybe you are serious, but so far I have seen no indication.

I do not make "ad hom" attacks. I challenge you to find one single remark in all of my posts that may be conclusively shown to be an insult. If I have done so, I would apologize profusely. I don't do that, Mageth, because I try to always remember the immeasurable value of each person.

However, I will not give quarter to those who care nothing about wasting time. I have plenty of experience in such dialogues, and I've learned a long time ago that little of enduring value comes from the pettiness and insults that characterize many of the posts in these forums.

John

[ October 24, 2002: Message edited by: Vanderzyden ]

Mageth · 10-24-2002, 01:23 PM

I do not make "ad hom" attacks.

<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

One more time:

Quote:

If the denial of "modern technological and explorative advancements" in astronomy call flatearthers' worldview into question, does the denial of "modern technological and explorative advancements" concerning origins call creationists' worldview into question?

Can you respond to that or not?

Vanderzyden · 10-24-2002, 01:29 PM

Apikorus

Perhaps you are attempting to impress us with your Hebrew skills. Perhaps next time you could provide the English equivalent, since it is clear that you have command of the English language.

Quote:

Originally posted by Apikorus:
As for the biblical statement of the sun going around the earth, see Qohelet 1:5:

v'zarakh hashemesh uva' hashemesh v'el-m'qomo shoef zoreakh hu sham

This is Ecclesiastes 1, verse 5 : The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises.

Enlighten us, Apikorus. Why is this indicative of a stricly geocentric worldview?

Quote:

Originally posted by Apikorus:
Another biblical verse indicating a fixed-earth is in Tehillim 82:5c:

yimotu kal-mos'dei aretz

Psalm 82:5 "They know nothing, they understand nothing. They walk about in darkness; all the foundations of the earth are shaken."

Tell us, why does this indicate a fixed, immovable earth?

Quote:

Originally posted by Apikorus:
I'm sure a godly man like Vanderzyden will be able to explain these verses and his solution to the problems they pose.

Incidentally, the reason why deutero-Isaiah and his contemporaries apparently thought the earth was shaped as a disk is likely because that is what it looks like when viewed from a high vantage point. I.e. one can see far in every direction, so one appears to be at the center of a disk. This is hardly profound.

Interesting explanation. I might like it. Now, please go on to tell us about the present active tense of stretching out the heavens.

John

Novowels · 10-24-2002, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vanderzyden:
The content of your posts is largely distractive, Mageth. You appear at random, pepper your response with insults, and make light of the issue. When your opponent turns on you to force you to commit fully to the discussion and substantiate your claims, you tuck tail and run (or cry foul). This is the mark of a man who thinks life a game. Maybe you are serious, but so far I have seen no indication.

No. He didn't just type that. Did he?

Vanderzyden · 10-24-2002, 01:31 PM

Mageth,

Yes, I could respond to that. However, given our history, and your last post, I think you need to persuade me why I should bother.

John

Mageth · 10-24-2002, 01:37 PM

Yes, I could respond to that. However, given our history, and your last post, I think you need to persuade me why I should bother.

My last post? Give me a break. Considering that was the question I quite reasonably posed to you before you started on this personal tirade against me, I would ask why the hell didn't you just respond to it in the first place?

Vanderzyden · 10-24-2002, 02:10 PM

Mageth,

Again, I will ask:

Why should I see consider any further dialogue with you a good investment of time?

John

10-24-2002, 08:06 AM	#92
Apikorus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,396	Of course it is pure fantasy to insist that "scholars attest to the Bible's amazing accuracy". Regarding the Hebrew Bible, there are undoubtedly historical elements, particularly in the Books of Kings, where several names of Judaean/Israelean rulers are corroborated in the extensive Assyrian annals. But scholars also recognize the extremely tendentious and abjectly fictional aspects to the biblical account as well. There are dozens of ancient historical texts which scholars judge to be more historically reliable than the Bible, including the works of Thucydides, Herodotus, Polybius, Tacitus, Suetonius, Josephus, Diodorus, et al. As for the biblical statement of the sun going around the earth, see Qohelet 1:5: v'zarakh hashemesh uva' hashemesh v'el-m'qomo shoef zoreakh hu sham Another biblical verse indicating a fixed-earth is in Tehillim 82:5c: yimotu kal-mos'dei aretz I'm sure a godly man like Vanderzyden will be able to explain these verses and his solution to the problems they pose. Incidentally, the reason why deutero-Isaiah and his contemporaries apparently thought the earth was shaped as a disk is likely because that is what it looks like when viewed from a high vantage point. I.e. one can see far in every direction, so one appears to be at the center of a disk. This is hardly profound. [ October 24, 2002: Message edited by: Apikorus ]</p>

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

10-24-2002, 01:31 PM	#98
Vanderzyden Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: California Posts: 694	Mageth, Yes, I could respond to that. However, given our history, and your last post, I think you need to persuade me why I should bother. John

10-24-2002, 01:37 PM	#99
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Yes, I could respond to that. However, given our history, and your last post, I think you need to persuade me why I should bother. My last post? Give me a break. Considering that was the question I quite reasonably posed to you before you started on this personal tirade against me, I would ask why the hell didn't you just respond to it in the first place?

10-24-2002, 02:10 PM	#100
Vanderzyden Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: California Posts: 694	Mageth, Again, I will ask: Why should I see consider any further dialogue with you a good investment of time? John

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.