Has Christianity finally been debunked?

[ziplock]

Making this quick as I gotta jet... Not to say it really deserves anything more.

Originally Posted by citizen abuse

All you're doing is making a fool of yourself by continuing to make this post. All it proves is that you don't have a single iota of a clue what in the hell you're talking about.

No. You are making a fool of yourself. You have not a "single iota of a clue what in the hell you're talking about."

Petitio principii. Begging the question. That is all your ENTIRE argument is. The little bits and pieces I pointed out are just more of the logical fallacies you commit while charioting this self-righteous image of being the logical one in this situation. You have FAILED to in many instances demonstrate coherent or consistent, valid logic. I have pointed out numerous TYPES of fallacies. None of the bullshit that cascades from this hell of an opener reconciles any of the fallacies I mentioned. It doesn't even address them. This is what you're doing to me:

"Nothing is written about Jesus having any knowledge of land masses on the other side of the planet anything interplanetary for that matter. That's FACT, ziplock. THAT IS SO FACT. YOU CAN'T DENY THAT."

I say no, I'm not denying it. There is nothing we know of Jesus via hearsay that would imply he had this knowledge. You take it a step further and assume that because there's no record of his knowledge, he didn't have it. Essentially what you told me is, because there's no record of Jesus knowing when he shit on any given day, Jesus never shit. Because there's no record of Jesus smiling as at the age of 14, he never did. So on and so forth. I've got news for you, that isn't logical.

Educate yourself I can't do this shit for you. Go actually LEARN about fallacies, SEE what they are and what they mean as clearly you don't have a single iota of a clue about what the fuck you're talking about.

[kamikazi89]

Originally Posted by spicoli

i'm feeling really good today, so i'll explain it again, citizen abuse:

God and Jesus are of the supernatural realm. you cannot hold them to worldly criteria.

exactly..and although there's no proof or even universal agreement as to the nature or realityof the supernatural acts performed by Jesus(even if there were eyewitness accounts, that in and of itself would not prove anything.)

it's a matter of faith

[TreeToker]

Faith and logic while they both improve on each other are not the same thing. I say all we need is faith in reason and a reasonable amount of faith

[kamikazi89]

"When thy mind leaves behind its dark forest of delusion, thou shalt go beyond the scriptures of times past and still to come."

[ziplock]

I hate how easily lead I am when it comes to logic. Some one lays it out, I follow it. It bugs me when I can't, logically, reconcile a situation with an individual. If it's about logic then we're dealing with certain parameters (I'm thinking of you, snapshot). It's like someone asks you to play chess, you both agree that chess is the game. You then sit down and start playing the way you would checkers to your opponents confusion. The game can't really come to a conclusion in this way. If we both agree to play chess however, then the game can and will come to a conclusion.

So, I'm going to attempt to address as logically as possible the points you (citizen abuse) brought up. If you choose to respond, please, respond to the logic.

Originally Posted by citizen abuse

1) The essay points out that Jesus didn't exhibit any knowledge of the natural world that would distinguish him from an ordinary person. I've got news for you. That isn't fallacy as you obviously believe. It's fact. Jesus didn't exhibit any knowledge of the natural world that would distinguish him from an ordinary person. Fact!

I don't believe that is a fallacy, and would like for you to show me where I stated it was? Here you are simply stating your premise. There is no conclusion drawn from it, there is no argument. I agree, from what information we have of Jesus he seemed to not speak of anything about the planet that would allude to knowledge outside of his time period. The arguments you make from this premise are where the fallacies manifest.

Originally Posted by citizen abuse

2) This is what you refer to as "fallacy": The essay points out that not everyone who came in contact with him believed that Jesus was the son of God. I've got news for you. That isn't fallacy as you obviously believe. It's fact. A significant number of people who came in contact with him did not believe that Jesus was the son of God. Fact!

Again, I have not contested this and again this is simply you stating a premise. No argument.

Originally Posted by citizen abuse

3) This is what you refer to as "fallacy": The essay points out that the Christian god would have to cast judgment on people at the rate of almost two people per second. I've got news for you. That isn't fallacy as you obviously believe. It's fact. At the current deathrate around the world, God would have only a fraction of a second to cast judgment on a person at the time of their death before having to move on to the next. Fact!

Again, same thing.

Originally Posted by citizen abuse

I could go on and on but I think most intelligent people will get the point. And that is that you obviously cannot ascertain the difference between fact and fiction!

Originally Posted by citizen abuse

And as for the "opponent " part, who's the opponent? You? I've got news for you. At the time I posted this thread I had never even heard of you. Nor is the essay that this thread is based on directed at any one in particular. It's little more than a collection of pertinent facts. Conclusion: You couldn't recognize a strawman argument if came up and slapped you in the face!

Here we have an argument, or a debate, or whatever term you want to call it. You and I are engaged in it. You are arguing for something, I am arguing against something basically. You support it, I don't. Therefore, technically, in this little debate, I would be your opponent and you are mine. No previous knowledge or any knowledge for that matter of each other is necessary or even relevant. Just our position on the topic.

Carrying that over to the essay, the essay is arguing with Christianity. However, you cannot say the beliefs outlined in the essay encapsulate the whole of Christianity due to the large diversity of beliefs and interpretations. Therefore, it is a straw man argument. As that is not the argument that is being made by Christianity. It may be the argument made by certain interpretations or denominations, but certainly not the whole.

Originally Posted by citizen abuse

If you want to keep making this foolish post feel free to do so. Sometimes people jump into a debate in the middle and aren't aware of what's been said previously. You'll be filling them in on the state of your intelligence. I know I'll keep responding with this post to make sure that the point gets driven home!!!

[kamikazi89]

specifics are extremely important,..and since christianty is(as has been pointed out) diverse..i suggest we move the conversation in that direction

[citizen abuse]

Originally Posted by TreeToker

Faith and logic while they both improve on each other are not the same thing. I say all we need is faith in reason and a reasonable amount of faith

I don't have any problem with faith per se. The problem is when people try to apply their faith-based beliefs to the lives of others or use their faith-based beliefs as a means to judge others. This is what a significant number of Christians do, particularly in the United States. They want their faith-based beliefs to dominate the lives of everyone else. That's the problem. That's when their faith-based beliefs become open game as far as I'm concerned anyway.

[verklingen]

^ a significant number of PEOPLE do that, man. christians are just the tip of the iceberg, and atheists are floating around there as well. for example, the article this thread is based on insists that anyone who believes in jesus relinquish their belief or else risk failing to live up to the standards of the author. judgment is judgment, and its a problem regardless of its origin.

[josh22_22]

Originally Posted by Patrick Rue

discount the whole thing off that one paragraph

granted its weak but it leads into shit like hundreds of thousands of people dieing at once being judged and sent to hell, as would have happened with the tsunami



The guy is judging a story about a god.

wtf. your basically saying that everyone who dies in a tsunami is bad.
just shows what religion teaches you

[citizen abuse]

Originally Posted by josh22_22

wtf. your basically saying that everyone who dies in a tsunami is bad.
just shows what religion teaches you

The author was clearly just throwing that tsunami comment in as a caveat to shed insight on, or to mock, Christian mentality. Christians believe that if a person doesn't repent and embrace Jesus as their savior God will send them to hell when they die. Well, because the vast majority of the people killed by the 2004 tsunami worshipped faiths other than Christianity - mainly Islam - according to Christian logic God would have sent the majority of them right on to hell. The only question I have is why the author didn't throw in his "insert joke here" line right after pointing that out?

[verklingen]

^ if "christians" believe that all those people were sent to hell for not believing in jesus why did the people of america, a "christian" nation, send millions and millions of dollars for relief in the affected area?

you're argument is based on nothing but what turn out to be baseless generalizations when considered through the lens of practical reality. i told you to get a clue but you must not find it accessible with your head so far up your ass.

[JcP]

Originally Posted by citizen abuse

The author was clearly just throwing that tsunami comment in as a caveat to shed insight on, or to mock, Christian mentality. Christians believe that if a person doesn't repent and embrace Jesus as their savior God will send them to hell when they die. Well, because the vast majority of the people killed by the 2004 tsunami worshipped faiths other than Christianity - mainly Islam - according to Christian logic God would have sent the majority of them right on to hell. The only question I have is why the author didn't throw in his "insert joke here" line right after pointing that out?

believing God doesn't let non-christians into heaven is a complete non-sequetor of God killed them on purpose with a tsunami out of vengeance.

As has been pointed out to you repeatedly, you are defining Christianity by a stereotype that, while certainly exists in some denominations, is anything but universal or true for a huge majority of christians.

Just like Muslims are not all suicide bombers, or all mormons polygamist pedophiles, not all Christians are Pat Robertson-esque idiots.

[Man in Black]

Originally Posted by JcP

Just like Muslims are not all suicide bombers, or all mormons polygamist pedophiles, not all Christians are Pat Robertson-esque idiots.

we have a winnar1!1!!

[matthewmunari]

ya know what, even if religion is fake and its all a lie, it still professes to do good in your life, and your brother...i believe we transition into a next phase of existence (perfected human bodies), and its like this, but with a twistn-we don't age, or have the need to eat.....it will be the essence of what we were when we were alive existing as the energy we now occupy.....i'm pretty sure of it....

[kamikazi89]

you can't debunk jesus : he's just an idea(it's like the war on terrorism)

..the bible on the other hand: no problem