Archaeological Work in the Sinai

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

>> DICK

>> >Why would any logical, sane,

>> >rational person imagine that the biased opinions

>> >of a fool written in a book might somehow on faith

>> >become "evidence" of reality? Can no one on this

>> >list reason?



>> >BRIDEAN

>> >Is the Bible a book written by biased authors?



>> DICK

>> Some were, some weren't. Does bias change reality?



>> BRIDEAN

>> So since you are a logical, same, rational person, why would biased

>> opinions written in a book, somehow on faith become "evidence" of

>> reality.  And you yourself admit that the Bible is such a book.



>DICK

>I am NOT logical which does not mean illogical --

>it means NO logic, not false logic. No opinions

>written in a book are evidence of reality. Wherever

>did you get that idea? 



>BRIDEAN

>You yourself said, and I quote, "Why would any logical, sane,

>rational person imagine that the biased opinions of a fool written 

>in a book might somehow on faith become "evidence" of reality?"


DICK
You're now speaking only noise. You repeat my question
but you obviously don't understand any part of it.

I'll change it from a question to a statement: No logical,
sane, rational person would imagine that the biased opinions
of a fool written in a book might somehow on faith or by any
other means become evidence or "evidence" of reality.

BRIDEAN

>However, even if you defend the above by saying that the people

>of the Bible were not fools, opinions are only opinions and can't

>be evidence of anything.  


DICK
Yes. So? That's what I said and what you keep quoting me
as saying. What is your problem? (Besides not understanding
what I said obviously.) No human testimony, written or spoken,
is any more than opinion, as I've said repeatedly. Nothing in
any book should ever be considered a fact or the truth and is
evidence of nothing outside its own existence as a physical
book. You have a point?

BRIDEAN
Well  "No human testimony, written or spoken,
is any more than opinion, as I've said repeatedly."
That demonstrates that all you have to show
me is opinion.
 


>DICK

>This is the fallacy of strawman if you're trying to assign 

>it to me. I DON'T ADMIT ANYTHING. I state that the Bible 

>is infallibly true, but that does not imply that it

>is evidence of anything. 



>BRIDEAN

>If truth has anything to do with reality, and the Bible is infallibly true,

>then it must infallibly have something to do with reality.  As such

>it would be evidence of how reality operates.


DICK
Fallacy of equivocation. Truth is reality. The Bible is
infallibly true. But there is no "then" which is one of
the rules of the silly games of logic. The word "then"
means a guess follows. However, regardless of your false
conclusion, the Bible contains the infallible truth about
reality. But your last statement is a wild leap into total
irrationality. The Bible is not evidence of anything except
that it exists as a book. The Bible is certainly not evidence
of how reality operates, since for one thing, reality doesn't
operate whatever the hell operate means.

Your problem here in logic, reason and semantics is that you
fail to comprehend what evidence is. That has been the major
problem with all the nutty participants on this list. They
keep on and on quoting the opinions of human beings from
books as though they were more than opinions, which is only
another word for guesses. They are not evidence of anything
except the person's opinion. Such quotations are illogical
and irrational. You people play some very odd games on this
list with your imagined "debates" and "arguments" but you
never do anything but trade opinions, sometimes with a LOT
of false logic and insults thrown in. No one here has come
close to stating the truth about anything except by pure
luck, chance, fate or God's will. It certainly was never
done logically or rationally.


>DICK

>You badly misuse common

>words, which is the fallacy of equivocation.



>BRIDEAN

>This is coming from a person who defends Catholicism, yet says that

>everyone is saved, Jesus was not God, ect [sic].  You badly misuse the

>Catholic faith.


DICK
You are both a fool and a liar who cannot read and comprehend
simple English. Here you continue to badly misuse words and
commit the fallacy of strawman trying to assign to me positions
that exist only in your own feeble mind. I do NOT defend
Catholicism, showing you fail to know what the word defend
means. I do NOT say everyone is "saved" whatever the hell that
word is supposed to mean. But I do say Jesus was no more a
god or God than you or Tilly or my dog. That one statement
you got correct, no doubt by accident. I do NOT use or misuse
the moronic Catholic faith, whatever the hell that is, a term
I've certainly never used. All this amounts to gross intellectual
dishonesty, often exhibited on this list, especially by Till.

Your twisting of the words of other people into things you
then ridicule is the double logical fallacy of strawman and
humor. It proves only that you're totally illogical.

Now, I'll reinstate some things to untwist your twists.

Fact: The Catholic Church is the only Christian Church.
This is NOT defending anything but merely stating an
empirical fact of reality that any human being can
observe for themselves, if they know how to see reality.
Some here don't.

Truth, but not a fact: All living things, from amoebae to
human animals, will be recreated or manufactured or
resurrected or built as identical duplicates or whatever
phrase you wish to indicate a new identical thing after
time ends. This has NOTHING to do with any concept of
"salvation" since there is NOTHING to be saved from.

BRIDEAN
In that case, the Bible lies when it gives the answer to
"What must I do to be saved?".  I will give you a hint,
there IS a place in the Bible where someone directly
asks Jesus this question.  But as you said earlier,
"No human testimony, written or spoken,
is any more than opinion, as I've said repeatedly."
By the way, why would God want to bother resurrecting
fools like me or Till?

DICK
Fact: Jesus is not God.
This is an empirical fact that any human being can
observe for themselves, if they know how to see reality.
Some here don't. (You know how to see a negative, a non-
existent? Simple. By seeing the real God and seeing that
He is not Jesus.)

"Arguing" against strawman positions is a waste of
everyone's time.


BRIDEAN
Sure beats scoping out the local High School.

• Previous message: Archaeological Work in the Sinai
• Next message: Archaeological Work in the Sinai
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]