Jesus Christ proof: Richard Dawkins in shock ‘archaeological evidence’ claim over Messiah

[ToxicBunny]

Ahhh gotta love the circle jerk that any vaguely religious thread turns into...

@Ponderer, you have shown in multiple threads that you are entirely clueless about science...

 

[Techne]

And you have no idea what science is.

No you don't, likely never will.

 

[SauRoNZA]

You seem to be under the impression that Dawkins is a philosopher.
He is not.
He is a (pathetic) hateful Atheist.

You stated that you enjoyed Dawkins's ventures in Philosophy.
I enjoyed how David Berlinski absolutely shredded Dawkins, and showed him up for the "poepol" he is.

Why do you keep putting poephol in quotes and spelling it incorrectly?

 

[rietrot]

Basically make up whatever suits the reader.

Actually not. There's the whole canon thing and all that.

 

[SauRoNZA]

Actually given the right conditions the current oceans could easily do it..... a large enough comet impact could cause a high tide that cycles and gradually lowers. And you are assuming that the water that covers the earth was there to begin with, what could have happened is a double-whammy of ice comet hitting the earth and causing the plate cracks which forced out subterranean sources of water, a ice comet would also break apart upon entry causing a shotgun hit for maximum coverage.

Erm...wasn't it supposed to be flooded for like 30 days or something?

So no, a momentary comment doesn't explain it away with a giant wave that buggers off shortly after.

 

[Ponderer]

Why do you keep putting poephol in quotes and spelling it incorrectly?

Excuse my inconsistent spelling.

I should also not have put poephol/poepol in quotes - he is a true one.
The same goes for his worshipers.

 

[rambo919]

Erm...wasn't it supposed to be flooded for like 30 days or something?

So no, a momentary comment doesn't explain it away with a giant wave that buggers off shortly after.

If the bulge is large enough though it wont bugger off shortly after, the moon's pull would make it only gradually subside once it had reached peak. Like a magnet gradually loosing pull.

 

[Markd]

The issue I have with Dawkins is that he isn't very objective. He has a strong bias towards atheism and listening to his Audibook of The God Delusion was actually very difficult. I'm open to hearing some unbiased, logic-based discussion on religions, but I didn't get that from him. In fact, when I fact checked some of the research that was referenced in the book, the views he put forward in the book did not align to the actual outcomes - it was like he pick and chose the research he wanted to include, and ignored the research that was counter to his view. On this basis he loses credibility to me. I respect his views, but not his arguments.

When it comes to the Bible, there is enough evidence for historians to broadly agree that Jesus was a real person who existed. This said, there are plenty of contradictions and inconsistencies in the bible that make questioning the rules set forth a reasonable thing to do in my view.

There just doesnt seem to be any rational discussion out there. People are in one of the 2 camps above, and can't come in with a neutral view. So we'll sit in forums and watch this thread max out...

 

[Lupus]

Erm...wasn't it supposed to be flooded for like 30 days or something?

So no, a momentary comment doesn't explain it away with a giant wave that buggers off shortly after.

40 days and 40 nights, Jesus was also fasting for 40 days and 40 nights. But 40 days and 40 nights just means a really long time, doesn't have a specific time line.

 

[SauRoNZA]

If the bulge is large enough though it wont bugger off shortly after, the moon's pull would make it only gradually subside once it had reached peak. Like a magnet gradually loosing pull.

Okay, now I’m pretty sure you are just trolling nonsense.

 

[Binary_Bark]

Sure this guy might have existed, but he was not a wizard as the fairytale book makes him out to be

 

[Lupus]

Sure this guy might have existed, but he was not a wizard as the fairytale book makes him out to be

The thing is, the name was quite a common name. I'm sure there was a Yeshua (Joshua/Jesus) there could've been ten of them. But was he the son of god? Probably as close to Adam Sandler being the son of satan.

 

[rambo919]

Okay, now I’m pretty sure you are just trolling nonsense.

What happened to having open minds? Or is that just for things you believe? I'm, not saying it happened just that it's a likely scenario.

 

[Ponderer]

What happened to having open minds? Or is that just for things you believe? I'm, not saying it happened just that it's a likely scenario.

Zealots are notorious for being closed minded.
Many (but not all) Atheists are zealots.

 

[rambo919]

Zealots are notorious for being closed minded.
Many (but not all) Atheists are zealots.

Funny thing is many academics also become zealots because it becomes an issue of defending turf or orthodoxy rather than finding truth. My problem is neither turf nor orthodoxy matter to me..... and this seems to really confuse people.

 

[Binary_Bark]

Funny thing is many academics also become zealots because it becomes an issue of defending turf or orthodoxy rather than finding the truth. My problem is neither turf nor orthodoxy matter to me..... and this seems to really confuse people.

Everything confuses they guy, if it's not written in his magic fairytale book then it is BS according to him

 

[SauRoNZA]

What happened to having open minds? Or is that just for things you believe? I'm, not saying it happened just that it's a likely scenario.

I’m all for being open minded.

But telling me the moon’s pull with make the water rise is the biggest bollocks I’ve ever heard.

 

[rambo919]

I’m all for being open minded.

But telling me the moon’s pull with make the water rise is the biggest bollocks I’ve ever heard.

Good.... cause I never said that....

 

[Ponderer]

Funny thing is many academics also become zealots because it becomes an issue of defending turf or orthodoxy rather than finding truth. My problem is neither turf nor orthodoxy matter to me..... and this seems to really confuse people.

100% agree.
Its not about who says what and why, its about what the truth is.

 

[vic777]

The issue I have with Dawkins is that he isn't very objective. He has a strong bias towards atheism and listening to his Audibook of The God Delusion was actually very difficult. I'm open to hearing some unbiased, logic-based discussion on religions, but I didn't get that from him. In fact, when I fact checked some of the research that was referenced in the book, the views he put forward in the book did not align to the actual outcomes - it was like he pick and chose the research he wanted to include, and ignored the research that was counter to his view. On this basis he loses credibility to me. I respect his views, but not his arguments.

What research in the book are you referring to?