Can one disprove Jesus' resurrection?

[Donn]

Mary might not even have been human. What taxonomy fictional god mothers?

 

[Leumas]

Regarding the virgin Mary; as I said further up the thread, in the early scriptures she was referred to as a young woman. The Greeks mistranslated that to virgin. Mary wasn't a virgin when she gave birth

Mary did not exist!

Trying to rationalize a fairy tale is irrational.

You don't see people trying to rationalize Aladdin or Snow White, do you?

What would you say about someone trying to rationalize the Little Red Riding Hood story saying it was not really a wolf and he did not really EAT the grandmother he just killed her and raped her granddaughter?

See this rational version of Little Red Riding Hood

 

[The Big Dog]

How the hell did it get to 12 pages?

a whole lot of proselytizing like this:

12 pages of sophistry and SPECIAL PLEADING and illogical fallacies of the most desperate kind to alleviate the most chronic and acute Cognitive Dissonance.

Nothing but arrant casuistry trying to somehow still maintain some FACE SAVING from having to admit that their culture and society and history has been based upon nothing more than a FAIRY TALE fabricated by huckstering poltroons and enforced by the swords of pillaging brigands. Nothing but an ancient Pyramid Scheme or Multi-Level Marketing Scam.

They are desperate to prove that it is not all a big hoax like all the other woo they are increasingly beginning to realize is claptrap.

Much like children who are driven to tears and dismay after discovering the level of adult complicity of their society and parents in deceiving them for so long and in so many ways with the Santa fable.

 

[H'ethetheth]

a whole lot of proselytizing like this:

...and baiting like this.

Anyway, I'm happy to largely agree with you for once. I don't get to say that often.

 

[Nihilianth]

Actually in some rare case it is possible. A virgin is not "corked" down here. And sperm if very active and swimming splashed down under near or through the vaginal opening, can indeed climb up.

Due to the over abundance of web stuff about christian it is difficult for me to find a statistic.
But it is probably exceedingly rare.

Now whether genital petting count or other activities baring penetration count as is culturally open , some culture count only penetration as losing virginity.

If you are speaking of parthenogenesis , yes you are right it is a no go for mammals AFAIK but i am no biologist.

Are you still a "virgin" if you are just "playing around," to where both an egg and sperm are released so those little ****ers can climb into a woman's vagina, and chew themselves into one of her released eggs?

Nah, I'm talking about a virgin, like Mary was supposedly a virgin.

12 pages of sophistry and SPECIAL PLEADING and illogical fallacies of the most desperate kind to alleviate the most chronic and acute Cognitive Dissonance.

Nothing but arrant casuistry trying to somehow still maintain some FACE SAVING from having to admit that their culture and society and history has been based upon nothing more than a FAIRY TALE fabricated by huckstering poltroons and enforced by the swords of pillaging brigands. Nothing but an ancient Pyramid Scheme or Multi-Level Marketing Scam.

They are desperate to prove that it is not all a big hoax like all the other woo they are increasingly beginning to realize is claptrap.

Much like children who are driven to tears and dismay after discovering the level of adult complicity of their society and parents in deceiving them for so long and in so many ways with the Santa fable.

Wow, you could have just answered my other question of whether it's worth reading or not, with just a simply "no."

But hey, your way was way more fun!

Regarding the virgin Mary; as I said further up the thread, in the early scriptures she was referred to as a young woman. The Greeks mistranslated that to virgin. Mary wasn't a virgin when she gave birth

Ok, but I wasn't talking about "MARY" specifically. I was referring to the claim made in the OP that "theoretically a virgin can get pregnant." Aepervius gave an example of how it "MIGHT" be possible. I suppose Aepervius's post answers my concerns. But two people would still have to be pulling off some antics for that to occur.

a whole lot of proselytizing like this:

 

[Foster Zygote]

I was expecting a strong mix of votes- part of them saying it could be disproved for some reason and another part saying that it's extremely difficult to prove a negative. I didn't really have an opinion. I was however very surprised by many responses on the conspiracy theory threads. I understand that skeptics would be cynical of conspiracy theories, but I certainly expected a comparable tendency toward skepticism toward official narratives as well. But I don't want to digress about that in this thread.

You seem to be conflating skepticism with cynicism. Just because one provisionally accepts a theory as the most parsimonious explanation, it doesn't mean that said theory was not skeptically examined.

 

[Foster Zygote]

I guess that you are right about Judaism and Christianity's method of passing knowledge to the extent that one group had some knowledge that others didn't - like Zechariah would have known the meaning behind his own poems.
However, the quotes you showed and the idea of one group having the true knowledge and the outsiders being led astray or being close minded is not really such a bad way of putting things and can be a good way of putting reality.

Take for example Galileo and Copernicus who proposed that the earth was round and that the earth went around the sun. They shared this knowledge with their students and cothinkers, along with even deeper knowledge about the stars. But people who society treated as wise didn't "get it". They were kept from understanding by their ignorance, by institutions, personal failings, etc.

It's like a moral teaching combined with some miracle- People picked on John, beat him up intensely, but then he surprised everyone by healing over night. But they wouldn't believe it or that he was right in what he was telling people because of their ignorance or other failings.

Neither Copernicus nor Galileo would have surprised anyone by positing that the Earth is a sphere. This had been common knowledge to educated people for several centuries prior. Eratosthenes even calculated the diameter of the Earth, with remarkable accuracy given the technical limitations of the time, in the 3rd Century BCE.

I only bring it up because there seem to be similar misaprehensions regarding your understanding of early Christianity.

 

[Nihilianth]

Ok. I have trudged through the first three pages of this thread. I have found some.....rather interesting things out, but a lot of stuff remains a mystery.

DLH. His posts disappeared, except for the ones that people have quoted.

At the end of page 2, this "DLH" character posted about his website "Pathway Machine." He said his link is in his profile.

Well, much to my chagrin, his name has disappeared from the forums. I try clicking on the arrow thingy in a quote, to take me to one of his posts. I didn't have access. Ok, so interesting.

I Googled "Pathway Machine."

I came up with THIS post from "atheistforums.org":

https://atheistforums.org/thread-432.html

Apparently, he knows how to get himself banned all around the internet!

So, I am wondering. What happened to this fellow on iSkep? Curiosity is killing me!

ETA: Leumas quotes this guy. He says his name is "David." On the atheist forum, he calls himself "Raymond." More specifically, "Raymond Sheen," and somehow thinks it is clever that he uses "The Pathway MaCHINE;" Last name "Sheen." What a crackhead! LOL.

ETA2: Also as Luemas points out, this guy has lied about "not being a Christian," by digging up a quote of calling himself a Christian in his introduction! (He even lies about his name, as I have found out from a completely different forum I have never been to before!)

If he's banned from here, he will likely create a new account,a nd continue with his lies. And his lies will be oh-so-obvious. It's almost painful to watch, if it weren't so amusing.

 

[Pixel42]

DLH. His posts disappeared, except for the ones that people have quoted.

A quick check of the 'Public Notices' subforum found this:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=10584933#post10584933

DLH has been banned as a sockpuppet of banned member David Henson

 

[annnnoid]

12 pages of sophistry and SPECIAL PLEADING and illogical fallacies of the most desperate kind to alleviate the most chronic and acute Cognitive Dissonance.

Nothing but arrant casuistry trying to somehow still maintain some FACE SAVING from having to admit that their culture and society and history has been based upon nothing more than a FAIRY TALE fabricated by huckstering poltroons and enforced by the swords of pillaging brigands. Nothing but an ancient Pyramid Scheme or Multi-Level Marketing Scam.

They are desperate to prove that it is not all a big hoax like all the other woo they are increasingly beginning to realize is claptrap.

Much like children who are driven to tears and dismay after discovering the level of adult complicity of their society and parents in deceiving them for so long and in so many ways with the Santa fable.

…but of course Leumas. I am also a firm believer in the philosophy of absolute reality. Never, ever, ever allow kids to subscribe to anything but empirical certainty. Get rid of the dolls, the imaginary friends, the fairy tales, the stupid picture books and the unscientific storytelling. Sesame street, Spongbob, Dora the explorer, Mickey Mouse, Arthur, Thomas the Tank Engine, Animaniacs…and the most evil of all…the Teletubbies (…of course…there are those who would insist that a certain purple dinosaur is the antichrist…but I guess that’s just them). Expunge our world of these horrific influences!

From the moment they can blabber they should have mathematics and physics hammered incessantly into their tiny brains and not a damn thing else.

…but hang on…nobody has the faintest idea what mathematics and physics are or where they come from….or did you not notice this piddling detail (NOTE: “they come from your brain” does not, in fact, qualify as a credible answer)? In fact…nobody has any idea how human beings ultimately do anything at all…including but not limited to your capacity to understand the word you are reading right NOW. Meaning…neither you nor anyone (?) on this planet empirically ‘understands’ what you / they are doing….it’s all FAITH!!!!!! (…I’d suggest you take a minute…relax…I know that must be a hard word for you to digest). Not to mention…that nobody has a clue what this universe actually is, where any of it comes from…or how.

It’s all fairy tales. So…along with dear old Santa, I guess we’ll just have to toss ….everything!

 

[Donn]

Math comes from Spongebob, who calculates lamba under the sea.

 

[annnnoid]

Ah the chicanery of language legerdemain and pretense of making up nonsensical rules indicating not a likelihood but an assured certainty that the casuistic codswallop has been exposed for the onanism it is and that apologetics have failed to substantiate any claimed claptrap, for which reason the next step is now on the way deploying sophistic hoodwinking stratagems to obfuscate the issue by degenerating the argument into nothing but tomfoolery and flinging ad hominems and red herrings and piles of illogical fallacies.

Ah, but I interrupted your sophistic shenanigans... do carry on!

…just curious…but did you accomplish all this before or after breakfast?

 

[Nihilianth]

A quick check of the 'Public Notices' subforum found this:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=10584933#post10584933

Oh! I think I remember that name. Well, his name is probably neither David, nor Raymond. It's probably like Spencer or something.

I forgot to mention, his antics date back to 2008, at the very least.

…just curious…but did you accomplish all this before or after breakfast?

That's just Leumas. He always talks that way when he gets mad.

 

[Slowvehicle]

Oh! I think I remember that name. Well, his name is probably neither David, nor Raymond. It's probably like Spencer or something.

I forgot to mention, his antics date back to 2008, at the very least.



That's just Leumas. He always talks that way when he gets mad.

It is refreshing, to me at least, that some of us have a naturally sesquipedalian bent, not being limited to a quotidian mainstream. Grammar and Lexicon are our only tools against the darkness. I venture to surmise that Leumas, in full cry, would actually have to slow down to use more pedestrian tools.

 

[mstricky]

Mary did not exist!

Trying to rationalize a fairy tale is irrational.

You don't see people trying to rationalize Aladdin or Snow White, do you?

What would you say about someone trying to rationalize the Little Red Riding Hood story saying it was not really a wolf and he did not really EAT the grandmother he just killed her and raped her granddaughter?

See this rational version of Little Red Riding Hood

I don't think she existed either.

 

[Slowvehicle]

I don't think she existed either.

But there's VIDEO (Into the Woods; "I know Things Now")

 

[Nihilianth]

It is refreshing, to me at least, that some of us have a naturally sesquipedalian bent, not being limited to a quotidian mainstream. Grammar and Lexicon are our only tools against the darkness. I venture to surmise that Leumas, in full cry, would actually have to slow down to use more pedestrian tools.

Unfortunately, I do not have such an expansive vocabulary. I know what big words mean and stuff. I just don't use them....

 

[Slowvehicle]

Unfortunately, I do not have such an expansive vocabulary. I know what big words mean and stuff. I just don't use them....

I am certain that Leumas, and others know what "little words" mean, "and stuff"; and simply choose not to use them...

 

[The Big Dog]

I am certain that Leumas, and others know what "little words" mean, "and stuff"; and simply choose not to use them...

Actually leumas uses those words when he personally attacks people who point out that his arguments are fallacious.

It is just a string of personal attacks and insults against people who question a personal belief system.

Typing out "onanism" in no way makes the arguments less juvenile, to cite but one example.

 

[Elind]

...for that claim, yes.
If someone else claims the opposite of the original claim, they have the burden of proof of the opposite claim.

Ridiculous.