The Bible is a Human Artifice!!!

[Craig4]

Seeing that Delvo is not going to do it ... maybe you can "zealously" as you claim... read the answer to this question




And see if you can find it in one of my posts...

Hint: it was in fact also given to you as a response to one of your posts... one in which you thought I said Moses was an Egyptian COURIER because you did not read properly the word Courtier.

Go find it....

On second thought given your other further demonstrated faulty reading given in this post.... I am going to make it easier for you.... here read it ...





And maybe you would finally like to admit your errors and baseless calumny in this post



.

Loki is supposed to have been a trickster. He could just be having a laugh.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

[*]He won't even say whether he does or not in fact think "omipotent deities" exist or not

You appear to be talking about me, yet I said in my very first post that Gods are just pretend, and I reiterated that belief in later posting. Why are you falsely accusing me of equivocating on this?

Also, for the umpteen-and-first time, the beliefs of others are utterly irrelevant to whether or not you have shown proof of your claim.

 

[Leumas]

Yes.

It's like when you start a thread about your claim to have proven that the bible was authored by humans and then bluster to cover your continuing failure to make a logical case.

No it is when you do not read and refuse to read the proof and to avoid reading it ... you and the "us" start doing this

No, he's stating it's not serious because, as far as I can tell, you are the only one really taking it seriously. Almost everyone else is having a laugh at your expense.

Jokes made at your expense keep flying over your head. Thermal's continued insistence on calling you brother is done to take the piss out of you, and you seem to be completely oblivious.

I'm reminded of the gathering at my aunt's house many years ago where a couple of her MENSA friends made an appearance. Any conversation on any topic, they were "experts". They totally failed to notice that nobody was taking anything they had to say seriously, and half of us were doing everything we could to make them look like fools. Not that it required much effort on our behalf, because they were doing a pretty good job of that all by themselves.

 

[Leumas]

No need. There are no gods. All religious writings were written by humans. Many of those humans were serious in their beliefs. Some were no doubt engaging in artifice. The rest is just pointless window dressing.

GREAT... QED!!!

And there are no posters here disputing those few facts so your verbosity is wasted.

But the above is clearly and demonstrably not true... maybe you have not read any posts other than yours... but there are numerous posts in this thread showing that your above statement is an error.

here is an example....

...

If readers here do not believe Gods exist that does not establish your claim to have proven no God authored the bible. ...
Even if your language anomaly argument is true, you have only made a case that the bible was not authored by a particular type of God who is incapable of lying.

That would appear to be a case for the bible being a work of fiction, as I think almost everyone here would agree, but can you explain which part shows that the fiction could not have been authored by an omnipotent deity?

No. I maintain the following:

If an omnipotent deity existed, they could certainly author a work of fiction if they wanted to.

And you have not yet shown any evidence that this particular work of fiction could not have been so authored.
You just assume it wasn't, because you assume axiomatically that no such deity exists. And this axiom, in turn, is nothing more than the null hypothesis for the claim that such a deity does exist.

But assuming the null is not the same as showing evidence to support it.

AHHHH AAHHHHHHHHHHHH....Those are the screams of your logic being tortured.

It's perfectly clear to me that Jack does not think the bible or anything else was written by a supernatural being. I'm not really sure why this is a tough one for you. There's a difference between you proving it wasn't (an odd claim) and believing it was.

Loki is supposed to have been a trickster. He could just be having a laugh.

etc. etc. etc.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Do you think it is rational to demand that the defense lawyer prove that the butler did not do it???

Or do you think there is a butler??

And is it irrational or not to say that regardless of if there is a butler one still has to prove that he did not do it???

Your butler analogy fails because it does not describe the same logical case.
Your analogy is begging the question that there is no butler.

It's a little more nuanced even than that; your defence lawyer should be claiming he can prove that no butler committed the crime, whether the victim employed a butler or not.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

GREAT... QED!!!




But the above is clearly and demonstrably not true... maybe you have not read any posts other than yours... but there are numerous posts in this thread showing that your above statement is an error.

here is an example....


etc. etc. etc.

Logic fail again. You really need to get past your incorrect belief that what anyone else believes relieves you of the burden of proving your claim.

 

[Leumas]

Your butler analogy fails because it does not describe the same logical case.
Your analogy is begging the question that there is no butler.

It's a little more nuanced even than that; your defence lawyer should be claiming he can prove that no butler committed the crime, whether the victim employed a butler or not.

Are you again doing the below ... or are you serious???

If you are serious then the guy below has egregiously misrepresented you ... do you care to correct him ... or do you agree with him that you are indeed doing what he said you are doing???

No, he's stating it's not serious because, as far as I can tell, you are the only one really taking it seriously. Almost everyone else is having a laugh at your expense.

Jokes made at your expense keep flying over your head. Thermal's continued insistence on calling you brother is done to take the piss out of you, and you seem to be completely oblivious.

I'm reminded of the gathering at my aunt's house many years ago where a couple of her MENSA friends made an appearance. Any conversation on any topic, they were "experts". They totally failed to notice that nobody was taking anything they had to say seriously, and half of us were doing everything we could to make them look like fools. Not that it required much effort on our behalf, because they were doing a pretty good job of that all by themselves.

 

[Leumas]

Your butler analogy fails because it does not describe the same logical case.
Your analogy is begging the question that there is no butler.

It's a little more nuanced even than that; your defence lawyer should be claiming he can prove that no butler committed the crime, whether the victim employed a butler or not.

​

 

[Leumas]

Logic fail again. You really need to get past your incorrect belief that what anyone else believes relieves you of the burden of proving your claim.

I did prove my claim.... but unfortunately you cannot understand the proof because you say things like this and are convinced of them...

..
It's a little more nuanced even than that; your defence lawyer should be claiming he can prove that no butler committed the crime, whether the victim employed a butler or not.

Or else ... you are doing what that guy said you are doing....

Or both....

Which is it????

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Are you again doing the below ... or are you serious???



If you are serious then the guy below has egregiously misrepresented you ... do you care to correct him ... or do you agree with him that you are indeed doing what he said you are doing???

Logic fail again. "Almost everyone" is not everyone.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/5128262cfa59e118ac.jpg[/qimg]





[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/5128262cfa56081a1b.jpg[/qimg]​

You fail to make any defence of your logical failure, I notice.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

I did prove my claim.... but unfortunately you cannot understand the proof because you say things like this and are convinced of them...











Or else ... you are doing what that guy said you are doing....



Or both....



Which is it????

You failed to make a logical case and since then you have merely demanded we re-read your failure.

 

[Thermal]

How the hell do you present an argument with a bunch of atheists (or the majority of the faithful, for that matter) that the Bible was written by men...and actually lose the argument?

 

[Craig4]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/5128262cfa59e118ac.jpg[/qimg]


[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/5128262cfa56081a1b.jpg[/qimg]​

I really hope that what you're trying to communicate with this post is different from what you actually communicated with this post.

 

[Leumas]

Loki is supposed to have been a trickster. He could just be having a laugh.

​

Or are you doing what that guy said you are doing???

If you agree with him that that is indeed what you are doing then say so... if not then please tell him so....

Which is it??? Are you attempting to derail this thread or not???

If you are then admit it ... just like he did.

 

[Leumas]

How the hell do you present an argument with a bunch of atheists (or the majority of the faithful, for that matter) that the Bible was written by men...and actually lose the argument?

If they do not know what reality is ... because I did not lose the argument... because all you were doing is what that guy admitted you are doing... so there was no argument....

No, he's stating it's not serious because, as far as I can tell, you are the only one really taking it seriously. Almost everyone else is having a laugh at your expense.

Jokes made at your expense keep flying over your head. Thermal's continued insistence on calling you brother is done to take the piss out of you, and you seem to be completely oblivious.

That is not an argument and certainly not by any rational atheists....

Do you agree with him.... then admit it...

If not then please refute him....

Which is it???

I'm reminded of the gathering at my aunt's house many years ago where a couple of her MENSA friends made an appearance. Any conversation on any topic, they were "experts". They totally failed to notice that nobody was taking anything they had to say seriously, and half of us were doing everything we could to make them look like fools. Not that it required much effort on our behalf, because they were doing a pretty good job of that all by themselves.

The above is not the action of rational skeptics... and not the action of anyone winning any arguments...

So do you agree with him or do you not... admit it if you do or refute him if you do not.....

I will take any silence as you agree with him.

Which if you do then you have not won any argument because you did not make any rational anything.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

I really hope that what you're trying to communicate with this post is different from what you actually communicated with this post.

I just quoted your post on my phone and that's what came out. Do you suppose something similar happened to your iron-clad proof that humans authored the bible?

 

[Leumas]

You failed to make a logical case and since then you have merely demanded we re-read your failure.

I have not failed anything ... you were not listening to any case nor were you reading anything.... just like that guy admitted you are doing...

You were derailing this thread deliberately all along... just like he admitted.

No, he's stating it's not serious because, as far as I can tell, you are the only one really taking it seriously. Almost everyone else is having a laugh at your expense.

Jokes made at your expense keep flying over your head. Thermal's continued insistence on calling you brother is done to take the piss out of you, and you seem to be completely oblivious.

I'm reminded of the gathering at my aunt's house many years ago where a couple of her MENSA friends made an appearance. Any conversation on any topic, they were "experts". They totally failed to notice that nobody was taking anything they had to say seriously, and half of us were doing everything we could to make them look like fools. Not that it required much effort on our behalf, because they were doing a pretty good job of that all by themselves.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Can you complete the argument "No deity could have authored the bible because..." in a single sentence and without making an argument from incredulity?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

You were derailing this thread deliberately all along... just like he admitted.

You're getting desperate now. If you need to grasp at this excuse to avoid supporting your claim I think we're done.