• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth.

Status
Not open for further replies.
DOC said:
I didn't say you attacked (me) the messenger but others certainly have, and it always seems to come after I make what I think is an effective post.

I think it portrays some skeptics in here as bitter people incapable of a civilized discussion on this topic without degenerating into personal attacks and shock language; and I think that hurts the image of skepticism.
Click to expand...
If DOC is basing his opinion on the same evidential basis as his post concerning the OP; skeptics and skepticism is not only safe but is doing much better since DOC posted.
 
DOC said:
I didn't say you attacked (me) the messenger but others certainly have, and it always seems to come after I make what I think is an effective post.

I think it portrays some skeptics in here as bitter people incapable of a civilized discussion on this topic, and I think that hurts the image of skepticism.
Click to expand...


I can help but notice how you complained about my 'personal attack'. Yet, when I write a long post explaining and justifying my remarks, you just ignore it.


As I said, it seems to me that you are only interested in answering the minority of short snippy remarks because you don't have the baggage to actually handle the argumented ones.

Really, you are seemingly blind to all but the less argumented posts and you choose to complain about them.
In reality, at every iteration of the same tired arguments, a large number of posts do deal with the arguments and you do not even acknowledge their existence... It's obviously intellectually dishonest, it's also inciting people not to get into the trouble of spending time on giving their answer a backing that is only getting their post more likely to be ignored.



Seriously, "[you] think is an effective post"?
You are flattering yourself... And being delusional all at the same time.
The post wasn't effective when you posted the same argument the first time and was picked up apart within minutes.
It wasn't effective any of the other multiple times you posted it and people patiently explained to you why it wasn't effective.
And it certainly wasn't any more effective the last time you posted it when people did once again refute it, before making a few passing remarks that you choose to focus on...
 
And, yes, I am bitter or actually, annoyed; annoyed that I have been trying to have a civilized conversation with a wall of intellectual dishonesty.
 
Hokulele said:
In my dictionary, there is a reference to "lie of omission", which in turns references your quote regarding the author of the book of Luke. Who would have guessed?
Click to expand...
I've been on this planet many years, have a college degree, and have taken post graduate courses, and I never remember hearing the term lie of omission before putting up this thread.

Anyone with a high school diploma, who has read this "whole" thread [including the 84 highly detailed facts Luke got right (mentioned by me over 3 times)] should know I didn't lie when I said Sir William M. Ramsay has called gospel writer Luke one of the world's greatest historians. And for people to continue to say it was a lie or a lie of omission, I thinks hurts your image and credibility.
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
I've been on this planet many years, have a college degree, and have taken post graduate courses, and I never remember hearing the term lie of omission before putting up this thread.
Click to expand...

Lie by omission, including this gem:
The Catholic theological definition of a lie is, "To deny others access to knowledge to which they are entitled"
Click to expand...
Also, more generally, presented here.


You might should also be aware of the oath:
Do you promise to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Click to expand...
.

Once again, your own (deep) ignorance is not an argument and you are giving otter-parenting a bad name.


Anyone with a high school diploma, who has read this "whole" thread [including the 84 highly detailed facts Luke got right (mentioned by me over 3 times)] should know I didn't lie when I said Sir William M. Ramsay has called gospel writer Luke one of the world's greatest historians. And for people to continue to say it, I thinks hurts your image and credibility.
Click to expand...

Actually, anybody who can read knows you have been purposelly misquoting Ramsay multiple times. To purposelly misquote somebody is no different than to lie about what he said...
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
I've been on this planet many years,
Click to expand...
I believe this.
DOC said:
have a college degree,
Click to expand...
I don't wish to believe this (it would speak poorly about the educational system.)
DOC said:
and have taken post graduate courses,
Click to expand...
I don't believe this.
DOC said:
and I never remember hearing the term lie of omission before putting up this thread.
Click to expand...
Just like you've never read a first hand account of the american revolution?

DOC said:
Anyone with a high school diploma, who has read this "whole" thread [including the 84 highly detailed facts Luke got right (mentioned by me over 3 times)] should know I didn't lie
Click to expand...
This is a lie.
DOC said:
when I said Sir William M. Ramsay has called gospel writer Luke one of the world's greatest historians. And for people to continue to say it was a lie or a lie of omission, I thinks hurts your image and credibility.
Click to expand...
This is also a lie.
 
DOC said:
This is wierd, Look up the definition of a lie.
Click to expand...
Webster's Dictionary:
"1 : to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
2 : to create a false or misleading impression"


Your posts definitely give false and misleading impressions.
ETA:
Look above and note that the two statements I call lies completely and totally fit definition 2 provided by Webster's Dictionary.
 
Last edited:
Hokulele said:
Win!

And did anyone note the fallacies DOC used in his "I am educated and never heard of this" speech? I still have a Bingo card that needs completing.
Click to expand...

Argument ad ignorantium with a little bit of 'argument from authority' on the side...
It's like, the plat du jour at Doc's.


paximperium said:
Definition of DOC's nonsense/Christian apolegetics/Push-up bra:
"To make attractive by propping up that which is lacking."

:boxedin:
Click to expand...

Well played ol' chap. I am glad I could be of use setting that up for you...
 
DOC said:
I've been on this planet many years, have a college degree, and have taken post graduate courses, and I never remember hearing the term lie of omission before putting up this thread.
Click to expand...


Are you trying to make this easy, DOC?
Didn't you claim to have studied logic? And yet you cannot remember the "lie by omission"? That, coupled with your all-to-well evidenced ignorance of the fallacies of popularity and authority lead me to conclude that this logic course you took must have been taught in Swahili*. By somebody who doesn't speak that language.


* I'm not attempting to denigrate Swahili. It's just the first language that popped into my head.



DOC said:
Anyone with a high school diploma, who has read this "whole" thread [including the 84 highly detailed facts Luke got right (mentioned by me over 3 times)] should know I didn't lie when I said Sir William M. Ramsay has called gospel writer Luke one of the world's greatest historians. And for people to continue to say it was a lie or a lie of omission, I thinks hurts your image and credibility.
Click to expand...


Okay, first off, those "84 highly detailed facts" are nothing more than the author's personal opinion. For example: What's the objective measure of an "embarrassing detail"? And the rest aren't any better. And most (if not all) have already been shown to be either unfounded, fallacious, or flat-out dishonest.

And you did lie when you said that Ramsay called Luke "one of the world's greatest historians". Just because you haven't heard of lying by omission, or of quote-mining, does not make your actions in repeatedly making that claim after being shown that it was wrong any less dishonest.
In fact, it was only in the last few pages that your started including Ramsay's disclaimers when making that claim. All the rest of the time, DOC, you were making the claim knowing that it was incomplete. You were intentionally distorting the meaning of what Ramsay said. You were lying.

You're inability to comprehend this does not in any way hurt our credibility.
One might, however, be inspired to ponder the credibility of someone who has, for 1600-some-odd-posts, trotted out the same long-debunked rubbish over-and-over-and-over again, pretending like it hasn't been refuted.

Honestly, DOC, read Don Quixote. His logic reminds me very strongly of yours.
 
DOC said:
This is wierd, Look up the definition of a lie.
Click to expand...


Lie (n)

1. DOC has just replied to a thread you have subscribed to entitled - Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth. - in the History, Literature, and the Arts forum of JREF Forum.​


DOC said:
I didn't say you attacked (me) the messenger but others certainly have, and it always seems to come after I make what I think is an effective post.
Click to expand...


Apart from the fact that this is yet another lie, it rather begs the question, "Why do you make posts which you don't consider to be effective?"


DOC said:
I think it portrays some skeptics in here as bitter people incapable of a civilized discussion on this topic without degenerating into personal attacks and shock language; and I think that hurts the image of skepticism.
Click to expand...


You're wrong, as usual.

How would you know what people here are capable of, given that you never post anywhere other than in this fiasco?

Image of skepticism? What the hell are you talking about?


DOC said:
I've been on this planet many years, have a college degree, and have taken post graduate courses, and I never remember hearing the term lie of omission before putting up this thread.
Click to expand...


You have a sub-high school education, by all appaearances.

Pointing out things that you don't remember does little to alter that perception.

Apart from this most recent drivel about not be aware of what a 'Lie of Omission' means, you previously tried to claim never having heard of any eye-witness accounts of the War of Independence.

Statements like this, in fact, cast doubt on your having any education whatsoever.


DOC said:
Anyone with a high school diploma, who has read this "whole" thread . . .
Click to expand...


What's a high school diploma, Americano? Are you aware that other countries are able to access the Internet these days?


DOC said:
[including the 84 highly detailed facts Luke got right (mentioned by me over 3 times)] should know I didn't lie when I said Sir William M. Ramsay has called gospel writer Luke one of the world's greatest historians.
Click to expand...


Given the number of times this has been proven to be complete rubbish, it is absolutely a lie. The fact that you perservere with it is a disgrace. Have you no shame at all?


DOC said:
And for people to continue to say it was a lie or a lie of omission, I thinks hurts your image and credibility.
Click to expand...


You have got to be kidding.

Name one person participating in this thread who believes your garbage and then tell us why you think you're in any way qualified to comment on the credibility of others.

How would you describe the image created here by your posting history?

Pathetic is the first thing that comes to my mind, but I'm sure you'll give me a laugh with yours.
 
Akhenaten said:
What's a high school diploma, Americano? Are you aware that other countries are able to access the Internet these days?
Click to expand...

The degree you receive at the end of high school, before going to college/ higher education. The equivalent to the British A-level or the French baccalaureat.

So, I guess, the equivalent of the Higher School Certificate that you aussies receive on your twelfth years, at the end of your secondary education.
 
Nah, please don't. Simon. I'm being crabby today, and that was uncalled for.

I'm just sick of his ridiculously narrow world view and it got the better of me.

Apologies, mate. I should know better.


Dave
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom