kingthreat:


Please read the attached. The absolute truth.

This is half truth, not absolute truth. You need to show us what led to those greens, turning white. Without that, it is half truth (which is a way of deceit)

loskally:


Why don't you make research well before opening your stinky mouth.. Israeli bis the disease here, why attack innocent civilians in the mosques during the holy month of Ramadan, killing innocent Children, injured above 300 person. And the world is mute, this is a total act of aggression, inhuman..

Like the question I do ask children when one complains of how he has been beaten; "what did you do to him?" Is it possible for this other person to just beat you for NOTHING? What ensues is silence.

adedehinbo:
you might not know,let me educate you,israel are the ones annexing these people land, destroy their houses and when they fight back, israel term them terrorist,fire them and claim victim

You need to start from few years before 1948, not from recent times. That would give a better context of the issue

olugabbie:


It is Isreal that cant do without America. Isreal exists today because of the US & its Eurooean allies.

All the fighter jets Isreal has today was bought from US. Thier major tank (Abraham tank) was brought from US. Without the US, Isreal is dead.

The iron dome defence system is design to engage short range, cheap missiles/rockets.

Russia has the best surface to air defence system in the world. BUK missile system, Panshir missile system, Tor missile system, S-350, S-300 & S-400, these are the real badass defence systems. The S-400 is the most powerful and the most sophisticated defence system in the world.

It's largely a joint development by many countries with Israel among, and Israel mostly re-configure theirs to fit the type of war they fight.
Also, when it comes to Battle management systems and autonomous arms, Israel have one of the best companies for that - Raphael systems, Elbit and others.
And for tanks, have you heard of Merkava tanks and Amar APCs, these are fully Israeli made as the American tanks are vulnerable for their own type of warfare.

Then, Russia truly have one of the best air defense systems. Doesn't mean that other countries are relaxed, especially with the collaboration of US, Europe and Israel

Ibrahimmrfish:

Hisbollah is still standing and increase their missile range and accuracy.And they succeeded on kicking your god(Israel) out of southern Lebanon.

You are right that Israel lost the asymmetric warfare to Hezbollah. It was an ASYMMETRIC WARFARE, looking for enemies among civilians. It is the most difficult situation for the attacker as attack can come from any direction in a residential area, and as we've seen so far with the Gazans, a retaliatory strike will lead to civilian casualties.
But they don't take such chances with Hamas, though they still give warning strikes (which is still unfair, as the enemy could easily use the warning to take cover elsewhere), yet we see a lot of civilian casualties

explosiveskull:


Keep deceiving yourself with fake news. Oga 70% of rich and policy makers in the US have ties to the jews, if you don't support the jewish movement you can never be an american president, not everyone know this secret. This Joe Biden you are shouting up and down, do you know all his kids are married to jews. The earlier you are enlightened the better for you. For your information the f35 you are talking about the israelis were partakers in developing it, infact their own block somehow surpasses those of other export blocks with their incorporated indigenous technologies such as radar and weapons systems. Sometimes I don't know how you guys sleep comfortably with lieing to your conscience.

The bolded is what most don't know about Israel. Non of their weapons that they jointly have with other countries are identical to those countries. They mostly re-configure them to their taste. And most importantly, They jointly develop most of those arms that they purchase with a right to re-configure them

LordReed:


Let's take a look at flood myths from around the world and let's see how similar they are to the Noah story.

Yoruba:



North American Choctow:



Greek:

Chinese:


As we can see your claim of detailed similarity is lacking in any actual evidence. So no you did not prove that the flood myths all emanated from 1 event, you merely stated it, making a statement is not proof.

It would be really funny to see you attempt to nitpick your way through the various flood myths I posted above. LoL

Seem I should be the one to claim that you nitpick your way through the various flood myths as you seem to have picked those which are well diverged from the rest.
Let me post some flood stories and see why I gave my explanation for such similarities

Greek:
Zeus sent a flood to destroy the men of the Bronze Age. Prometheus advised his son Deucalion to build a chest. All other men perished except for a few who escaped to high mountains. The mountains in Thessaly were parted, and all the world beyond the Isthmus and Peloponnese was overwhelmed. Deucalion and his wife Pyrrha (daughter of Epimetheus and Pandora), after floating in the chest for nine days and nights, landed on Parnassus. When the rains ceased, he sacrificed to Zeus, the God of Escape. At the bidding of Zeus, he threw stones over his head; they became men, and the stones which Pyrrha threw became women. That is why people are called laoi, from laas, "a stone." [Apollodorus, 1.7.2]

The first race of[b] people was completely destroyed[/b] because they were exceedingly wicked. The fountains of the deep opened, the rain fell in torrents, and the rivers and seas rose to cover the earth, killing all of them. Deucalion survived due to his prudence and piety and linked the first and second race of men. Onto a great ark he loaded his wives and children and all animals. The animals came to him, and by God's help, remained friendly for the duration of the flood. The flood waters escaped down a chasm opened in Hierapolis.

Roman:
Jupiter, angered at the evil ways of humanity, resolved to destroy it. He was about to set the earth to burning, but considered that that might set heaven itself afire, so he decided to flood the earth instead. With Neptune's help, he caused storm and earthquake to flood everything but the summit of Parnassus, where[b] Deucalion and his wife Pyrrha came by boat and found refuge[/b]. Recognizing their piety, Jupiter let them live and withdrew the flood. Deucalion and Pyrrha, at the advice of an oracle, repopulated the world by throwing "your mother's bones" (stones) behind them; each stone became a person. [Ovid, book 1]

Celtic:
Heaven and Earth were great giants, and Heaven lay upon the Earth so that their children were crowded between them, and the children and their mother were unhappy in the darkness. The boldest of the sons led his brothers in cutting up Heaven into many pieces. From his skull they made the firmament. His spilling blood caused a great flood which killed all humans except a[b] single pair, who were saved in a ship made by a beneficent Titan[/b]. The waters settled in hollows to become the oceans. The son who led in the mutilation of Heaven was a Titan and became their king, but the Titans and gods hated each other, and the king titan was driven from his throne by his son, who was born a god. That Titan at last went to the land of the departed. The Titan who built the ship, whom some consider to be the same as the king Titan, went there also.

Welsh:
[/b]The lake of Llion burst, [b]flooding all lands. Dwyfan and Dwyfach escaped in a mastless ship with pairs of every sort of living creature. They[b] landed in Prydain (Britain) and repopulated the world[/b]

Lithuanian:
From his heavenly window, the[b] supreme god Pramzimas saw nothing but war and injustice among mankind[/b]. He sent two giants, Wandu and Wejas (water and wind), to destroy earth. After twenty days and nights, little was left. Pramzimas looked to see the progress. He happened to be eating nuts at the time, and he threw down the shells. One happened to land on the peak of the tallest mountain, where some people and animals had sought refuge. Everybody climbed in and survived the flood floating in the nutshell. God's wrath abated, he ordered the wind and water to abate. The people dispersed, except for one elderly couple who stayed where they landed. To comfort them, God sent the rainbow and advised them to jump over the bones of the earth nine times. They did so, and up sprang nine other couples, from which the nine Lithuanian tribes descended

Transylvanian Gypsy:
Men once lived forever and knew no troubles. The earth brought forth fine fruits, flesh grew on trees, and milk and wine flowed in many rivers. One day, and old man came to the country and asked for a night's lodging, which a couple gave him in their cottage. When he departed the next day, he said he would return in nine days. He gave his host a small fish in a vessel and said he would reward the host if he did not eat the fish but returned it then. The wife thought the fish must be exceptionally good to eat, but the husband said he had promised the old man to keep it and made the woman swear not to eat it. After two days of thinking about it, though, the wife yielded to temptation and threw the fish on the hot coals. Immediately, she was struck dead by lightning, and it began to rain. The rivers started overflowing the country. On the ninth day, the old man returned and told his host[b] that all living things would be drowned[/b], but since he had kept his oath, he would be saved. The old man told the host to take a wife, gather his kinfolk, and build a boat on which to save them, animals, and seeds of trees and herbs. The man did all this. It rained a year, and the waters covered everything. After a year, the waters sank, and the people and animals disembarked. They now had to labor to gain a living, and sickness and death came also. They multiplied slowly so that many thousands of years passed before people were again as numerous as they were before the flood.

Let me stop here first, I will continue later

LordReed:


I would have to know what kind of cultures develop around volcanoes to be able to make an extensive prediction. With the little I know the stories would also involve vengeful gods and sacrifice, probably even self sacrifice. Beyond these I can't make any more predictions.

Archaeologists and anthropologists would have a better grasp of what to expect. I am neither.

Great!
Just that the various volcanic legends doesn't have such similarities. Some have it being born as result of gods while there are many that didn't even include god, not to talk of sacrifices. This make sense since the eruptions were independent of themselves even when as you said, virtually all the cultures have gods in their world view.
Now, comparing and contrasting,
1. All these volcano myths have similar environment
2. Majority have worship of gods
3. It would follow that worship of gods would entail sacrifice.
Yet, we don't have such similarities in those stories. That is, what is common to them was not found in such legends, rather, though some few mention the eruption as the acts of gods, the differences are so wide that one can never link them at all. This is because they are local events which are independent of each other

LordReed:




These are people whose worldview constantly revolved around the antics of gods as an explanation for natural phenomenon. It's no surprise they would include such things in their stories. Even our Nigerian cultures always mention gods and sacrifice whenever there is some calamity.

I don't know about volcanic events or tsunamis since the cultures that encounter them are not as many as those that encounter flooding.

These are people whose worldview constantly revolved around the antics of gods as an explanation for natural phenomenon. It's no surprise they would include such things in their stories. Even our Nigerian cultures always mention gods and sacrifice whenever there is some calamity
Fair enough. Your argument for inclusion of gods and sacrifice is plausible for all cultures which are surrounded with large bodies of water and have boat building skills.
I'll get back to that later

I don't know about volcanic events or tsunamis since the cultures that encounter them are not as many as those that encounter flooding.
Yes, I know. But what are the similarities that you would expect to see in such events, knowing the nature of such activities?
It is important that an answer should be given, as it would give a prediction that one could test with later discovery. (does the prediction of the theory match the evidence and can it be used for other similar phenomena? The type used in scientific method)

LordReed:


You were adamant that there were details in the flood myths that could only be explained by them being offshoots of the Noah story while I maintained that similarities will be found across all cultures that have encounters with large bodies of water. That is the crux of the debate.

I thought it was already made clear when I said that similarities are due to similarities in their environment and cultures. Vengeful gods, an unrelenting flood, a boat, sacrifice, etc are some of the similarities we would expect and indeed we see repeated across these flood myths. However what we do not see is any sort of detail that is constant aside from a flood and gods, every other thing varies. Some don't have boats, some do for instance.



I am well thanks for asking, hope you are too.

Thanks
But my question would be; why should we have the bolded words in a flood story? Not that those are the only anomalies in many flood stories anyway.
Also, since we don't have a volcanic event across the world; what similarities should we expect from volcanic activities of different areas? Or similarities that we should expect from tsunami event?

LordReed:


Let's take a look at flood myths from around the world and let's see how similar they are to the Noah story.

Yoruba:



North American Choctow:



Greek:



Chinese:



As we can see your claim of detailed similarity is lacking in any actual evidence. So no you did not prove that the flood myths all emanated from 1 event, you merely stated it, making a statement is not proof.



1. I did not call Osiris "the son of Ra", I wrote descendant of Ra. Even if you are disputing that particular phrasing, is it not said in your bible that Adam was a son of god? What does that make Jesus if not a descendant of god on his mother's side?

2. The reason for his death is irrelevant to the parallel in this case. They were killed by their enemies period.

3. Osiris resurrection was bodily as well except he was missing the phallus which was the reason he could not continue to rule in the land of the living.

You really didn't answer the question but instead went nitpicking. Can you prove that any part of the Osiris myth was written after Jesus, no you can't because it is simply not the case. It would be really funny to see you attempt to nitpick your way through the various flood myths I posted above. LoL



So the Bible says so is your proof? LMAO! I dunno where to even start with this one. I am sure anything I point at will receive the a hand wave and claim of being anti-god. Anything that does not show the things you claim from your Bible are simply labelled anti-god even though your Bible stories have little to no support. The real things we can see are not enough, we have to accept some fanciful tales of a god doing fantastical things which when we tell you to reproduce, you start another song and dance. Bwahahahahaha!

Let me start with reminding you about the crux of our debate. I’ll paraphrase it as “the best explanation for the similarities found in different flood accounts of different world cultures”.
Again, let me remind you of the part you seem to have refused to respond to (for the third time). What type of similarities should be found in flood account of different events (and locations); the type that we should see in armed robbery events of different locations?

When the question above is answered (faithfully), then I will go ahead to address your claims point by point.

I have been busy, hence have not got time to visit NL. I trust you are doing great and safe in the chaotic country (if you are in Nigeria o)

LordReed:


If merely saying "Starting with the Bible, the surviving families would pass the stories on to their descendants and the dispersal at Babel where every language group went their way would definitely go with such stories and continue to pass it down; though oral tradition corrupts with time" is proof, then merely saying Israelites took the dying and rising god myth from Egypt is proof.

LMFAO!

First, this is still comparing apples and orange as I showed a methodical approach how it came from one source and others having a variant of it, with the recorded history in the Bible. While you just compared it with merely asserting that the Isrealites took the a myth (which has also been shown to not be similar in the way it was claimed). That is comparing apples and orange.
Funny enough, there are no parallels which can be compared to detailed similarities found in the flood stories which should naturally not be found. I already asked you to show us the type of similarities that should be found in different flood account of different geographical places (such which should be found in different armed robbery events)

You obviously skipped that part of my response

LordReed:


He was claiming shared heritage with respect to flood stories from various regions of the world. I introduced the Osiris myth as a way to underscore the fact that similarities in religious tales does not indicate a shared heritage. If you believe the flood stories are all linked then be necessity you have to accept that dying and rising gods are all linked. Disavowing one disavows the other likewise. The article makes it abundantly clear that you cannot assume links because of similarities, you have to prove they are linked.

Though I already ask you to give the type of similarities we should expect from different flood stories (a type which we should expect in different armed robbery stories), I just want to respond to the bolded, that I did that already in this thread. Starting with the Bible, the surviving families would pass the stories on to their descendants and the dispersal at Babel where every language group went their way would definitely go with such stories and continue to pass it down; though oral tradition corrupts with time, hence the differences in the stories, but accounts for the similarities that one should not expect in a typical flood story.

You on the other hand compared apples with orange and my last response showed what I have maintained all along. The alleged parallels which are not are forced so as to discredit the gospels

LordReed:


LoL! Your argument was wrecked by the very same article you referenced and all you can say is fallacy this and fallacy that. Bwahahahahahaha!

Notice how you skipped answering my question: Which part of what I mentioned about the Osiris myth was written after Jesus?

BTW Jewish monotheism came from monolatry and before that polytheism, get your facts straight.

LoL! Your argument was wrecked by the very same article you referenced and all you can say is fallacy this and fallacy that. Bwahahahahahaha!

Let's see if that's true.
The article says' "Religions, by nature will have some general things in common…" then you claim that flood stories should have some general things in common. I agree with you on that. But the we should be able to know what this two things should have in common, especially, religion which have a way from BRANCHING OFF from one source. If I may ask, what should flood stories have in common (we can compare your answer with flood from news and weather reports)

Notice how you skipped answering my question: Which part of what I mentioned about the Osiris myth was written after Jesus?

Secondly, I maintained that the alleged parallels didn't happen in the original text. Let's see if these events are true parallels
1. Christ is the son of God the Father (and the Bible says him being the word was the agent of creation). Osiris on the other hand is among the many children of Geb who is a descendant of many ancestors leading to Ra the creator. A PARALLEL? No!
But a parallel was formed such that Jesus is the son of the creator and Osiris is the son of the creator
2. Jesus came primarily to die for the sins of the world and reconcile the world to the Father. He knew about his death and that it was perpetrated by the Jews. Osiris died by the hand of Set his brother (some version claimed that it was for him to take over the throne, some claimed that he had intimacy with another who was supposed to be Set's wife).
But a parallel was formed such that they both died by the hands of their enemy (though many people die by the hands of their enemies )
3. Jesus had a bodily resurrection on this earth and appeared to his disciples, giving them instructions and having communion. Osiris dead body pieces was put together to copulate with Isis (according to some tradition) while his semen was drawn from his penis alone (according to other tradition) to copulate with Isis. The most striking part of them all is that he lived in the underworld. The question was that if he did not live on the earth, where did he copulate with Isis?
But the word resurrection is now used to describe Osiris, which was never part of the myth in the first place

BTW Jewish monotheism came from monolatry and before that polytheism, get your facts straight.
Practiced monolatory? The Bible recorded one God in the beginning and later began to warn the Hebrews that there is no other deity except him. This and other evidence suggest that people along the way chose gods for themselves, hence, monolatrism and polytheism that you alluded to. The rightful thing for the Hebrews then was monotheism, hence the Shema given to them before their nation was settled.
What facts should I get straight, Prof? To accept anti-God hypothesis or what the Bible and other scholars agree with?

LordReed:


Which part of what I mentioned about the Osiris myth was written after Jesus?

Meanwhile here is what the article you reference says about religious stories similarities:

4. Logical Leaps
Logically, we have to remember that even if a similarity exists between Jesus and a pagan god (and it doesn’t run into the issues mentioned above), even that doesn’t automatically mean they are related, copied, or influenced. A connection must be proven. Religions, by nature, will have some general things in common, like beliefs about an afterlife. Further, many religions have some sort of tradition with a common meal. Similarity doesn’t prove dependence.

Which is my point exactly, both for the Jesus stories and the flood stories. Yes very funny indeed. LMAO!

I have maintained that your analogy is like the fallacy of comparing apples and orange. One is religion which basically would have similar concepts (and some studies even showed that they mostly come from still one source, that monotheism diverged into polytheism just as there are many sects of Christianity coming from one source. Just with the difference of there being a written document which can not be altered, still proving my point anyway) while the other is about a story about an event which its type cannot be found again, but such unique story was found among different folks in various places.
Your argument of them having knowledge of the boat building and sea would hold more ground if there are other stories found in various cultures which mention stuff which should be global. We don't have any of this.
So, comparing apples and orange (even if I had allowed such fallacy in the first place) in order to stay a float is really funny

LordReed:


Your claim that the flood stories have the same exact details is not correct. Even the chart you referenced shows there are several details that do not appear in other flood stories so I don't see why you are making a point of it.




The Osiris myth has no parallels with virgin birth (except with reference in a matter of speaking to his son Horus) so I can't possibly be talking about that. Osiris was a king and a descent of Ra or Atum the creator (Jesus is said to be the son of god the creator and a king). He was killed by his enemy (Jesus is said to have been crucified under the direction of Satan his enemy). He did resurrect long enough to copulate with Isis and then is said to have become the ruler of the realm of the dead (Jesus resurrected long enough to show himself to his disciples. Jesus isn't on earth right now is he? And the only humans able to get where he is now are dead people is it not?). These were well established before the advent of Christianity so it is funny you are trying very hard to deny the parallels. Very funny indeed.

I didn't make my point clear when trying to point out and emphasize 'details'. What I meant to point out was that they have a global flood and have exact details scattered among them. They all don't have ALL THE DETAILS in them but the details are fairly distributed in such stories. That is what the chart showed.


This time, I guess you didn't get my point. I said that the myth of Osiris existed before the life of Jesus on earth but what is RECORDED which have what appears to resemble the life of Jesus appeared LONG AFTER Jesus' death. And many other alleged parallels (which don't meet up with the flood parallels) appear after Jesus' death. This still agree with my point that Christianity must have influenced such alleged parallelism. And I explained the 180 degrees out of phase with that of the flood, which wouldn't make your analogy follow in the first place. Funny isn't it?

LordReed:


What parallels? Osiris died and was resurrected, this is central to the myth. Which other parallels are you referring to?

Oh it is funny, very.

I'm afraid you're not conversant with the pagan copycat theories. I like that you want to use such analogy that but it actually reinforces my point if you actually read the theories (scholarly at least).
First, the parallels are not the type of parallels we get with the flood stories where you have a GLOBAL FLOOD with EXACT DETAILS which can be found in all the flood stories. These are what are referred to as PARALLELS and it is best interpreted through the Biblical lens as the survivors passing down the stories through generations, with the dispersal at Babel such that every group went with same story which would definitely get "corrupted" with time as is common with oral traditions.

Now to your example, what are referred to parallels are not really parallels as skeptics only try to prove that
1. Jesus never existed
2. The gospels are fraud
3. The stories in the gospels are copied from MANY OTHER gods which are combined in the person of Jesus.
So we have a 180 degrees out of phase of what you are saying. One single event found with variants in several stories against several events found in one single story.

Now to your objection, there are other parallels of alleged virgin birth, son of god etc which all have no evideurnce predating Jesus but after him. And your resurrection is still a form of forcing a Christian term on his story as he did not resurrect in the sense of the word but appeared to rule the underworld. Which reinforces my point that Christianity influenced the later alleged parallels that skeptics have tried to show. Not forgetting what they really want to prove as stated above.

Now, it actually get funny

LordReed:


LoL! The Osiris myth was well established by 24th century BCE so any suggestion that Christianity was the one that influenced it holds no water.

What is also funny is when I suggest that similarities are not indicative of a shared heritage you are quick to the challenge but in this case you want to deny that shared heritage and turn it around. Very funny. LMFAO!

I wished you had read the link I provided as it answered your objections already. The myth is actually older than the life, death and resurrection of Jesus but the parallels did not emerge until after his death. This was what I maintained that the parallels could still be argued that it came from the life of Jesus. Hence, shared "heritage".
Not funny at the end of the day

LordReed:


Maybe you could also answer:

It still reinforces my point. Having read about pagan copycat thesis, I have learned that apart from the fact that they are mostly fabrications and exaggerations, the most important thing which relate to your questions is:
Often, when some sort of parallel is made between paganism and Christianity that looks legitimate (and not an extreme exaggeration or fabrication), it has been found the similar characteristic doesn’t appear in that pagan religion until long after Christianity had been established. Thus, it appears Christianity influenced the pagan religion, not the other way around
https://confidenceinchrist.net/2018/05/22/is-jesus-just-a-pagan-copycat/.
You may visit the page to get the full context

In conclusion, there's always a true event which diverges with time or influences other ideas

LordReed:


All the cultures that have flood stories are all centered around large bodies of water, all of them have vengeful gods that could not be placated, all of them have knowledge of boat building, all of them have significant experience with flooding. Why is it now far fetched to propose that their similar environments would generate similar stories?

Alright, I rest my case

LordReed:


So in other words I must accept your explanation for the similarities? I can propose no other way by which it could be?

Maybe you could do better by answering the last question.
Let me put it in perspective clearly. The questions would be;
Why do most of the flood story have it caused by man's transgression?
Your answer: Because they have "similar environments"

Why do most of the flood story have it being a result of divine destruction
Your answer: Because they have "similar environments"
And others which it is clear that your explanations does not just follow. It is not about you accepting mine, but yours clearly don't just follow

LordReed:


When I use their opinions then you can ask me, not before.

How did I down play it or explain it away?

I was supposed to add a question mark to the statement. It was a question; You don't have to answer anybody's opinion but you are free to use their opinions?

I showed you a chart which shows similarities that are even theological, then you answered with this "Because they all knew about boats and transporting things by boat? I don't think it's a far fetched idea for them to have similarities due to having similar environments"
What has man transgression, DIVINE destruction, bird sent out, survivors' worship have to do with your explanation?

HellVictorinho:

Keppler,Dtruthspeaker,etc.
The list goes on.
They keep saying the same thing in different ways.

Why not stop mentioning me when it is not to have an intellectual discussion or bring my attention to something I need to address.

LordReed:


I am not disowning anything, I don't have to answer for anybody's opinion but mine. Anytime you are discussing with me you bring other peoples opinions and speak as if I need to answer for them. If you want such an answer why don't you go ask the people who express such opinions, don't ask me.

Where in what I wrote did I not acknowledge the parallels in the biblical flood story with other flood stories.?

You seem to not want to address my analogy where I explained your position. You don't have to answer anybody's opinion but you are free to use their opinions (but this is beyond opinion, it is worldview, no matter how one denies it)

Not that you didn't acknowledge it, but you down played it and have been explaining it away; which has been surprising.

HellVictorinho:

You don't know what you are saying.
There are different ways of saying you don't agree.
Examples are:
1... there's no evidence.
2...it doesn't make sense.
3.... it's pure nonsense.
4.... it's wrong.
5..... it's false.
6..... it's a mere belief.
7..... it's invalid.
8.......it lacks proof.
9...... it's impossible.


People like budaatum accuse others of being lazy or not understanding or being any other thing that's derogatory even when they agree.
Such people are worse than terrorists.
BigBashiru is another one who worships every non-African including the rapists and human traffickers among them but condemns his fellow Africans including those that never offended him.

I already explained that there are absolute truths to which contradictory claims cannot match. When someone tells you that goats fly, you don't just say you disagree for the sake of it, rather, an absolute truth is that goats don't fly.
Now, when the person insist that you can't change his mind, then you may take such statement as his personal belief (even in the face of contrary evidence).
Hence, I don't just disagree with you for the sake of it, I already showed you, using analogy how your statements does not hold up. You responded at a time that THERE'S NOTHING I WOULD SAY TO CHANGE YOUR PHILOSOPHY. Thus, I called them your STATEMENTS OF FAITH

Your last paragraph has nothing to do with the discussion anyway. You may have peace of mind if you can fully defend your position

HellVictorinho:

The tendency to make baseless comparisons will be inherited by your children.
You never stated any absolute truth but you keep repeating the same crap.
The so-called evidence is the same empty talk that Dtruthspeaker induces.
I never said you accused anyone.
I only said you can.
Go back to primary school and learn the difference!!!
Ultimately, you are wrong concerning me since you keep repeating what is wrong.

Of all your response, the bolded is the only which made sense.
Yeah, I must have read into it, using the way you do sound.
I think for the first time in our discussion, you impress me, which suggest you have the potential to reason; only to spoil it with your second to the last sentence. It is obvious for any reader who needs to be well inform

HellVictorinho:

Nobody has the right to destroy Africa.
But inferiority complex has destroyed the brains of people like BigBashiru and atonement12 who keep generalizing baselessly and disgracefully.
Their arguments are just like that of budaatum who is only good at false accusations and denying such accusations.
I have told keppler to take his cup of wine in disagreement with me instead of thinking he's the only one that can use words like "fallacy","logic","invalid",etc.
There's no word in any dictionary that anyone can use to change my thoughts concerning these things.

Haba my Friend! You still have to mention my name in a thread that I don't even visit?

HellVictorinho:


In other words, you don't agree.
Do you think I can't use words like "fallacy","invalid","ignorance",etc?
There's no word in the dictionary that you can use to change my thoughts.
You can also accuse me of several things like budaatum but my philosophy remains unchanged.

In other words, you don't agree.
Do you think I can't use words like "fallacy","invalid","ignorance",etc?
Again, it's not that I don't agree. I had to show why your argument fails. For example, if someone come to a conclusion that goats can fly, you won't just DISAGREE for the sake of it, would you? You would rather SHOW him how is claim fails using good reasoning which shows ABSOLUTE TRUTHS.

There's no word in the dictionary that you can use to change my thoughts.

You may be right. Which was why I called those things you said, STATEMENTS OF FAITH. It takes serious faith (even in the face of contrary evidence) to believe such statements. In fact, I shouldn't call it FAITH because there are contrary evidence to it.

You can also accuse me of several things like budaatum but my philosophy remains unchanged.

If I make a claim such as this, I do try to show such accusation. You claim that I accuse you but does not show such accusation. This itself is an accusation my friend

LordReed:


You quote positions that have nothing to do with anything I have said then say you have justification for lumping me in? Are you listening to yourself? Where did I say anything about epic of Gilgamesh as an example, yet you said my position is like that of those saying that the flood story of the bible is similar to epic of Gilgamesh. I have never expressed such a position and in fact I expressed opposite of that but you are obviously incapable of interacting on an individual level. When you are ready for that may be we can discuss meanwhile no more answering you.

Sorry I was busy all this time.
Alright, you've accused me of many things here and I don't know why you would do that.

For a start, you said "You quote positions that have nothing to do with anything I have said then say you have justification for lumping me in? Are you listening to yourself"
I gave a simple analogy. I thought you would explain from the analogy, how Person C should not see Person A as his enemy (in the context of the analogy) or simply show how it does not relate with you (maybe by showing how you coincidentally use virtually all atheistic arguments, yet should not be seen as representing atheistic worldviews)

Where did I say anything about epic of Gilgamesh as an example,
I never said you gave epic of Gilgamesh as an example. (simple answer? or you may go through my response again for clarity)

yet you said my position is like that of those saying that the flood story of the bible is similar to epic of Gilgamesh
Again, this is an accusation. I never said what you accuse me of saying. In fact, this was what I wrote

keppler:

I believe you know that secularist believe that the Biblical story was plagiarized from epic of Gilgamesh. In fact, that is what every average Joe who has had of epic of Gilgamesh believe and the conclusion was drawn from the parallelism of the two. Just that now that such parallels are found in ALL flood stories, the interpretation seem to change (maybe with you anyway); which is just due to the bias of not wanting to see the Bible true

My aim was to tell you that people easily see parallelism between Biblical flood and other flood stories and I had to wonder why you seem to have decide not to acknowledge such parallels, concluding that it is due to your bias of not wanting to see the Bible true.
So how what I wrote implied what you accuse me of is surprising.

I have never expressed such a position and in fact I expressed opposite of that
Like I explained above, I did not say or implied that you expressed such position.

but you are obviously incapable of interacting on an individual level
As shown already, my response was on an individual level.
It seem you have this statement in mind

When you are ready for that may be we can discuss meanwhile no more answering you
It's quite frustrating anyway since we both have our bias, and I can't be fighting a defensive battle just because my "enemy soldier" (or "ally" of my enemy army) seem to disown "his army" anytime I launch a counter attack

HellVictorinho:


First,I don't think the DNA is a law enforcement agent.
Also,life is absurd.
Furthermore, there's nothing amazing about the universe.
If you don't agree,then that's your cup of wine.
Keep your unnecessary analogies,illustrations and parables to yourself!!!

It's not about agreement or not, it's about what the best evidence portray.
Like I proposed already, those are your beliefs and I just want to help you point it out that they are just mere beliefs and nothing more

LordReed:


I will refrain from discussing anything with you hence forth because you seem incapable of talking to me as an individual, you must include what others have said and try to paint me with the same brush even when I have expressed no such views.

You may make it seem like you have nothing in common with the big picture but it is no coincidence that your statements ALWAYS echo that of the big picture. That is the rationale behind it.
Like I explained to Buda: Person A cannot use weapons known only by Army B to attack Army D and expect C (who is in army D) to not see him belonging to army B.
That's exactly what I see you doing, else, I don't know why you are bent on discrediting and rejecting the Bible a priori and using same arguments used by virtually every atheists; yet, accuse me of lumping you up with the big picture whenever I make my shot

LordReed:


Whatever it is you are talking, about humans in similar situations will exhibit some similarities. That is not indicative of the same source for their traditions.

I believe you know that secularist believe that the Biblical story was plagiarized from epic of Gilgamesh. In fact, that is what every average Joe who has had of epic of Gilgamesh believe and the conclusion was drawn from the parallelism of the two. Just that now that such parallels are found in ALL flood stories, the interpretation seem to change (maybe with you anyway); which is just due to the bias of not wanting to see the Bible true