19 Aug 14
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAre you not willing to make a "truth claim" about the account as rendered in John 18:38?
oh dear poor FMF reduced to deflection, smoke screens and mirrors, id say thats pretty much checkmate,
robbie and the empirical evidence 1 - FMF, the drugged balloonists and uncorroborated truth claims 0
19 Aug 14
Originally posted by divegeestersee if you can also perform an exorcism of FMF's evidence for his truth claim, that what transpired between Pilate and Christ is fictional, it seems to have got stuck inside of him somehow. 😵
I shall "resurect" it, don't worry 😵
19 Aug 14
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBump for for robbie carrobie and the sake of "empirical evidence"
... divesgeester [and others] make[s] claims, the Bible is allegorical, it was used as a political weapon, its fictional etc etc not a single reference,
originally posted by divegeester
I've said no such thing - you are being dishonest
Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I was talking about your debating style... ...[text shortened]... t you posted. Kinda sounds like more of you two Jehovah's Witnesses bearing false witness to me.
To accuse someone of "making a claim", be called on it for being dishonest, and then snake into saying you were talking about "debating style" is outright dishonesty on your part. I wonder what your fellow "witnesses" would think of you bearing false witness like this.
19 Aug 14
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf neither of us is making a "truth claim" that the Biblical account of the conversation between Pilate and Jesus is true, then so be it. If you want to make a "truth claim" about the account, then be my guest.
see if you can also perform an exorcism of FMF's evidence for his truth claim, that what transpired between Pilate and Christ is fictional, it seems to have got stuck inside of him somehow. 😵
19 Aug 14
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOriginally posted by robbie carrobie
I love the smell of coffee in the morning....its smells like....victory.😵
Have i stated your opinion is meaningless? yeah i think i have. Why you think it has meaning i cannot say.
Your view as stated a few pages ago was: "This perspective [six day literalism ~ 144 hours] is anti Biblical, anti science and cannot be substantiated in any rational way. What is more it detracts sincere seekers of truth from the Biblical message."
My view, as stated a page or two before yours is that insisting that allegories in scripture are "literally true" serves to obscure or misinterpret the role that God did play in creation and how it was actually brought about.
My view elicited your view. And these two views are essentially the same, are they not? I don't see how your view is not also "meaningless" if you declare mine to be "meaningless". Is not you saying that my view is "meaningless" simply you uttering a "self-certified opinion", as you often put it?
19 Aug 14
Originally posted by FMFyou have made a truth claim that its fictional, evidence for that truth claim, nil. Do you often make claims you cannot substantiate?
If neither of us is making a "truth claim" that the Biblical account of the conversation between Pilate and Jesus is true, then so be it. If you want to make a "truth claim" about the account, then be my guest.
19 Aug 14
Originally posted by FMFmmmmm Italian fresh roasted, it has a slightly nutty flavour and is best served with those little Italian almond biscuits.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie
[b]Have i stated your opinion is meaningless? yeah i think i have. Why you think it has meaning i cannot say.
Your view as stated a few pages ago was: "This perspective [six day literalism ~ 144 hours] is anti Biblical, anti science and cannot be substantiated in any rational way. What is more it detracts since ...[text shortened]... at my view is "meaningless" simply you uttering a "self-certified opinion", as you often put it?[/b]
19 Aug 14
Originally posted by divegeestertry boohoo.com, buy yourself a dress.
Bump for for robbie carrobie and the sake of "empirical evidence"
To accuse someone of "making a claim", be called on it for being dishonest, and then snake into saying you were talking about "debating style" is outright dishonesty on your part. I wonder what your fellow "witnesses" would think of you bearing false witness like this.
19 Aug 14
Originally posted by robbie carrobieUnless you claim it is true and can show it to be true, then it is presumably fictional. It was written decades later by people who were not present. The account is uncorroborated. The burden of proof is yours. If you don't want to make a "truth claim" about the account, then the whole things is moot. I deduce that it is fictionalized and you refuse to claim it is "true".
you have made a truth claim that its fictional, evidence for that truth claim, nil. Do you often make claims you cannot substantiate?
19 Aug 14
Originally posted by FMFso you keep saying, problem is, you have not provided a shred of evidence for your claim, have you. I have not made the statement that the account is fictional , you have, therefore the onus is not on me as you have erroneously assumed, its on you to make good on your claim. I will ask you once again, do you often make claims that you cannot substantiate?
Unless you claim it is true and can show it to be true, then it is presumably fictional. It was written decades later by people who were not present. The account is uncorroborated. The burden of proof is yours. If you don't want to make a "truth claim" about the account, then the whole things is moot. I deduce that it is fictionalized and you refuse to claim it is "true".