Apr 032012
 

COGWA has obtained a new domain name for their social media and gospel-preaching platform.

Life, Hope and Truth is their new propaganda tool. The decision to use these words is not based on COGWA’s doctrines, since none of those words really apply to the church. Instead, they were chosen purely for tactical reasons.

First, COGWA had to find an available name it could use as a web address, Twitter account and Facebook page. Then, it had to consider what words were most popular to make the new cult website popup in search results and be friendlier to analytics, all in the name of attracting new tithe-paying members to line ministerial pockets.

These words were not chosen to inspire or as an accurate description of the cult’s message. They were chosen entirely for cynical reasons: to compete with other churches, especially other COG groups, and to try gaming social media networks and search engines, to draw the unsuspecting into the church’s trap.

To show how truly dedicated it is to this domain/brand name, COGWA has only registered it for a year. At least that’s a more accurate portrayal of how much they actually care about life, hope or truth.

Silence

  138 Responses to “Life, Hope, Truth, Greed and Fraud”

  1. Upfront: I have no desire to post my name. Yes, I attend COGWA, but am a lay member.

    Sorry, but I must disagree with your assessment regarding COGWA’s choice of the words life, hope and truth. Let’s look at the words themselves and how they apply to COGWA’s doctrine. I’ll take them out of order, though:
    Life – the message is clearly about living a Christian way of life.
    Truth – to be fair, you don’t have to agree that the message on the website is truth. However, it is self evident that COGWA believes the message to be truth.
    Hope – the fundamental message is that everyone in the world has an opportunity for eternal life. I think that classifies as hope.

    So, what is the complaint with the choice of those three words? I think it is simple: you don’t believe COGWA’s message is true. You are entitled to that opinion. You are inaccurate, though, in saying those three words do not express COGWA’s doctrinal message.

    Reply  |  Quote
  2. remain anon wrote:

    Life – the message is clearly about living a Christian way of life.

    Ok, I’ll give you this one. Even so, you’ll be debating how to live that “way of life” with just about every other christian on the planet, which brings me to:

    remain anon wrote:

    Truth – to be fair, you don’t have to agree that the message on the website is truth. However, it is self evident that COGWA believes the message to be truth.

    And? Please, all of the COG’s believe themselves to be the only ones with “the truth” yet for the most part, they’re not flaunting it via domain name. Of course it’s a keyword, and they are most definitely in competition with UCG and many others.

    remain anon wrote:

    Hope – the fundamental message is that everyone in the world has an opportunity for eternal life. I think that classifies as hope.

    How insulting. You dare to come on here and argue this particular point? Your religion teaches that all people shall either choose to live by the whim of Yahweh or be burned alive (though “mercifully”, to death) in the lake of fire. Your message of hope is “submit or die”. You want hope? I hope your god is real so I can look the motherf*cker in the eye and tell him to kiss the darkest part of my ass. There’s hope.

    Reply  |  Quote
  3. @ remain anon:

    The site and domain name choice was based on keywords, social media and search rankings. The sources of that information are elders/members close to the decision who didn’t know they were telling us. To them, it was matter of properly branding themselves, to set themselves apart. Of course they believe all of those words apply for them. Such is the arrogance of the culture. But in an organization starving for new blood and thus new money, the fledgling organization needs all the boosts and attention it can get. It’s not malicious. It’s just a cynical use of the language.

    If it were really chosen based on the core of COG values, a Tohu says, other Armstrongite organizations would flaunt the words, which they really haven’t, not like this. Also, they would have shown some dedication to it by registering the domain for more than a year. If it floats like a trial balloon, it most often is.

    Reply  |  Quote
  4. If you are really informed about both sides of the evolution/creation science controversy, you would realize that both macro-evolutionism and radiometric dating are worthless. That leaves only a divine creation to account for the existence of the universe. Since the Bible is the most credible, scientifically accurate religious document by far in the world, it is also the most logical guide to salvation, immortality, and everything else that is good. Your venomous words seem to be more like those from an evolutionist. If you are instead a religious person accepting part or all of the Bible, you need to provide some persuasive Biblical verses to refute what COGWA teaches to make your website credible. The site TithingHelps.us provides many dozens of verses reinforcing COGWA’s doctrines. If you are not interested in salvation and immortality, you need to state that on your site here to better identify your thinking.
    Yes, COGWA is not perfect. I personally do not think they should have broken away from UCG, which seriously weakened UCG financially. Yes, the Worldwide Church of God, the mother church of both, made some premature date speculations about prophecy. WCG even made several doctrinal mistakes which it later corrected. But overall all three churches are “light years” ahead of mainstream Christendom in teaching what the Bible really says literally.

    Reply  |  Quote
  5. @ Anonymous:
    Anonymous wrote:

    But overall all three churches are “light years” ahead of mainstream Christendom in teaching what the Bible really says literally.

    Except of course, for those nasty bits about god-sanctioned slavery and genocide. They’ve left those out. Oh and of course the annoying parts about wearing clothing of mixed fabric, tithing on produce/livestock, keeping the FOT in booths, etc. But those are trivial little things, and Herbert has spoken!

    You’ve convinced me of my error. What splintergroup can I attend that’s built a house upon a rock against which the gates of hell hath failed to prevail? Just point me in the right direction, good sir!

    Reply  |  Quote
  6. Anonymous wrote:

    If you are really informed about both sides of the evolution/creation science controversy

    Let me guess, you consider yourself to be “really informed”? LOL.

    Reply  |  Quote
  7. @ Anonymous:

    “If you are really informed about both sides of the evolution/creation science controversy, you would realize that both macro-evolutionism and radiometric dating are worthless.”

    Oh? I’m afraid you’ve stumbled upon a nest of highly intelligent ex-Creationists who are all incredibly well informed about both sides of the evolution/creation pseudo-science controversy. We’d love to hear how you arrived at your conclusions about “macro-evolution” and radiometric dating. Please, enlighten us!

    Reply  |  Quote
  8. @ Anonymous:

    “That leaves only a divine creation to account for the existence of the universe. Since the Bible is the most credible, scientifically accurate religious document by far in the world, it is also the most logical guide to salvation, immortality, and everything else that is good.”

    What about dental hygiene? Isn’t that good? Nothing in the Bible about that. Am I being too picky? It never condemns slavery, and, in fact, gives guidelines on how to treat slaves. Is slavery good? What about ethnic cleansing?–plenty of guidance in the Bible about that. So…ethnic cleansing, good. Also a lot of guidance about how to beat your children, even to the point of crushing their skulls with stones. So…child-abuse and murder, good. Subjugation of women…good. Persecution of homosexuals…good. Got it. Anything else? (Of course there’s more…I could go on all day. And don’t get us started on your suggestion that the Bible is credible and scientifically accurate.)

    Furthermore, you are employing a gratuitous non sequitur in your leap from a specially-created universe (a dubious contention to begin with) to the Bible’s Yahweh as the culprit. It could have been any of the hundred or so creator gods imagined by humans throughout the sad history of theistic thought–or any number of imagined and unimagined super-creative beings apart from the theistic variety. Yahweh, don’t you know, is nothing more than a Canaanite storm god–a pagan idol brought down out of the hills to take up residence as the centerpiece in the cult to Israel’s national deity, Yahwism–and only eventually touted as the “one true god” (once monotheism became more or less fashionable among the squabbling theocrats of the day).

    You simply need to step up your game if you want to debate these things with the level of arrogance you are displaying here. Alternatively, you may be more respectful in your assertions and be prepared to learn something.

    Reply  |  Quote
  9. “God sanctioned slavery” and Old Testament “genocide” are merely Biblical recordings of historical fact, available to anyone who reads the Bible. Are you declaring that God does not have the right to do anything He wants to do? Are you declaring that the victims of slavery and genocide will never be resurrected to have a chance at salvation and Biblical truth? COGWA and sister splinter churches all teach, according to specific Biblical verses, that those victims will be resurrected in the second resurrection, a very good thing obviously, which is not taught in most mainstream churches, a very bad thing, obviously.

    Concerning tithing, FOT, etc., specific Biblical verses have spoken commanding those things, not Herbert Armstrong or his present day followers. If you want to really show some credibility, you need to provide some refuting Biblical verses that refute Matthew 7:23 which reveals that a significant percentage of fervent Christians will be literally incinerated for failing to obey certain Old Testament laws as well as possibly some New Testament laws. How about giving us some verses refuting Romans 6:15, Romans 3:31, and similar verses COMMANDING obedience to certain Mosaic laws? Matthew 13:41,42 reveals that people who fail to observe Biblical laws, including some Mosaic laws by definition of the Greek “anomia” in those verses, will be permanently eliminated. Come on, man, prove Biblically that Armstrong is wrong, or shut up.

    Raw, brat like emotionalism is not a good way to convince others about whether or not a certain church is correct in its teachings. I recommend visiting TithingHelps.us.

    Reply  |  Quote
  10. Replying to Tohu’s June 16 comment, with an attitude like that, I wouldn’t be surprised if Tohu was the very first to be tossed into the “lake of fire.” Even Hitler, Eichmann, or perhaps Satan himself would never have dared to insult God like that, to my knowledge. I don’t know if Tohu is a teenage brat or not, but maybe if he had been raised by parents threatening to use the Biblical command for the neighborhood to stone him to death for being consistently unruly, he might have a more respectful attitude towards his Creator.

    (Concerning the child stoning law, Caseywollberg, there is no evidence it was actually ever carried out. So maybe just the threat of that law worked extremely well in curbing juvenile sin.)
    Jace, compared to you, I probably am “really informed.” If you are more informed, why don’t you provide some competent, refuting evidence against what is explained on the “creation science” and “radiometic dating” pages of the site TithingHelps.us? Raw, brat like emotionalism is not really persuasive. Hard facts are.

    Caseywollberg is obviously an evolutionist. There are so many unanswered questions concerning the step from inanimate matter to even the first cell of life that it takes far, far more purely blind faith that the event took place without a divine miracle from an all knowing Creator, compared to the faith required that God did perform that miracle. I challenge and dare you, caseywollberg, to read the “creation science” page at TithingHelps.us. If you remain an evolutionist, I believe your comments should no longer be permitted on this site since Bible respecting people will never be able to “get to first base” with you concerning the validity of what the Bible says.

    Reply  |  Quote
  11. @ Anonymous:

    “Are you declaring that God does not have the right to do anything He wants to do?”

    Not if he wants to claim the moral high ground. Capriciousness is not ethical. So, here’s the question you have to answer (for your god, ostensibly, since he doesn’t seem to be around to speak for himself). Does your god do what is right because it is right, or does the fact of him doing something make it right?

    “Are you declaring that the victims of slavery and genocide will never be resurrected to have a chance at salvation and Biblical truth?”

    No, I don’t have to make that claim. I just reject your claim that they will, since there is no evidence whatsoever that such a thing is possible. You have the burden of proof here, and it is certainly a spectacular proposition that demands extraordinary evidence to back it up. Furthermore, resurrecting someone after the fact does not morally rectify the harm you caused them. Harm is still harm, regardless of any promised and fantastical future consolation prize.

    Your insistence that an atheist argue from the Bible is ludicrous. I want you to understand something. The Bible is just a book of fairy tales. It doesn’t count as evidence or even a valid argument. So, if you want a Bible war you’ll just have to look to your fellow dreamers. If you want to go a few rounds with someone who has their eyes open, like I said, you’ll have to step up your game by offering some real arguments.

    Remember how this started. You claimed to be an expert on how life works, and that you had evidence that it was specially created by a being called Yahweh. You asserted that the Bible was germane to this question and had all the answers. Challenged by your interlocutors on that point, your only recourse now is to refer to scripture in defense of scripture. Your argument is recursive, and thus, invalid. Need I say more?

    “Raw, brat like emotionalism is not a good way to convince others about whether or not a certain church is correct in its teachings.”

    No, you’re right. Good arguments will work though. Have any of those?

    “I recommend visiting TithingHelps.us.”

    I recommend less confirmation bias.

    Reply  |  Quote
  12. @ Anonymous:

    “I don’t know if Tohu is a teenage brat or not, but maybe if he had been raised by parents threatening to use the Biblical command for the neighborhood to stone him to death for being consistently unruly, he might have a more respectful attitude towards his Creator.”

    Behold the vile, petty theist and his sick, petulant god! “Don’t believe my delusions? Well, we’ll fix that with a few rocks to the head!” Boy, you sure are a brave little theist, Anonymous. You’d fit right in with those Taliban fucks. Why don’t you go over to the Middle East and tell them all about your “truth”? See who beats whom to a bloody pulp over stupid fictions that can’t be supported with anything better than threats of violence.

    “Concerning the child stoning law, Caseywollberg, there is no evidence it was actually ever carried out. So maybe just the threat of that law worked extremely well in curbing juvenile sin.”

    So what, you simpering moron! The point is it’s unethical to suggest it, much less to make it fucking law! Do you tell your kids that if they don’t behave you’ll murder them? That’s a crime for a reason, you know. Maybe you belong behind bars? And I’m sure your ilk among the Taliban would think so, but for different reasons altogether.

    “If you are more informed, why don’t you provide some competent, refuting evidence against what is explained on the “creation science” and “radiometic dating” pages of the site TithingHelps.us?”

    Debate. You’re doing it wrong. If you want someone to refute an argument, the onus is on you to present an argument. Besides this, it’s cute the way you assume Tohu or anyone else for that matter has never seen these “explanations” of “evidence” for Creationism. I’m calling your bluff, Anonypuss! Put up, or shut up. It’s not our job to find your arguments for you in order to refute them. Decide what you think is a persuasive argument and present it (copy and paste from your favorite website if you must). Then we’ll swipe it away like an annoying gnat and you can try another one. We’ve done this all before, thousands of times. Have you?

    “If you remain an evolutionist, I believe your comments should no longer be permitted on this site since Bible respecting people will never be able to “get to first base” with you concerning the validity of what the Bible says.”

    LOL, you don’t even know where you are, son! Furthermore, your syntax here is so convoluted I’m not even sure what it is you are trying to say. You think arguments for evolution should be banned (from an evolutionist’s site, mind you) because they will offend your fellow violent, ignorant and superstitious Bible fans? And what does that have to do with the validity of scripture? You’re incredibly confused and stupid. But it’s not surprising: these traits tend to correlate strongly with the kinds of beliefs you hold.

    Reply  |  Quote
  13. @ caseywollberg: There is something about people like you that really fascinates me. Since you are an evolutionist not even believing in a universe creating God, and since you must have realized long ago that evolutionism can never give you immortality after you leave this physical life, then the most likely probability is that once you die physically, you will stay dead, permanently. The thing that fascinates me intensely, is that you don’t even seem to care about that or fear it. You don’t seem concerned about wanting to live forever, which is a natural goal of most people. That means that you don’t even love yourself, because if you did you would seek immortality to perpetuate yourself. And if you don’t even have the common horse sense to love yourself, then you almost surely will not love and respect others. That means you’re junk, worthy only of being tossed into “the lake of fire,” unless you hopefully change for the better, which I hope you do. So tell the world here, why don’t you love yourself?

    Christianity, if it is true according to the Bible, at least offers a gambling chance at immortality, but evolutuionism offers only guaranted death.

    Your unnecessarily foul language impresses me only in the sense that you appear to desire open, physical warfare, a fight to the death.

    Reply  |  Quote
  14. @ Anonymous:

    I almost wasn’t going to bother responding to you. Casey is doing just fine, and quite frankly, I’ve been too busy busting my ass on a project the past few days. As it turns out, you’re an especially entertaining case, as trolls go, so I’ll bite. My free time is rather limited, so I’ll have to keep this brief.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Are you declaring that God does not have the right to do anything He wants to do?

    You show me proof that he even exists and I’ll be happy to declare the above.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Are you declaring that the victims of slavery and genocide will never be resurrected to have a chance at salvation and Biblical truth?

    Are we declaring that Yahweh’s victims will never be resurrected? Well, technically, no. But again, if Yahweh were real, I’d be happy to declare that, while adding that he is a piss-poor planner, capricious, sadistic, irresponsible, prone to, how did you put it: “Raw, brat like emotionalism” the likes of which makes hitler look like a gerbil, and that he would almost certainly lack the attention span needed to conduct a single resurrection, let alone en-masse.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Come on, man, prove Biblically that Armstrong is wrong, or shut up.

    Well, the bible has zero credibility to begin with, but I suppose we could start in Leviticus and take a look at all of the cute little rules and regulations that Armstrong ignored while maintaining that the old covenant was never done away with. The Pentecost debacle also comes to mind. He was either wrong about Sunday or wrong about Monday, but wrong is wrong (Not that it matters what day you keep your archaic tribal rituals anyway). He was wrong about D&R, makeup, and of course, 1975. He obviously was wrong in who he chose as his successor. But oh, I forgot. That was all according to Yahweh’s plan, right? Fucking with testing those idiots sheep seems like something that’d be right up Yahweh’s alley (and hey, some of those folks won’t be in the 2nd resurrection as a result (according to your idiotic beliefs anyway). how’s that for warm and fuzzy)

    Anonymous wrote:

    Christianity, if it is true according to the Bible, at least offers a gambling chance at immortality, but evolutuionism offers only guaranted death.

    You know, you come here boasting that you’ve done your research, and the best thing you can come up with is Pascal’s Wager? Christ, that’s lame.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Replying to Tohu’s June 16 comment, with an attitude like that, I wouldn’t be surprised if Tohu was the very first to be tossed into the “lake of fire.”

    What an honor! Truth be told, if I did find myself in that little nightmare world, they wouldn’t need to throw me anywhere. Rest assured that I would do my best to set an appropriate benchmark of blasphemy for the apostates standing in line behind me to strive for. I’m sure I’ll get a standing ovation from my fellow “god haters” in the crowd!

    Anonymous wrote:

    Even Hitler, Eichmann, or perhaps Satan himself would never have dared to insult God like that, to my knowledge.

    To your knowledge? What, did you know them personally? Well, you’ve made a great point! Even the worst mass murder in recent history knows that he’s an amateur compared to ol’ Yahweh. I suppose you missed that little bit about Satan rebelling eh? Not insulting in the least bit.

    You don’t seem concerned about wanting to live forever, which is a natural goal of most people.

    Where do you get this shit? Seriously? The natural goal of most people is to live their lives the best they can one day at a time, to find food/water/clothing/shelter and happiness, if possible. Anyone pining away for eternal life obviously hasn’t put much thought into the concept.

    Anonymous wrote:

    So tell the world here, why don’t you love yourself?

    Uh… yeah… I love myself daily , thank you very much.

    By the way, I did go check our your site. The term “word vomit” comes to mind. What is it with you dipshit armstrongists and horrible web design skills? Are you all using the same crazy-cultist-toolkit or something?

    Reply  |  Quote
  15. @ Jace:
    No, Jace, I think Mr. Anonymous is right–the COGs do a very good job of teaching what the bible literally says. So far as I know, they don’t shy away from scriptures where God orders every man, woman, child, and donkey killed. And the Feast is kept in as temporary a structure as they can manage (since they don’t have Big Sandy style camping areas).

    So far as the slogan goes, yeah, well, they all believe they have more Life, Hope, and Truth than the other 500+ CoG splinters.

    The Hope bit is what gets to me, though…the hope comes in only if you look for every single bad thing in the news and forget half of history (“there has NEVER been a time as bad as this”…well, except when the Plague ravaged Europe…or “we are more immoral now than at any time in HISTORY!”…well, except for late Roman Empire days where various orgies were common, as was the death of Gladiators at the hands of other gladiators or wild animals). Basically, then, you HOPE God is coming soon to end it all b/c you get yourself so worked up that you’re ready to kill yourself–except for that glimmer of hope.

    I no longer share in that vision of hope, but I am FAR less depressed and pessimistic about the world in general since I figured out most of what is taught is lies. I mean, the WCG made a few date setting errors? HAHAHAHAHA! Armstrong was saying that the Great Depression was the Great Tribulation and laid out a nice chart in the Plain Truth about how it was all going to gloriously end in 1936!

    Reply  |  Quote
  16. @ Anonymous:
    Ok, ok…I get it. You want to camp and play the defense. The attacking force always has a harder time than the defender. On the down-side, however, is the fact that the defender usually has little strategic maneuverability, meaning that the attacker is free to launch feints and flanking attacks. This translates into: Since you will not post something from your tithinghelps.us site (yes, tithing does help them…get rich w/o having to do actual work), then I guess I’m free to pick whatever I want and refute it! Yay me!

    “Evolutionists have only one argument to support their claim that many fossils are millions or billions of years old, the radiometric dating techniques.” Well, a good explanation of radiometric dating (including acknowledging the fact that Carbon 14 dating is only good up to 70,000 yrs…and that Carbon 14 is far from the only isotope tested) can be found at http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/benton.html.

    Of course, then there is the Institute for Creation Science’s RATE research which apparently claims that the decay rate of certain radioactive isotopes used to be much higher (thus everything only LOOKS billions of years old…). “Radioactive rates are directly related to the speed of light, and since radioactivity must have been much higher, the speed of light also must have been much faster in the past” says your guys’ site. You see? “MUST have been higher”. Must have been? Why “must”? Must it have been higher in order to mesh with your pre-concieved notions? How about what IS as opposed to what MUST have been. Here’s a good rebuttal of the claim anyway: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CF/CF210.html

    “rock known to be less than 300 years old because a volcano formed it in 1800 has been been dated by radiometric methods to be over 2.8 billion years old.” Really? “Well, the volcano erupted only 150 yrs ago, so the scientists saying the rock is a couple BILLION years old proves that they’re just lying!” Newsflash: Volcanoes do not create rock, just like a hole in a tire does not create air.

    You guys talk about Gap Theory creation (which was not original with Armstrong): Myth busted. http://armstrongdelusion.com/2012/06/13/without-form-and-void-part-two-the-case-against-gap-creationism/ This article also chops down the whole “giant sequoyas have never been found to be older than 4kyrs old, so that means the flood!” argument. One question I’ve always had about that–so, all the animal species were saved (though, how you can get that many animals on something half the size of the Titanic is a mystery to me), but what about the plants? Did God have to re-create all the plants that drowned? Then why not recreate the animals, too? Also, what about the herbivores? What did they eat when they came out to post-flood earth? How did the various herbivore species survive the need of the carnivores to eat? Etc.

    Something about DNA found in old Dino bones proves that the old bones are less than 20kyrs old b/c DNA doesn’t last any longer…hmmm…let’s see if 10min of research can cure us of this ignorance…hmmm…oh yes, here you go: http://www.biotechniques.com/BiotechniquesJournal/2007/March/Comparison-and-optimization-of-ancient-DNA-extraction/biotechniques-41414.html

    So, by turtling on the debate field of battle, you have allowed me to pick and choose my targets and route them (at least those that were not summarily slaughtered). Now, you can choose to counter-attack, or you can play defense some more. However, if you are going to play defense, I’d suggest YOU pick the points you’d like us to try and attack–at least that way you can prepare a defense that can hold off a good frontal assault.

    P.S. As a parting “Parthian” shot, I’ve gotta laugh at the point #5 on the list, about how illogical, from an evolutionary point of view, is the beauty of deep sea fish that never see light. Clearly their beauty was created for our (and Mr. Deity’s) aesthetic appreciation. Yes, just like how awe-inspiring glaciers and volcanoes are is a clear indication that the all-wise creator of the universe intended for us to live very close to such things.

    Reply  |  Quote
  17. Anonymous wrote:

    @ caseywollberg: There is something about people like you that really fascinates me. Since you are an evolutionist not even believing in a universe creating God, and since you must have realized long ago that evolutionism can never give you immortality after you leave this physical life, then the most likely probability is that once you die physically, you will stay dead, permanently. The thing that fascinates me intensely, is that you don’t even seem to care about that or fear it.

    Your unnecessarily foul language impresses me only in the sense that you appear to desire open, physical warfare, a fight to the death.

    Well, that just took a turn to the creepy. Although, Mr. Anonymous, your comments fascinates me too. In that, as I’ve suspected, you, and probably many other COG members are motivated by fear, specifically your fear of death. Why so glum, chum?

    Reply  |  Quote
  18. In my last comment I made a mistake calling caseywollberg “….. junk, worthy of only being tossed into “the lake of fire.”…….” I sincerely apologize for those words that of course violated Biblical guidelines. I do not even come close to qualifying for judging anyone on an eternal basis. Since some of the other comments are actually scientifically accurate or at least try to be, I may answer them, but the openly hostile attitude of some of the commenters is so disgusting and unnecessarily ugly that this may be my last comment.

    Concerning how to prove God exists, that is quite simple. Like I said before, if you are really informed about the evolution creation science controversy, you know that, according to our known laws of physics, biology, and other scientific laws, that it was thoroughly impossible for biological life to have formed without much, much divine assistance. Translation: A God of some type must have created biological life forms since they could not have “evolved” on their own. So you have only 2 choices for the creation of life: evolution or a divine creation by a divine God. If one choice is impossible (evolutionism), the remaining choice (God and His creations) is the only answer. By deductive reasoning, you have just proven God exists. It really is that simple, like it or not, take it or leave it. As far as God remaining invisible and often not answering prayers, that is no proof that He does not exist. If I was God I would most definitely stay invisible, too. That would save me from having to strike dead hordes of dumb people trying to openly insult me and even trying to physically attack me.

    Misinformed evolutionists will not tell you that for decades now the very top evolutionists absolutely, steadfastly refuse or hesitate to debate creationist professors, to avoid being publicly ridiculed. How about that? Even offering one top evolutionist, now dead, large sums of money to publicly debate a top creationist was not enough to start a debate. Evolutionists know that at best they will only tie, but usually end up getting “stomped” by the creationist.

    Reply  |  Quote
  19. @ Anonymous:
    Thank you, Anonymous, for apologizing for your “old testament” language about who is worthy of eternal death. Because, really, according to the teachings, we are ALL worthy of death (Rom. 6:23). And don’t forget Matt. 5:22 about not being angry w/ your brother and saying to him “racha” (spelling?), lest you be in danger of the judgment yourself. Of course, the final lines of your reply, about if you were God you’d stay invisible so you wouldn’t have to go around smiting everyone seems illustrative of your mindset…b/c if you were the Almighty, you wouldn’t HAVE to do anything…and as for the majority of atheists, they would instantly not be atheists if they saw but a shadow of your awesome brilliance, heard but an echo of your powerful voice of authority finally bringing an end to the confusion and Holy Wars of the competing faiths, b/c then there would be good EVIDENCE of your existence. Of course, coming down to smite everyone you didn’t like would be good evidence of your existence, too, and it would just make you an Evil god…

    Your argument about proving whether God exists is getting better (since there is an actual argument now). However, it needs work in the following areas:

    You are confusing evolution (and btw, there is no such thing as “evolutionism”–scientific principles are not belief systems…just like it isn’t “gravityism”, or “germ theoryism”) with First Cause. I’m pretty sure there are still a lot of people who say “I don’t know” how life began. However, once it began, evolution describes how life has changed since that time–why there are 5000 different species of spider, for example (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html).

    Of course, just b/c a First Cause for life (and possibly even the universe in general, since we all at one time or another rejected the idea of the Big Bang) leaves a Gap open for God (God of the Gaps), it is a tremendous leap to go from “well, a Supreme Deity must have created stuff, and thus MY idea of God, according to THIS particular book (and don’t forget each denomination’s own particular interpretation of said Holy Book) is the One True Truth!” There might indeed be a God, but to go from “evidence supports the idea that there may be a god” to “and it is Yhwh and his son Jesus Christ according to the truth of the Bible (and good thing they left the Apocrypha and Septuagint out!)” just can’t be done logically…to go from one form of idea to the next requires Intermediate Steps…kind of like evolution! ;-)

    Yeah, sometimes biology professors don’t debate creationists, though watching the videos of PZ Meyers and Richard Dawkins doing so are pretty entertaining. But just think for a moment…you’re probably going under Anonymous b/c if the church knew you were here, you’d be in big trouble (that is an assumption on my part, but most CoGs work that way, though I have heard that United is pretty liberal). If, for example, you refused to debate me, or Caseywollberg, would that be b/c deep down you KNOW you’re wrong? Or would it be b/c you’re sick of our foul language or horrible blasphemies or whatever? See? Just b/c a biologist who once debated won’t debate anymore doesn’t automatically mean it is b/c deep down they know it is all wrong and they just can’t keep up the charade any longer. For what it is worth, Dawkins explains very clearly why he doesn’t debate much: http://richarddawkins.net/articles/119-why-i-won-39-t-debate-creationists.

    Reply  |  Quote
  20. Some badly misinformed people make the mistake of claiming the Bible is nothing more than a bunch of fairy tales. An educated person, though, might say that such people are advertising and displaying, big time, the abysmally deep depth of their ignorance. In 5 quick sentences I can show that the Bible is an accurate, reliable historical and archaeological as well as a religious document. 1) Several major scientific principles were revealed before man discovered them the hard way: a) The earth is round, not flat, and b) the deepest interior part of the earth is literally red hot or hotter. 2) Many predictions were made in the Old Testament that literally came true much later. 3) Archaeology has verified the names of and sometimes the location of Biblical cities as well as some other Biblical claims. 4) Secular history itself has extensively documented the existence and life of Jesus. 5) So many detailed prophecies about the life of Jesus came true so accurately that mathematical calculations have shown that it was basically impossible for those prophecies to have been made by random chance alone. Translation: An all knowing God must have divinely inspired men to record those prophecies about Jesus.

    I read most of and all the subject content of the “Refuting Armstrongism” page to the left. What was provided by its author, though, was at best a feeble attempt to refute the teachings of the surviving remnant churches of the former Worldwide Church of God. Discussion of the dietary laws was glaringly absent (Noah knew which animals were forbidden to eat long before the Mosaic laws were codified, and Isaiah reveals the food laws will still be in force in the distant future). Discussion of the various tithing laws was glaringly absent. Discussion of about 12 major New Testament verses strictly commanding obedience to certain Old Testament laws, including the really terrifying Matthew 7:23 and 13:41,42 verses, was also glaringly absent.

    Soon I will give a comment within that so called refuting page. Amazingly, no comments have been made yet on that page.

    Reply  |  Quote
  21. Anonymous wrote:

    Some badly misinformed people make the mistake of claiming the Bible is nothing more than a bunch of fairy tales.

    Yahweh is a fairy tale. Virgin birth, is a fairy tale. Resurrection is a fairy tale. Noah and the ark, is a fairy tale.

    The Israelites sacking cities as they rampaged throughout Canaan is certainly verifiable. King david lived, so did solomon, so did countless other people described in the book.

    Your problem is that you take the historically accurate sections of the book, of which there are many, and attempt to use them to legitimize the fairy tale elements. Worse yet, you feel that the “wisdom” of bronze age priests should be applied to the 21st century. You are worse than a flat-earther in that regard.

    Anonymous wrote:

    So many detailed prophecies about the life of Jesus came true so accurately that mathematical calculations have shown that it was basically impossible for those prophecies to have been made by random chance alone.

    List them. Show us the math, while you’re at it.

    Anonymous wrote:

    In 5 quick sentences I can show that the Bible is an accurate, reliable historical and archaeological as well as a religious document.

    You failed. Miserably.

    Reply  |  Quote
  22. Five quick sentences? Cool. So, point 1a) The earth is round? You forgot to quote Job 26:10, but guess that’s good enough. b) not quite sure what you’re talking about there–the only scriptures I found concerning a hot core were references to Hell, which the CoGs/Armstrong teach against being an actual place of everlasting burning punishment. So, clarify.
    2) Which predictions?
    3) Wow, archaeology has verified that towns/places the bible talks about actually exist? You mean places like Egypt, Sinai Desert, Jerusalem, Philadelphia, Laodecia, etc? Must mean it is all true! Of course, the archaeological evidence for the Exodous isn’t working out very well (for example)…
    4) Extensively documented the life of Christ? Sources, please. There is much debate as to whether the man ever lived–and that wouldn’t be the case if there was extensive documentation. Right now, off the top of my head, the only source I know of is Josephus, who wrote a couple lines.
    5) You mean like “and OT book prophesied that this fact of the Messiah’s life would happen, and this, this, and that would happen, and we see from NT books that those exact things happened!”? Well, it could have been that since everyone who wrote of the guy knew the OT prophecies, and since they believed he was the Messiah, they would have made sure everything fit. For example, JC being born in Bethlehem…there are numerous factual inconsistencies with that story (census of Quirinius happened when the dude was governor…which was about 6-7AD, whereas JC was reportedly born around 4BC. Also, the whole “return to the land of your long lost ancestor” makes no sense from a “how to run your world empire” frame of mind.

    OK, my turn. 5 sentences (well, points…can’t make them single sentences) that make me think the bible is not entirely accurate: (in addition to the above refutations

    1) The Flood. How much water? How many species? Yeah, I’ve been on some websites that explain how the interior volume was as much as like 570 railcars, etc. And they mention that the thousands of species of sea organisms would be just fine. OK, maybe, but what about the fresh water ones? They’d be dead. Or was the supposed “fountains of the deep” fresh water? If they were fresh water, and the rain was fresh water, then the salt water critters would die. Furthermore, even taking into account the “kinds” argument (guessing they’re meaning something like Phyla or something similar), which would necessitate far fewer critters, then that means god had to miracle a lot of evolution very quickly–like 7 pairs of a representative from the anthropod phyla all giving birth to a different species of arachnids and insects (you know, since there are currently 900,000 currently known).
    Additionally, what about all the plant life that would have died in the flood (plants drown, too)? God recreated everything from scratch? Why not do that with the animals? So, either God miracled the animals to stay alive for however long until some plants came back, or he miracled all the plants back in like a day or two…

    2) Adam/Eve and Noah & Co: We all know (well, all of us that don’t live in Mississippi…haha, cheap laugh!) that you don’t marry close relatives b/c big genetic problems will happen. So…pretty self-explanatory. All humanity came from one mating pair, and then got drownded down to 8mating pairs?

    3) Back to the Beginning: Genesis. The book tells us that god created light and separated it from darkness on the first day…and didn’t create the sun and moon until the 4th day. Of course, it was very wise of god to create plants on the third day…again, before the sun and moon. Similarly, it has been omitted that the moon is a reflector of sunlight and not just a dull version of the sun (being a “lesser light).

    4) Post flood rainbow…guess God rewrote the laws of light and physics (like rewriting a computer program) to suddenly make light refract into a spectrum?

    5) Genealogy of Christ is different in Matt 1 and Luke 3.

    And if you weren’t impressed with Refuting Armstrongism, try Armstrong Delusion (www.armstrongdelusion.com)! ;-)

    Reply  |  Quote
  23. Eric Sell wrote:

    well, all of us that don’t live in Mississippi…

    LOL

    Reply  |  Quote
  24. Tohu, that’s easy. Just Google “mathematical calculations, Jesus, old testament prophecies” and you will find well over a dozen scholarly sites proving what I said.

    Reply  |  Quote
  25. Anonymous wrote:

    Tohu, that’s easy. Just Google “mathematical calculations, Jesus, old testament prophecies” and you will find well over a dozen scholarly sites proving what I said.

    Great!

    Then google it for me, post it here and I’ll get started refuting the bullshit. Links or it didn’t happen. And I suspect we should be using the term “scholarly” rather loosely.

    Reply  |  Quote
  26. Tohu, you seem to forget that most of the readers of these comments are not mentally retarded or seriously impaired mentally otherwise. I’ll bet many of them DID Google what I referred to. Your resorting to raw, brat like emotionalism probaly did not favorably impress most readers of these comments.

    Reply  |  Quote
  27. Anonymous wrote:

    most of the readers of these comments are not mentally retarded

    Well, I’m glad you didn’t say “all” because I can certainly think of one.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Your resorting to raw, brat like emotionalism probaly did not favorably impress most readers of these comments.

    Where was I raw, bratlike, or emotional? I simply asked you to provide the proof instead of being so lazy as to tell me to “google it”

    You are the one making a claim, you get to supply the proof. You are obviously stalling or hoping I’ll stop asking, but you’d be wrong again.

    Put up or shut up.

    Thanks a ton.

    Reply  |  Quote
  28. @ Anonymous:

    And while you’re at it, quit ignoring Mr. Sells excellent refutation of your entire argument.

    Reply  |  Quote
  29. Tohu, with your grotesquely hostile, antiBiblical attitude, some people might say that even if the Lord struck you dead a thousand times and resurrected you a thousand times, then shouted into your face that the entire Bible is true and reliable, you still would not believe the Lord or the Bible. Some people might also say that you are embarrassing yourself more and more with your unreasonable, irrational attitude in your comments. Why do you continue to degrade yourself with your illogical comments?

    Reply  |  Quote
  30. Tohu, with your attitude some people might say that you are not even worthy of having the extremely valuable information and research I pointed you to concerning what I told you to google. So I may never post a link or name a specific site until your attitude improves considerably.

    Reply  |  Quote
  31. Awww, come on Anonymous! Don’t take your ball and go home just cuz you think Tohu is being mean! Think of all the other people on here who might benefit from the valuable information you’ll be withholding! Besides, I was just starting to have fun! Of course, you can tell what kind of nerd I am since I was having fun writing short essays for answers to your challenges. It is nice, though, that you have gotten away from saying “go to our tithing helps us” site for your challenge material–this shows growth and original thought!

    But I’ve written enough essays…I’m interested in hearing from your side of the debate. Oh, that’s right, you brought up the “mathematical proof” thing again w/ Tohu. Well, I already brought forward a good explanation of how Jesus could have been recorded to have accomplished all the OT said The Messiah was supposed to do w/o actually being the Messiah–illustrated by Luke’s made up “everyone went back to the ancestral home of their great, great, great, great, great grandfather for the tax census and thus Jesus of Nazareth was actually born in Bethlehem just like the prophecies fortold” shenanigans. Also, conflicting genealogies (of not just personages, but actual number of generations as well) doesn’t help things. http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/paul_carlson/nt_contradictions.html

    OK, any other rebuttals?

    I’m still a little worried about your seeming fixation w/ killing those who don’t agree with your theology (talking about killing Tohu a thousand times). But, as we were taught, we are all at different points along the road to conversion…maybe blasting some folks in COD 4 will help ease this violent nature you appear to have. Farcry 2 is my favorite “shoot ‘em til I feel better” game, personally.

    Reply  |  Quote
  32. Eric Sell, I don’t have a violent nature. I’m just as gentle as a little kitty cat.

    I glanced over your “contradictions” site and almost immediately spotted one mistake. Here is what it said:

    “VI. MISCELLANEOUS
    A. THE UNCHANGEABLE LAW
    According to Matthew 5:18, Jesus said that not the tiniest bit of the Law could be changed. However, in Mark 7:19 Jesus declares that all foods are clean, thereby drastically changing the Law.

    The church tries to get around this obvious contradiction by artificially separating the Mosaic Law into the “ceremonial” law and the “moral” law, a separation which would have abhorred the Jews of Jesus’ time. The Mark passage and similar ones like Acts 10:9-16 were added to accommodate the teaching of Paul regarding the Law (which was diametrically opposed to the teaching of Jesus on the Law) and to make the gospel palatable to the Gentiles.” End of quotation from the “contradictions” site.

    At the end of Mark 7:19 is the statement or similar statement in many, but not all, Bibles, ADDED BY TRANSLATORS AND IS NOT IN THE ORIGINAL GREEK: “In saying this Jesus declared all foods clean.” This artificially added statement is not in the generally more conservative and accurate KJV and NKJV. The context also, of Mark 7:19 involves the ceremonial ritual of carefully washing hands, not which foods are unclean or inedible Biblically according to the dietary laws in Leviticus.
    Acts 10:9-16 was also royally screwed up by the author of your site. Those verses only prove that Peter could now baptize gentiles, previously considered “unclean,” NOT that the laws about diet have supposedly been abolished. If you don’t believe me, read item 3 on the “verses mainstreamers use” page at http://www.TithingHelps.us.

    Your “contradictions” site is admittedly interesting but would require an enormous amount of time checking the original Greek to make sure no mistakes were made, as were made in the above example.

    Reply  |  Quote
  33. Anonymous wrote:

    would require an enormous amount of time checking the original Greek to make sure no mistakes were made

    It totally makes sense that Yahweh would choose that as the method of delivering his message to mankind.

    You know, as opposed to just growing some god-balls, showing his face and telling us what he wanted personally.

    Anonymous wrote:

    some people might say that even if the Lord struck you dead a thousand times and resurrected you a thousand times, then shouted into your face that the entire Bible is true and reliable, you still would not believe the Lord or the Bible.

    Oh, if I were to endure all of that, I certainly would believe in Yahweh. I also believed in the existence of Saddam Hussein and Joseph Stalin.

    But existence alone, is not reason enough to grovel. I would have a great many questions for Yahweh, even before he killed me a thousand times. First question would be, why “grant” me a set of morals, when those very same morals condemn the actions of Yahweh himself?

    Seems kind of counterproductive to building a following of petty humans.

    Reply  |  Quote
  34. “Gods ways are greater than ours” in three… two… one…

    Reply  |  Quote
  35. Tohu does not seem very concerned about at least trying to make sure he gets to live forever, according to Biblical instructions, the best in the world, after he dies here. Why is Tohu so complacent, and not more zealous to make his personal immortality more sure? Doesn’t he place considerable value on his life?

    I desperately want to live forever, and the Bible, and therefore God, commands us to seek immortality, and to not be ashamed or bashful about it. Yes, I am selfish in that regard, but not for the wrong reasons.

    Reply  |  Quote
  36. Anonymous wrote:

    the Bible, and therefore God, commands us to seek immortality

    When a genocidal maniac commands me to jump, I don’t ask “how high?”

    I tell him to fuck off.

    Now quit with your happy little tales of mandatory participation in what is certain to be the most boring and inescapable event of all time, for all time, and either show me some proof or leave. Please, you’re an embarrassment to every apologist in the western world.

    Reply  |  Quote
  37. “Genocidal maniac.” Analyzing that closely, the Lord created some humans, let them live for awhile to savor life, then the Lord allowed them to die prematurely. Is it not far worse to have never created those particular humans in the first place, than to create them and let them die later? Therefore the Lord was good to them, but not as good to them as He could have been, or, especially as good to them as He will be later when He resurrects them and gives them all the knowledge of salvation they will need.

    Your reasoning is too limited.

    Think.

    Reply  |  Quote
  38. Anonymous wrote:

    then the Lord allowed them to die

    Cut the sweet-talk, Sunshine. “allowed them to die” my ass. Outright killed them (like a genocidal maniac), if your book of fables is to be believed.

    If my reasoning is limited, yours is fucking non-existent. (Which means you have something in common with Yahweh! You should be thrilled.)

    Reply  |  Quote
  39. Yeah, the symbol in the upper right hand corner of your comments should have tipped me off as to what I was dealing with.

    Reply  |  Quote
  40. Anonymous wrote:

    the symbol in the upper right hand corner of your comments should have tipped me off as to what I was dealing with.

    What, someone with a sense of humor?

    Reply  |  Quote
  41. Good point, Anonymous, about the bit on “cleansing all foods”. You are right–in the KJV it clearly says that “Paul understood he (god) was talking about the gentiles”. Well, maybe I shouldn’t have put that in quotes since it was a paraphrase, but anyway.

    Good job finding that!

    Now, what about everything else I took time away from playing Shogun 2: Total War to type up? You successfully found one point on one page that was wrong, and I congratulate you for that. Now there are still 10 other links (or more) for you to refute. Also, you might want to work hard to defend your tithinghelps.us site, otherwise you should probably leave the group you’re in since they use such bad, easily refuted arguments…I mean, God is all about telling the truth, right? Those creation science arguments were not truthful.

    Oooooh! The Problem of evil! I love that argument! Well, this thing between Anon and Tohu is turning into a mixed “problem of evil” and kind of “goodness of God” debate…so, yeah, isn’t it wonderful that god made some people in the first place and allowed them to live before ordering them to all be slain by the sword? Reminds me of something Armstrong wrote in “Military Service and War” about God ordering the Israelites to drive out the Canaanite “land poachers” (http://armstrongdelusion.com/2011/07/15/this-means-war/). They were land poachers b/c God had promised that land to the Israelites. But did the Canaanites (and all the other ites) know this? Were there “POSTED: Private Property” signs? Did god, in his infinite fairness and mercy, boom forth to these squatters (or make eviction notices rain from the heavens) that they’d best get out or else they’d suffer the penalty? Nothing about that in the bible! Nope, just straight to genocide.

    It is the old question of “is god good b/c he is following principles of good?” (therefore god is under an even higher moral principle), or “is god good b/c he is god and therefore any action he performs is good?” If it is the latter, then, sure, “you shall save no man alive, but utterly slay all, man and beast, young and old, etc” is Holy, Righteous genocide! And, of course, it was very righteous of god to kill all the animals along w/ all the sinful humans in the flood. Speaking of the flood, it kind of sounds like god was having anger management issues: “what? Look at these fuckers! I’m going to kill the LOT of ‘em! It repents me that I made them!”

    Of course, the whole “God has anger management issues” thing flows throughout the OT, since every few chapters he’s ready to kill all the Israelites and Moses has to come up and say “yo, God, dude, chill bro! You wouldn’t want all the other people to talk about what a dick you are for killing all your people after you freed them from Egypt, would you?” I hope you are gentle as a kitteh, Anonymous, b/c some of your remarks have made me very glad you are not yet a divine God being–lest we all be smitten in your fiery anger already.

    But all of that is neither here nor there on the bigger debate. And really, much of this debate has been about the validity of the bible. If I were to prove conclusively (which the contradictions of the Gospels helps me to do) that the bible is nothing more than the world’s oldest game of Telephone, that still wouldn’t disprove the existence of any God or other supernatural being. Similarly, saying that “life from non-life is so impossible, that there had to be Divine intervention” also does not prove that it was, specifically, the God of the Bible that did it. Ever hear of deism? Don’t worry, I won’t make you google it yourself… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism
    With deism, you get a Creator God who made everything and thereafter takes no interest in who/what we worship, who we sleep with, or whether or not we enjoy the sweet, sweet smell of bacon & eggs every morning.

    So, yeah, you still have a lot of work ahead, but I’m happy to see you’re still in the game!

    Reply  |  Quote
  42. Eric Sell, against my better judgment to discontinue communicating with someone who insists on using words to degrade his own Creator, I guess I will post a few more comments since you do have much knowledge of the former Worldwide Church of God. I am studying “The Armstrong Delusion” to later provide some refutations.

    The site you listed on Biblical contradictions provides contradictions that are mostly inconsequential and somewhat irrelevant to living a Biblical life and pursuing salvation, the main, important message in the Bible, which has no major contradictions. The contradiction listed about how Judas died does seem accurate according to the Greek. Many of the other contradictions listed concerning genealogy, geography, etc. are also probably accurate, too, although I have not researched them yet. You have no “iron-clad” guarantee that God did not deliberately have those contradictions recorded to thwart people like you who have a bad attitude towards God and the Bible to begin with, to provide an easy “stumblingblock” and make it harder for you to become converted and therefore saved. Perhaps the Lord wants in His eternal kingdom only those who have an all consuming, all out love for God and His Son, Jesus. The site’s contradiction about Jesus’ plan to preach only to the Jews versus his plan or command for the message of salvation to be preached to nations everywhere may not actually be contradictory because the real definition of “ethnos,” Strong’s 1484, may not actually mean “gentile.”

    Your concentration on refuting the validity of the Bible and the existence of God is kid’s stuff. You need to graduate to what it takes to achieve salvation, to where the grown ups are. The information rich internet has plenty of information validating the Bible, and the average 12 year old girl can figure out that God must exist.

    You need to come out with a really good set of Biblical arguments to refute the teachings of the remnant churches of the former Worldwide Church of God. I have debated on the internet mainstream Christians trying to convince them to start obeying the Mosaic food, festival, and tithing laws. The knowledge of many mainstream Christians of the Bible is amazingly shallow. That is one of the really great things about the COGs, they have researched forwards and backwards and backwards and forward the Greek in controversial, questionable New Testament verses, and when I debate grace abusing, “do nothing” Christians I win the arguments, although the traditionalists claim I don’t.

    You, Eric Sell, refuse to, probably, ACCURATELY explain Matthew 7:23 and Matthew 13:41,42. With your vastly superior knowledge, why don’t you “spell out” what those verses really mean?

    Reply  |  Quote
  43. Hey Anonymous:

    Good to see you on here and please do come back. I soldier away in lonesomehood and have to put up with the arrogant lying self-congratulatory assholes and trolls on here all by myself. You are wrong but so is Jace and Tohu-the-fag and Casey-the-queer and Paker the paki. I say you gave these retards a run for their money. Good stuff dude.

    Reply  |  Quote
  44. @ Anonymous:
    Well, I thank you for choosing to continue developing True, Godly Character, in the form of Patience, and continuing the debate! Also, it may very well be that this continuing debate could be justified (from your side) by the knowledge that you have no iron-clad guarantee that god isn’t using me to help you. I mean, isn’t the whole plan of God (according to the teachings we have been raised with) that we will all be Teachers in the WWT? I mean, you know, Priests are supposed to teach the people, right? So, by testing your knowledge, I am helping you in your goal of fulfilling the purpose God has for you in calling you out today! Yay me!

    You are right: I have no iron-clad guarantee that God didn’t maybe allow some glaring contradictions into the bible in order to test those who, like me, would have the very nerve to dare question it—just like I have no fool-proof guarantee that god didn’t put dinosaur fossils in the ground in order to prove a stumblingblock against those who would dare dig around checking on whether the Genesis account of creation was an accurate record of reality. Of course, if you were born in Saudi Arabia and I brought contradictions about the Koran to your attention, you might say the same thing (or, probably you’d say “off with your Infidel head”). Perhaps I should, as Gerald Furry once said in a sermon, (and as you are suggesting) study with a desire to prove it is TRUE rather than prove it false! He was talking, I think, about people trying to say he is not That Prophet by disproving his book, That Prophet, from scripture. He said “sure, if you go into it looking to prove it wrong, you will prove it wrong. That is why you should go into it proving THAT it is so.” Of course, Acts 17:11 says the Bereans proved WHETHER those things were so, not THAT they were so…it is almost like god was praising their skeptical approach! Maybe I’m not doing too bad after all…

    Just b/c I can’t Prove that god didn’t intentionally put stumbling blocks in the bible (even though he claims not to be the author of confusion), doesn’t mean that, by default, he must have. You also can’t prove he did. As you’ve seen, there are contradictions, some of them not inconsequential. Of course, if the bible is a collection of books written as far back as 4000yrs ago, written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, collected by those the CoGs teach were not of the true Religion (those following in the traditions of Simon Magus…btw, why didn’t God have some of his True Followers down through the ages keep a TRUE edition of what was to become the Bible?), translated into Latin, translated into English…then one would expect mistakes and contradictions. It would be inevitable. However, it if was the very Word of the One and Only God, one would expect clarity and consistency.

    Graduate up to figuring out what it takes to achieve salvation? OHHhhh…it is interesting the different point of view we’re taking with this—b/c unless the Bible is true (and again, if it is false that does not disprove the existence of any deity), then looking through the bible to see what it says about salvation is rather a waste of time. It is like Armstrong said: cut down the Trunk of the Tree and you needn’t worry about all the fiddly little branches. The bible is the trunk of the tree from which every single branch of Christianity grows—whether Catholic, Protestant, or CoG. Of course, the CoGs themselves all come from what Herbert W. Armstrong taught, so if is shown to have preached things which are not true, then I needn’t disprove tithing or the food laws (I haven’t looked into tithing, but I already know the bible nowhere contradicts the food laws, nor commands worshipping Sunday, etc.)…you know, since I think all the 500+ splinter CoGs all claim to follow Mr. Armstrong (and the Bible) better than the other 499+ groups.

    Here is a summary of chopping down the tree of Armstrongism: http://armstrongdelusion.com/2012/07/31/timberrrrrr/

    Also, here is where I got started—by actually reading what Armstrong said, strangely enough. http://www.herbert-armstrong.org/index2.html

    The Bible says, in Deut. 18:20-22, that the test of one sent from God is whether those things the guy says actually come to pass. If they don’t, then “I have not sent him and you needn’t be afraid of him”. If you read through all the old Plain Truths, starting in 1934, you’ll notice “…this is the tribulation! We have been in the tribulation since 1929 in the United States, and since 1928 in Europe” (Jun/July 1934 PT). In the Jan ’39 PT, he states, “Mussolini’s soon-appearing re-born ROMAN EMPIRE is the Beast Power, and Mussolini undoubtedly is the BEAST!” Of course, by the Nov/Dec ’40 PT, he is saying “…Hitler is looming up as the most likely candidate (for who is the Beast)”. Why? B/c Mussolini wasn’t doing a very good job. Keep reading the Plain Truths to find more, similar, oopsies, which, were he sent from God, he would not be making.

    You challenged me on Matt 7:23 and 13:41-42. You said I’d refuse to accurately explain them. That was a rather unnecessarily mean thing to say. Though those verses don’t seem to speak very specifically to the need to continue keeping the OT law, I have never seen that the NT has ever argued against keeping it. Yeah, modern, mainstream Christians say “but that’s the OT and now we’re under Grace, not the Law”, but I’ve never held to that interpretation of scripture.

    I, on the other hand, won’t accuse you of refusing to explain the challenges I’ve put forth to you, but I’m willing to give the benefit of the doubt that you may just be a bit busy in the non-internet parts of your life…so let me remind you of some of them: I asked you which OT predictions prove the bible (out of your 5 sentences argument). Also, I asked for sources of the extensive (non-biblical) historical documentation of Christ, b/c the only historical source I know of is a couple of lines written by Josephus.

    Reply  |  Quote
  45. Thanks, Anon 7.

    While Eric Sell is making up his mind as to whether or not he will take the bait of explaining Matthew 7:23 and 13:41,42 as well as Romans 6:15, 3:31 and 1 John 3:4, too, hopefully, I will be answering some previously unanswered questions posed to me, in the next day or two.

    Yes, Herbie’s multiple mistakes in setting dates for the fulfillment of some Biblical prophecies, his divorce and remarriage doctrinal mistake, his Pentecost date mistake, and his choice of a successor mistake certainly do invite some degree of justifiable scorn and ridicule. If he was so dumb as to make those mistakes, how in the world can we respect anything else he says, many people might ask. There is the possibility, though probably remote, that the Lord deliberately caused him to make those mistakes, to provide a “stumblingblock” for some unworthy people to understand the real salvation process. Herbie did not run around naked for about 3 years like Isaiah did, Herbie did not marry a known prostitute like Hosea did, and he was not well known for a diet of locusts or locust beans and honey, like John the Baptist was. Isaiah and Hosea must have/probably incurred a massive amount of Herbie style ridicule and criticism for their behavior, but what was overwhelmingly important about those 3 prophets was their overall message, which was profound. I am not saying Herbie was a prophet, but his main message, that mainstream Christianity is really, actually failing to obey some still valid, still important Old Testament laws with potentially disastrous consequences in the distant future is what really sets him apart from other religious leaders. Herbie’s overall message is profound.

    The antiCOG, anticreationism, antiBible commenters here, who seemingly don’t even have the common horse sense to want to live forever or want to try to perpetuate their lives after death, offer absolutely no hope to others understandably seeking immortality. Immortality living with God and Jesus with their incomprehensibly enormous powers of creation and super joyous activities is such a fabulously great goal and objective that no one can really adequately how wonderful that goal is. It is such a great goal that it is even worth gambling for, even if the possibility of realizing that goal may be less than 30 per cent.

    Reply  |  Quote
  46. “……that no one can really adequately EXPLAIN how wonderful that goal is.” Sentence corrected.

    Reply  |  Quote
  47. Anonymous wrote:

    While Eric Sell is making up his mind as to whether or not he will take the bait of explaining Matthew 7:23

    Anonymous, can you explain away the existence of Allah according to Quran 25:61?

    Reply  |  Quote
  48. Just google “secular history, jesus” and you will find a number of very good sites verifying the life of Jesus from a nonBIblical point of view.

    One really good site is http://the devineevidence.com/jesus_history.html.

    The first way I was exposed to this precious bit of knowledge was hearing about it in a COG sermonette or sermon.

    Reply  |  Quote
  49. Anonymous wrote:

    Just google…

    1) Stop telling us to google things.

    2) Answer the question.

    Reply  |  Quote
  50. I encourage others to google something to further expose them to dozens of other excellent sites. The site I recommend is only “the tip of the iceberg” that is available to study.

    DUH.

    By the way, you need to get rid of that satanic symbol. Whether you realize it or not, satan represents one of the highest forms of obscenity, and he would just as soon send a band of chimpanzees to tear you to pieces as to look at you, really. Is that really what you want to glorify?

    Regarding fulfilled Old Testament prophecies, google “fulfilled old testament prophecies.” One great site is http://100prophecies.org/.

    Reply  |  Quote
  51. You’re either too lazy to be bothered or you know that we will point and laugh at you when we click your links and witness the sheer idiocy of their content

    If Satan existed, and he does not, I would be most willing to hear his side of the story, When compared to Yahweh, who:

    1) has no interest in verifying his own existence to humanity
    2) sees fit to utilize only the most primitive methods of “communication” for relaying his commands (IE: the clergy and anonymous trolls who tell people to “google it”)
    3) Tells us that murder is wrong a hundred or so pages after he murdered every human on the planet, except for a family floating in a giant fucking zoo.
    4) Lied (or was unnecessarily vague) about the age of the earth before telling us lying was a sin.
    5) Raped a virgin after telling us not to commit adultery (except with the women the israelites spared in their god-inspired genocide).
    6) Stole the land from the Canaanites after telling us not to steal.
    7) Created us with curiosity and then told us not to be curious, again being vague about the consequences.
    8) Has no interest in putting a stop to horrific acts carried out in his name
    9) Feels just fine about passing punishments for “sin” down through the generations: IE infant cancer, birth defects, etc. Or, putting a curse on Eli’s house even though his descendants did jack-shit wrong.
    10) Created the law in the first place and then had his own son be murdered to pay the price for shit he didnt even do.
    11) expects us to believe in him, after all of the absurdity above.
    12) expects us to want to spend eternity with his narcissist ass.

    Satan, if he existed, had the balls to tell Yahweh to go fuck himself. Aces in my book.

    Oh, and when are you going to answer that question about the Quran verse?

    Reply  |  Quote
  52. @ Anonymous:
    Taking the bait?? Well, at least you’re honest about your approach—though I can’t say what trap you’re trying to set, since we’ve never been arguing about whether the NT negates the laws of the Old. You see, I’m not one of these namby-pamby New Age Christians who hold to the whole “little baby Jesus, meek and mild” thing. Whenever there is a debate about homosexuality and some modern, liberal Christian tries to say Jesus wasn’t anti-gay, I point to 1 Cor. 6:9-11. So, thank you for being open about the fact you’re trying to bait me into a trap, but unfortunately for you, I was never walking down that road to begin with.

    Nice try about Herbie. I was not making an ad hominem attack and trying to discredit his message through attacking whatever his less than stellar actions may have been—that is a Strawman you made up yourself. Pretty clever (in a very devious, unchristian sort of way) how you slipped it in, though…I almost didn’t see it!

    In actuality, I was pointing to real failed prophecies/predictions that a man sent from God, with extra of the Holy Spirit, etc, etc, should not have been making. Yeah, take DNR, or Pentecost since you brought it up…he said, when the change in doctrine came, that God had finally revealed the entire truth of the matter. I can understand a partial revelation followed by the entire revelation kind of argument, but in a multi-stage revelation, the latter stages need to build on the first stages instead of directly contradicting them. Did you ever see anywhere in Jeremiah or Isiah a prophecy partly revealed, then fully revealed later that meant the opposite of the first revelation? Personal conduct totally out of the picture, remember anything about when the Tribulation was supposed to happen? Still coming up within the next “five to seven years” at the end of the next “gun lap”? In the June/July ’34 PT, the Trib had been going on since ’29. In the Apr/May ’40 PT it explains that “it is THEN that the Great Tribulation will come!” Then, in 1956, in 1975 in Prophecy, “This will be the very beginning, as Jesus Christ said, of the Great Tribulation (speaking of a huge drought to hit probably some time between ’65-’72).

    Which part of Armstrong’s message was profound? The failed prophecies? Maybe it was the elegant (I certainly thought it was elegant for a long time) explanation of the Gap between Gen. 1:1 and 1:2? Oh yeah, that wasn’t revealed understanding to him from God—that was an old idea! It dated at least back to 1814 and references can be found as far back as the late 1500s. http://armstrongdelusion.com/2010/11/01/the-gap/

    Maybe the profound bit was US&BIP? Yes, profound revelation to…what? JH Allen? Pretty good evidence for plagiarism. http://armstrongdelusion.com/2010/11/01/a-broken-key-the-case-against-british-israelism-part-one/ and don’t forget parts 2 & 3. Even if the exact instances of phrasing and certain examples/illustrative stories that make it look a whole lot like plagiarism happen to be immensely improbable coincidences, it was still an old idea that Herbie found in his “exhaustive night and day study” in the library there in Oregon.

    Also, god might have allowed him to make those mistakes in order to test those who are really, really worthy of salvation? Wow, and here I thought “God is Love” and “God is not the author of confusion”! But seriously, just step back for a moment: if you were arguing with someone else who was claiming that THEIR guy was actually sent by god the way you claim (and the way I used to believe) that Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong was, would YOU be ready to accept, upon close inspection of his record (what has he gotten right, what he has missed) the special pleading of “well, he got some things wrong, but God allowed him to make those mistakes to test who really had faith”? When the question is about someone you (or I) don’t already have a confirmation bias towards, then the answer is clear—no way would that line of (poor) reasoning be acceptable!

    You keep going on about how unfathomable you find it that we appear to hate ourselves to such a point that we seem to have lost our “natural” desire to live for eternity. You say it is even worth gambling for. Hmmm…like Pascal’s Wager? Eh? “If God is not real, then you’ve lost nothing, but if he is real you’ve gained everything.” You better hope god isn’t omniscient…I can’t imagine he’d find such cowardly reasoning acceptable. But even if such thinking is acceptable, you have a long way to go—there are over 500 CoG splinter groups. Of course, you can throw those out the window if you accept the Bible’s test for who is really sent by God (Deut. 18:20-22), since the man Armstrong was wrong about so many things that a man sent by god wouldn’t be wrong about. Without all those CoGs to wade through, your wagering gets easier, since pretty much it is only “Fundamentalist” christian groups that, along with the CoGs, hold to a literal reading of the Bible.

    Reply  |  Quote
  53. A new low by Tofu.

    Despite probably growing condemnation of me by the silent readers of these comments, condemnation for continuing to communicate with a person like Tofu, I will answer, for the benefit of the curious, his questions, other than the ridiculous ones.

    The Koran verse seems to help prove the existence of God, not disprove it.

    1) I already proved that God exists. He does not have to appear in person and “spell it out” to you.

    2) What do you want the Lord to do to relay His commands to you, tattoo them on your skin?

    3) Again, since God is God, He has the right to do anything He wants to do, whether humans consider it right or wrong.

    4) God never lied or implied a lie about the age of the earth. Are you so dumb that you have never read the Hebrew definitions of critically important words in the book of Genesis? Those verses clearly leave wide open as the Grand Canyon an unknown age of the earth that could be in the millions of years. The Gap Theory is quite valid, and Herbie did not invent it. Google “the gap theory,” Tofu.

    5) That was a ridiculous statement. You must have little to no regard for your life. God could zap you in the next second for saying something like that.

    6) Refer to 3.

    7) Not sure what you meant.

    8) Of course He has an interest in stopping them, but to stop them He would have to use physical force, preventing free will, which is what judgment and the eternal life selection process is all about.

    9) Refer to 3.

    10) Ditto.

    11, 12) Too ridiculous to answer.

    Tofu, is there anything at all that you like and enjoy that God has created?

    Again, you really do need to get rid of that horned symbol.

    Reply  |  Quote
  54. Anonymous wrote:

    The Koran verse seems to help prove the existence of God, not disprove it.

    Yeah…. that would be Allah, last I checked, he’s practically a different deity than yours. Then again, you can’t even spell the book right.

    Awkward…

    Anonymous wrote:

    I already proved that God exists.

    1) Hooray for you! It shouldn’t be too difficult for you to show us how then.

    Anonymous wrote:

    What do you want the Lord to do to relay His commands to you, tattoo them on your skin?

    2) Actually, that might be a good start. With Moses it took a burning bush and god speaking. With Gideon it took a few nights and some soggy wool. Hell, they were lightweights, Pharaoh got ten whole plagues. Wahoo.

    But I’m supposed to just take it on faith that god is there, like you have because you’re afraid of not living forever? Pathetic.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Again, since God is God, He has the right to do anything He wants to do,

    3) Right, and pretending he exists, pretending he gave us our sense of morality, we have the right to call him a monster for it.

    Absolute power corrupts absolutely, as they say. just because you have the ability to do something does not make it right. If Yahweh’s shitty publicity strategy for our age is any indicator, it’s rather likely that he didn’t reveal himself to many (sane) people back in the bronze age either. And yet he somehow expected them to know they were sinning when he murdered them all in the flood. Real smart god ya got there.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Are you so dumb that you have never read the Hebrew definitions of critically important words in the book of Genesis?

    4) Am I so dumb that I never read it in the original hebrew? Ignore for a moment that I have Rosetta Stone Hebrew levels 1-3 sitting on my desk right now (a fun and expensive little tale I’ll save for later) also ignore that I am an author over at Armstrong delusion and know eminently more about Gap Theory than you do. Of course “god” never lied about creating the earth in 6 days, that was the petty human translators that fucked that one up, right?

    And as for “clearly” there is an entire group of believers (known as young earthers, yes, easily confused with flat earthers) that go to great lengths to show that it all happened in 6 days. Clearly it is a debatable topic for you believers and not “clearly” a decided one at all, no matter how much you’d like it to be.

    Anonymous wrote:

    You must have little to no regard for your life. God could zap you in the next second for saying something like that.

    5) First of all dipshit, I’d like you to google the definition of “rape”. Yep, you google it.

    It’s funny you should say “zap”, let me tell you a fun little tale that took place shortly after my deconversion. I live in Florida, known as the “lightning capital of the world”. I am a photographer, with greater regard for my craft than my own safety at times. One day, driving home from work, and towards the beach, I saw a spectacular display of lightning in the sky, over the water. Not wanting to miss it, I immediately got my camera and (metal) tripod and headed to the beach. There I was, on a dark beach, all by myself taking pix, practically standing next to a lightning rod with bolts coming down all around me every few seconds. Seemed to me like a good time for an experiment. I looked up at the sky, and (in what seems now as a goofy thing to do) silently challenged Yahweh to strike me dead. Nothing happened. I upped the ante with some choice words about Jeebus and (ironically) my next insult of choice referred (quite by accident) to Yahweh’s run-in with Mary, if you know what I mean.

    Well, your Hebrew god – storm god, for fucks sake, this was his element – could not spare me a bolt. Little old me, blaspheming my ass off, all alone on a beach, practically begging to get struck just be being there, and he didn’t do shit. And if he did exist, it’s not even like he’d have had to reveal his presence! One little lightning bolt is all he had to summon. I would have just looked liked a dumbass kid who got hit by lightning by standing on a beach in a thunderstorm. But yahweh did nothing. This great wrathful god who killed Korah and Abiram just for mouthing off to Moses, and I was insulting him. What I did get, were some incredible lightning photos and a fantastic story to tell morons like yourself who threaten me on behalf of their imaginary friend. Going forward, spare me your campfire stories about vengeful beings.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Refer to 3.

    6) You’re an idiot.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Not sure what you meant.

    7) Of course not. Refer to #6.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Of course He has an interest in stopping them, but to stop them He would have to use physical force, preventing free will, which is what judgment and the eternal life selection process is all about.

    8) Then why even bother to warn me about the zapping in the first place, Einstein?

    Anonymous wrote:

    Refer to 3.

    9) Ok, now you’re just being lazy. Disregard my “Einstein” remark. I just insulted a great man by association.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Ditto

    10) Likewise.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Too ridiculous to answer

    11) Translation: The answer would cause you to have to think critically about your dear and fluffy savior, and that would make your tummy ache.

    12) You’re so blinded by this desperate need for immortality that you haven’t stopped to think about how boring it might actually be. Roll that one around for a while.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Tofu, is there anything at all that you like and enjoy that God has created?

    I love the world, I love a great many things about it, and i love doing many things in it (some that would make you shake in your little bible-thumper-boots) I’m thrilled to have even lived at all. I hit the cosmic lottery. It’s been a good life (especially these last two hedonistic years) and I fucking love it.

    But god had nothing to do with any of that.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Again, you really do need to get rid of that horned symbol.

    I’m working on that actually!

    Reply  |  Quote
  55. For those who want a quick, easy education on the Gap theory, click http://tithinghelps.us/the-gap-theory.php.

    Getting back to being zapped, Herbie’s successor, if he could come back from the dead, needs to talk to Tofu. Joseph Tkach took control of the WCG and in 1995 changed ultraconservative doctrines around 180 degrees to liberal mainstream theology. Before 1995 ended, he was DEAD. He died after bragging that God had not yet struck him dead for reversing doctrines. I cannot prove that it was God who deliberately ended his life, but it is so unusually coincidental that the zapping theory is not unreasonable.

    Koran is a perfectly well accepted way to spell the word, Retardo.

    Reply  |  Quote
  56. Anonymous wrote:

    Getting back to being zapped, Herbie’s successor, if he could come back from the dead, needs to talk to Tofu. Joseph Tkach took control of the WCG and in 1995 changed ultraconservative doctrines around 180 degrees to liberal mainstream theology. Before 1995 ended, he was DEAD.

    The changes started taking place in the late 80s. Your god sure took his sweet time.

    Not only that, his son seems to be doing just fine and had a thing or two to do with the changes, if I recall.

    Anonymous wrote:

    He died after bragging that God had not yet struck him dead for reversing doctrines.

    Bragging? You totally pulled that out of your ass for shock value.

    Fail.

    Reply  |  Quote
  57. @ Anonymous:
    Point 4: Yes, that’s kind of the point—Armstrong did NOT invent Gap Theory, nor was it revealed to him. However, in MOA, he talks about “Now another surprise for most readers. Here is another bit of the missing dimension in knowledge, actually revealed in the Bible, but unrecognized by religion, by science and by higher education.” That is simply a lie. Religion knew about it, nay invented it, long before Armstrong was even born, and before his parents were born. But, only HE has the divine truth b/c HE is God’s End Time Apostle! However, I’m sure he was right that it was a surprise to most readers, as none of us had ever bothered to study theology and so, in our ignorance, we were like “wow, that makes so much sense and we’ve totally never heard anything like that before! This must truly be the very truth of God!”

    Yeah, I looked at your tithing helps us (get rich) site. One word: PARAGRAPHS.
    Aside from that, yeah, it makes sense from a “it is either this or Young Earth Creationism”, which, given the ease with which the age of the earth can be determined, just makes them look like the religious nutters they are. So, yeah, Gap creationism makes a whole lot more sense than YEC. But it doesn’t make more sense than reality. Because, sadly, people are too friggin curious (and smart) and thus continue looking into things and learning about things…things like ocean corals…and trees. http://armstrongdelusion.com/2012/06/13/without-form-and-void-part-two-the-case-against-gap-creationism/

    The Koran verse that Tohu is bothering you about shows that the Koran is more scientifically accurate than the bible, for the Koran gets right the fact that the moon merely reflects light, whereas the bible states that the moon is simply a dim version of the sun (a “lamp”, according to the Hebrew). Of course, Genesis was written probably 2000yrs before the Koran, so that would easily explain that. But, since you are wagering on Eternal Life, you should definitely prove whether the Koran/Quran is more or less accurate than the bible. No sense betting on the wrong horse, right? Because then you will have wagered and STILL lost all—and what a drag that would be!

    To help you along, maybe try googling Prophecy in Quran…nah, I won’t make you do that…here’s a handy dandy little link for you: http://www.islamreligion.com/articles/347/

    Reply  |  Quote
  58. Eric Sell wrote:

    Yeah, I looked at your tithing helps us (get rich) site.

    Incidentally, so did I, last night.

    I forced myself to read the demon possession article, trying to work that angle into Anonymous’ fixation with my horned avatar.

    But I just could not stop laughing. First, as mentioned, the formatting of the site looks as though an escaped mental patient developed it.

    Next, the article about possession uses as proof, an equally laughable article posted at worldnetdaily. On the same page were links to other articles such as: “How Obama will steal the election” and “Obama’s Hide and Seek College documents” along with more right-wing insanity (and I do mean insanity) than I’ve ever seen before.

    And that’s just the tip of the Tithinghelps Iceberg, to steal a line from Anon.

    Reply  |  Quote
  59. Tohu, the attention you are showering on me, even though it is negative, is truly appreciated. The fact that you insult me proves beyond any and all doubt that you consider me so important that I am worthy of insulting. Now if you really considered me worthless (not even important enough to insult), then you would ignore me. Oooooouuuuuu, now that would really hurt! I almost cannot stand to be ignored. That might wound me so grievously that I might never recover from that emotionally. So, please, please do keep the insults coming. The more the better, and the nastier, the better! I love feeling important!

    That horned thing still keeps showing up in your comments.

    The rest of this comment will be directed toward Eric Sell.

    Job 28:5: “As for the earth, from it comes bread, but underneath it is turned up as by fire.” This scientific verse revealed long before human researchers discovered it, that the deep interior of the earth, generally speaking, was literally as hot or hotter than fire. The verse therefore adds credibility to the Bible, making it more trustworthy and believable.

    http://www.greatcom.org/resources/areadydefense/ch06/default.htm states that the chances are only about 1 in 75,000,000 that Ezekiel’s fulfilled predictions about Tyre could have occurred by random chance alone without divine assistance. The site also says that the probability is about 300,000,000 to 1 that Ezekiel’s also fulfilled predictions about Edom could have been made using only random chance, without divine assistance.

    Herbie always kept telling the church members, basically, “Don’t believe me, believe the Bible.” So I look well past his mistakes, and appreciate the intense, accurate research spawned by WCG’s later COGs.

    I may limit my comments here to one per day or less since this is starting to really take a lot of my time, especially since a little time consuming research is needed for some comments.

    Reply  |  Quote
  60. Anonymous wrote:

    The fact that you insult me proves beyond any and all doubt that you consider me so important that I am worthy of insulting.

    I set the bar very low in terms of who I insult. That would be a lot of people, by the way, so don’t go feeling too special there. It’s something of a hobby really, so I’m enjoying myself.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Now if you really considered me worthless…

    Oh, you are.

    Anonymous wrote:

    then you would ignore me. Oooooouuuuuu, now that would really hurt! I almost cannot stand to be ignored.

    And give you the last word? Never, troll.

    Anonymous wrote:

    So, please, please do keep the insults coming. The more the better, and the nastier, the better!

    Count on it!

    Anonymous wrote:

    Job 28:5: “As for the earth, from it comes bread, but underneath it is turned up as by fire.” This scientific verse revealed long before human researchers discovered it, that the deep interior of the earth, generally speaking, was literally as hot or hotter than fire. The verse therefore adds credibility to the Bible, making it more trustworthy and believable

    Unless humans were naturally blind in the millennia prior to Job, they certainly saw the red fiery stuff that came out of volcanos and destroyed their villages. Job lived around 1650BCE. The first recorded volcano took place thousands and thousands of years before job ever lived. People knew all about the “fire” before your god got around to having it written down.

    Anonymous wrote:

    states that the chances are only about 1 in 75,000,000 that Ezekiel’s fulfilled predictions about Tyre could have occurred by random chance alone without divine assistance.

    I’d say that’s pretty bad math considering they built a bustling city right on the ruins of old tyre. It’s been rebuilt, prophecy fail.

    Keep em coming.

    Reply  |  Quote
  61. There is enough evidence that the exact, original location of Tyre has never been rebuilt and is still under water that your argument “won’t float.”

    It’s still 75,000,000 to 1.

    Reply  |  Quote
  62. @ Anonymous:

    So the ruins they found above ground, (including those of a small arena smack dab in the middle of town) don’t count as being part of the original city?

    And show us the evidence while you’re at it.

    I’m not going to make it easy for you Anonymous. I’m going to keep pounding away at your every claim until you 1) leave or 2) start to realize the extreme and even unrealistic lengths you are going to to dismiss every single sign that points to yahweh being a thing of folklore.

    And of course, you’ve already admitted why: Your bias is firmly rooted in wanting to live forever. Which won’t happen, making the whole damn thing that much more tragic (or amusing, depending on where you sit)

    Reply  |  Quote
  63. And the hilarious thing about the whole argument at this point, is that it is a moot point. Tyre was sacked and partially destroyed long before the so-called “prophecy” was issued. The fact that it was later rebuilt only rubs salt in the wounds of an impotent deity.

    Reply  |  Quote
  64. (Laughing out loud.)

    Tohu, sorry man, but you picked a fight with the wrong person. I think I’ve hit “the mother lode” here on antiCOG dissidence, which is what I’ve been looking for. No wonder you have encouraged me twice to stop commenting here. You might as well get ready to “dig in” for the next 20 years, or until I get tired, because I’m just getting started commenting. Somebody needs to tell your poor soul that you’ve already lost before you post another comment. What you and your other antiCOG, antiBiblical buddies need to do is put your “tails between your legs,” where they belong, admit defeat (because I can whip you with secular arguments or with Biblical arguments) and shut down this site to save what little if any dignity you have left. I wish this website had a weekly poll where readers could vote on who won the week’s arguments. I would win most and probably all the votes in my favor because I’m right, and I know I’m right, and it would almost be a sin if I didn’t flaunt it.

    Imagine, if you can, someone basically “spitting in the face” of, deliberately ignoring, calculations showing that the odds are less than 1 to 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 or in words, less than 1 to infinity, that the 200+ Old Testament prophecies about Jesus are a product of random chance, not divine, magical, supernatural inspiration. Surely no one can be that stupid, some people might say, and arrogantly brag about it, too. But yes, readers, with your own eyes you have witnessed what Tohu has put down in words previously.

    Concerning Job, you seem to think he had a working television informing him of world events, like far off lava spewing volcanoes. You cannot provide proof Job ever knew that volcanoes even existed, or that they emit red hot lava, which is only sometimes, etc. Scientific research around the globe probably was not coordinated well enough at the time to conclude, with decisive evidence, that the central region of the earth is as “hot as fire.” Job 28:5 is a broad, remarkable generalization, it seems, of the interior nature of the earth, divinely inspired.

    Regarding Tyre, I’ll post one or more websites probably next time supporting the 1 to 75,000,000 calculation.

    Besides acquiring immortality, other Christians and I of course have other goals, too.

    About the insults in your last comment: they were good. But come on, man, you can do better than that. Maybe a few more 4 letter words here and there? I just love the attention you are giving me. Just love, love, love it. I did not really know I was that important to you

    Reply  |  Quote
  65. @ Anonymous:
    I doubt your blatant attempt at schoolyard reverse psychology will work w/ Tohu (e.g. please keep insulting me), but it is fun to watch anyway! Lol.

    Thank you for getting back to me on the bit about “how does the bible show a hot interior of the earth” question. It is an interesting way of reading that verse—hopefully there are other verses similar to it, b/c Clarke’s, Barne’s, and Wesley’s Notes all say it is clear the verse is referring to Coal (or other combustible materials like sulphur), or perhaps to precious stones that shine and sparkle like fire (the phrase is “as if by fire”). http://www.godvine.com/bible/Job/28-5. Too bad it wasn’t more clear, saying something like “and underneath it a consuming fire”, or even just “and beneath it all a fire”, which, were it a revelation of unknown facts by Yhwh, one would expect something much less vague. But, since the context of the verse is about mining, one can see where the commentaries get their interpretation. Besides, the phrase “as if by fire” is like saying “I ate Mexican food yesterday, and my arse burns as if by fire”.

    Yes, and Tyre. Ooohh, sorry. Who, according to the prophecy, was going to destroy Tyre? Nebuchadnezzar. Did Nebuchadnezzar destroy Tyre? No. http://errancy.org/tyre.html. “Though you be sought for, yet shalt thou never be found again, saith the Lord God.” Well, either this particular deity doesn’t exist, or else Ezekiel wasn’t speaking for him, b/c Tyre currently has over 100K inhabitants and is the 4th largest city in Lebanon. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyre,_Lebanon. Even after Alexander’s sacking of the city, it was never totally destroyed and continued to be an important commercial spot for the region. And, you know, supposedly, God knows how to ruin a city—look at the ruinous remains of Sodom and Gamorrah; there is hardly anything left, and nobody would even know what those places were if they weren’t made so famous in the bible. The same SHOULD be the same for Tyre. But it isn’t. Prophecy Fail.

    So, let’s recap: some of the reasons I don’t think the bible is very trustworthy as a source of ultimate truth (which means I also don’t believe in the Mr. Deity it espouses; though, that in itself does not disprove his existence)…the whole Gen. 1:16 thing about the moon being seen as, basically, a dim sun (giving off its own light); the problems with the creation account in the first place—earth is clearly older than 6K yrs, and even Gap Theory has been shown to be no more than an inaccurate Gap Hypothesis; this whole “the earth has a molten core” thing didn’t pan out; the impossibility of a world wide flood (salt water fish v fresh water, not near enough genetic diversity on the ark, esp. if it were limited to Phyla, or even Families instead of actual species, since that many species could in no wise fit on the ark); not enough genetic diversity if we came from Adam & Eve; not enough genetic diversity (again, to negate the problems created by inbreeding which, supposedly, God set up and created) in 4 breeding pairs of humans on the ark.

    On Prophecy, the city of Tyre is still there and doing fine and has never been completely destroyed (and was esp. not destroyed by the one Ezekiel said would destroy it—Nebuchadnezzar). On Christ’s life, there are two contradictory genealogies for him; the whole “born in Bethlehem” thing is shown to be a “just so” story poorly done by Luke (the census by Quirinius could not have been done while Herod was governor b/c Herod had been dead 10yrs before Quirinius came along; also, not all the gospels mention the “slaughter of the innocents” by Herod, and such an atrocity would have been recorded by actual historians but is nowhere to be found). I’m not saying the man Jesus didn’t exist, but I’m saying that a bunch of stuff was made up by those who believed he was the Messiah to try and make him Look like his life was fulfilling scripture. Seriously, when the early Catholic church was choosing which books to put in the NT, they should have been careful to leave Luke out.

    On Herbert Armstrong: Clearly, according to the biblical test for one God sent (Deut. 18:20-22), he failed. Yes, he did say that the old annual Sabbaths are still valid, that Pork (etc) had not been cleansed, that there is no NT scripture advocating Sunday worship, etc. Good on him for reading the bible correctly. However, bad on him for stealing an old Gap Theory to try and square the bible with science (and then passing it off as his own), and for stealing the idea of British Israelism and passing it off as his own, and for scaring people with endless “in the next 5-7yrs” “final gun-lap now give me your money to do GOD’S WORK before it is too late” histrionics. So, it is not wise that you “look well past his mistakes”, b/c now you’re not following the bible. Hmmm, sounds like a quandary, to me!

    Finally: I’m surprised that you keep wanting us to look at the very poorly designed tithing helps us. I’ve looked at the COGWA’s site, and it is lovely. It is well done, professional, and does not look like it is run by a demented religious nutter. True, its appearance does not affect its truth content (and who knows, maybe God inspired it to be made like that so that only those really, REALLY, worthy, those who seek after truth so much that they’re willing to muddle through the mess will see the TRUTH). I can hardly believe the two sites are connected. Looks kind of odd…

    Reply  |  Quote
  66. Anonymous wrote:

    Concerning Job, you seem to think he had a working television informing him of world events.

    No jackass, I seem to think that people who witnessed such events as volcanos, told others who told others, and that in the 50,000 or so years that humans lived before Job, that the story got around quite a bit.

    Anonymous wrote:

    You cannot provide proof Job ever knew that volcanoes even existed, or that they emit red hot lava, which is only sometimes, etc.

    You cannot provide proof that god even exists but that’s never stopped you from believing in him. I am simply suggesting that Job (or the people who wrote that particular book) had possibly heard the tales of the fiery stuff coming out of the earth. They certainly heard the tall tales about sea monsters and unicorns.

    Reply  |  Quote
  67. This is just a quick, partial comment.
    Eric Sell, the 2 sites are not officially connected.

    Tohu, languages were first recorded about 6,000 years ago, not 50,000. Stop making these dates up. Recorded history also started only about 6,000 years ago, too. Almost any archaeology student knows that.

    Reply  |  Quote
  68. Anonymous wrote:

    Tohu, languages were first recorded about 6,000 years ago, not 50,000. Stop making these dates up.

    And that’s not what I said. Stop being dishonest.

    Humans (in one form or another) have been alive for over 50,000 years. During which time, numerous volcanos erupted and were certainly witnessed by humans, who almost certainly told other humans about it. It’s called oral tradition. Google it.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Recorded history also started only about 6,000 years ago, too.

    Actually, moron, it’s closer to 5,000 years for written history. But you’ve already demonstrated that your math skills are lacking so please try and keep up:

    The man known as “Job” supposedly lived around 1650 BCE. That was only 3662 years ago. This means, that humans were alive and thriving, and for your particular point, recording history for over 1,000 years before this.

    Your god always seems to get the memo late.

    Since you’ve gone so far as to twist my words, you just warranted a blog posting all your own. Stay tuned.

    Reply  |  Quote
  69. @ Anon 7:

    It appears you are still bitter about me fucking your mom. Twelve years is a long time to hold a grudge, son.

    Reply  |  Quote
  70. @ Anonymous:

    “Now if you really considered me worthless (not even important enough to insult), then you would ignore me.”

    I have been ignoring you for just that very reason.

    Reply  |  Quote
  71. @ Tohu:

    “Since you’ve gone so far as to twist my words, you just warranted a blog posting all your own. Stay tuned.”

    Yes! Another exhibit for the Menagerie of Fools!

    Reply  |  Quote
  72. “What you and your other antiCOG, antiBiblical buddies need to do is put your “tails between your legs,” where they belong, admit defeat (because I can whip you with secular arguments or with Biblical arguments)…”

    LMFAO! What a goddamn moron! Here, google this, if you aren’t too incompetent: “Dunning-Kruger effect”.

    Listen, dipshit. You aren’t doing debate. What you are doing is called sophistry. And the only thing comical about that is that you don’t know it. Now, go google “sophistry”, too, since you’ve never heard of it. Idiot.

    Reply  |  Quote
  73. @ Anonymous:

    “Besides acquiring immortality, other Christians and I of course have other goals, too.”

    Oh, I know this one! One of your goals as a true believer is to ignore disconfirming evidence or rationalize it to such an extent as to snap any normal person’s credulity. This you have been doing here. You are operating under a hopeless confirmation bias. To demonstrate this further, I’d like you to answer the question (and this is just a particular case of the general principle): What would it take to convince you that Tyre was not destroyed for all time, thereby fulfilling the magically imparted fortune-telling of an inscrutable, Canaanite storm god called Yahweh? What would it take? The answer is nothing. Nothing would convince you that your superstitions are not supported by the available evidence. That’s because they aren’t.

    Only a true believer operating under a confirmation bias would go to the lengths you mouth-breathers go to in order to rationalize away disconfirming evidence, employing the weakest of just-so stories to evade the strongest refutations. Just-so stories (like, for example, the one that claims the ruins preserved as an archeological site are the “real” doomed city–or any other relatively desolate spot within the otherwise bustling metropolis–a pathetic grasping at straws) are invalid as arguments, “just so” you know. Besides that, they are stupid, unfalsifiable (and therefore irrelevant), and petulant–the kind of argument a child would use to explain why it is actually not past their bed time. Grow the fuck up, will you? No. Of course you won’t. You will cling to your imaginary friend because you are afraid. Little child.

    Reply  |  Quote
  74. @ Anonymous:

    “There is something about people like you…”

    Fuck off.

    Reply  |  Quote
  75. @ Anonymous:

    “Your unnecessarily foul language impresses me only in the sense that you appear to desire open, physical warfare, a fight to the death.”

    Tell you what, anonypuss. If you had fouled my ears in-person with the diatribe from whence this quote was derived, I would have smashed your face in for you.

    Too strong? Too bad. I spent 30 years of my life on this delusion. I know it better than you do. I lived it better than you do. I wanted it more than you do. You’re nothing but a confused little lamb who wandered into a lion’s den. Then when you get devoured, you want to question my conversion, my lust for life, my self-respect, instead of taking on my arguments. You’re a pathetic little coward, a petty and incompetent sophist.

    I’ve disproved doctrines you’ve never heard of, sheep. I’ve ripped more cherished notions from my heart than you will ever have the balls to so much as question, sheep. I’ve left friends and family behind because I loved the truth in a way you will never have the brains to comprehend, sheep. I’ve thrilled to wonders you will never appreciate in your superstitious torpor, sheep. For all that I’ve had to excise from my soul, I’m still a thousand times the man you are, sheep.

    Suck my leonine cock, sheep.

    Reply  |  Quote
  76. By the way, thank you Eric and Tohu: it was a joy to witness you taking this moron to task.

    Reply  |  Quote
  77. “but the openly hostile attitude of some of the commenters is so disgusting and unnecessarily ugly that this may be my last comment.”

    Fuck you, Pot.

    -Kettle

    Maybe if you’d have stuck to answering arguments with arguments (instead of ad hominem), things wouldn’t have gotten ugly. But this is what a superstitious moron is always reduced to when they encounter quality rebuttals to their foolishness. Can’t defeat that superior argument? Tell the fucker he’s doomed for the lake of fire, question his morals, ask him if he’s stopped beating his wife–anything but facing his challenge head on like a vertebrate. You set the stage, asshole. Now you’re dancing on it. Feel free to flounce whenever you’re ready.

    Reply  |  Quote
  78. Well, I feel much better now since one more person considers me important.

    Let me “spell out” this child’s issue a little more clearly. Let’s be really liberal, and, far against the very well verified evidence of all the Old Testament fulfilled prophecies, assume that 25 per cent of the Old Testament prophecies (excluding those concerning the second coming of Jesus and the Tribulation) were not fulfilled (according to the recorded Bible) due to sloppy translations, a change in the Lord’s plans to fulfill them, or for any other reason. The combination of the other many, many (hundreds) of fulfilled prophecies happening by mere chance is so mathematically impossible that divine inspiration of the prophets to make those prophecies is the only rational conclusion left. That makes most of the Bible “supernatural,” or “magical,” or at least a little “spooky” for others. The obvious fact that the Bible does not seem to even “spook” some of you, well, draw your own conclusions. That 75 per cent still makes the Bible, whoppingly by far, the best religious document on the globe, and therefore the best “ticket” to the next life, for those who want it.

    Concerning the Koran since it has been previously mentioned, I do have some very strong things to say about it, but knowing the potentially extreme viciousness of some of its followers, it is best that I keep my mouse shut.

    Reply  |  Quote
  79. Anonymous wrote:

    Well, I feel much better now since one more person considers me important.

    Actually, I’m fairly sure he finds you to be utterly repulsive.

    Anonymous wrote:

    That 75 per cent still makes the Bible, whoppingly by far, the best religious document on the globe

    That’s like saying melanoma is the best kind of cancer on the planet.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Concerning the Koran since it has been previously mentioned, I do have some very strong things to say about it, but knowing the potentially extreme viciousness of some of its followers, it is best that I keep my mouse shut.

    Typical Christian, look down your collective noses at the Muslims. Newsflash! They’re just as convinced as you are that they are right and they as just as wrong for it.

    Reply  |  Quote
  80. @ caseywollberg:
    HAHAHAHAHA! Ohhhh, I do love Mr. Fire and Brimstone here! Alas, my joy is bitter-sweet, for you bring to mind the magnificent verbal ass-stompings that were the hallmark of one dearly departed Christopher Hitchens.

    Aside from small talk, that is a good point: “What would it take to convince you that Tyre was not destroyed for all time?” That is similar to another old question of “what would it take to convince you that the bible is wrong?” The answer is usually “nothing will ever shake my faith”, in which case the person is clearly not seeking after truth, but desperately clinging to their faith out of (usually) fear of death and/or greed for gain (heaven). However, most atheists will be able to give very specific answers to “what would convince you that God is real and the Bible is the revealed word of said God?” Why? Because they actually care about truth. So, if Tyre had been utterly destroyed and was nowhere on the map (instead of home to over 100K inhabitants), and it had been done by Nebuchadnezzar, AND it could be proven that Ezekiel was, indeed, writing long before the event, THAT would convince me (or at least get the ball rolling in that direction). IF the bible had mentioned that the moon was a reflector of light (instead of being a dim lamp itself), THAT would help. IF God had started with 60 couples there in Genesis (since 60 pairs is generally the fewest number to ensure sufficient genetic diversity for the survival of the species…something we didn’t find out until quite recently), I would be highly impressed. IF there was a historical record of Herod killing all children under 2yrs (and, incidentally, even if all the Gospels recorded such a huge atrocity), that would help. And if ALL these things together were accurate, I think I would be thoroughly convinced.

    But they’re not.

    So, anyway, Anon, it appears I’ve convinced you that Tyre wasn’t destroyed (since you are coming back with “well, even if 25% are proven false for whatever reason”…and btw you can’t use the “oh and God changed his mind at the last minute w/o telling anybody” argument). I know it is hard to admit–it was hard for me to accept when I found out years ago. I mean, I had built my whole life around it, I had foregone going to college b/c “the devil is on college campuses” in the form of Liberals and godless professors, and b/c “the end is nigh!” So, I understand it is hard to accept…but truth is usually unpopular for exactly that reason.

    I’m sure you do have some choice things to say about the Koran, but the question is: are they based on a thorough reading of the scriptures, or are they based on a Western religio-social bias against it? Seriously, since you’re worried about which book is the “best ticket to the next life”, for your sake, I would strongly suggest you make a thorough study of the Koran. I mean, who knows, it might be more convincing than the bible! Those who gamble and Win are those who know the odds and how to play them. You’ll never win in your use of Pascal’s Wager if you ignore important variables that considerably alter the odds.

    Reply  |  Quote
  81. @ Anonymous:

    “That makes most of the Bible “supernatural,” or “magical,” or at least a little “spooky” for others. The obvious fact that the Bible does not seem to even “spook” some of you, well, draw your own conclusions.”

    Superstition is for morons who are not capable of analytical thought, which makes it a cozy assumption for your ilk. All claims of prophecy rely on such shoddy logic that I’m ashamed I ever bought into it.

    Prophetic claims come in one of two basic forms:

    (1) Predictive, but useless. These predictions are made before the proposed event occurs, but are couched in such vague language they can mean anything (like fortune tellers who say, with spooky intonation, “I see peril in your future,” or the poetic spewings of Nostradamus). Or they refer to an event that is practically inevitable (“This city will fall…someday, under some circumstances–watch and see if I’m wrong!”). Or they refer to an event that is already being predicted by perfectly canny sources (like Armstrong’s stolen predictions of a reunited Germany, for example).

    (2) Non-predictive. These are the product of playing the game of postdiction. This is, of course, a fool’s game or a liar’s game (take your pick). It consists of searching scriptures or other ostensibly “prophetic” writings after the fact of some observed event, and claiming to find the event “predicted” therein. Of course, this is not a prediction at all, and, therefore, not evidence of prophetic powers. In any case, this trick necessarily relies on heavy interpretation of the writings in question in order to shoehorn them into a form that can appear to refer to the event in question, presumably by squinting one’s eyes just right and getting into the right frame of mind.

    Any so-called “prophecy” that doesn’t fall into one of these two categories (that is, it is predictive but useful in that it actually gives us something to go on) inexorably fails. Or, on the exceedingly rare occasions when such “prophecies” do succeed they are not capable of beating chance. These blind “successes” occur so infrequently that they have no statistical significance. The proponents of prophecy will not allow any of this to deflate their superstitions, however. They are quite skilled at counting the hits and ignoring the misses, giving themselves the impression that something spooky is happening. They tend to forget (or perhaps never realize) that someone can be “right” by accident (we’ve already covered being right by following the news, shrewd but perfectly canny analysis or common sense).

    Don’t let this stop you, though, anonypuss (you won’t). Nothing will persuade you that prophecy is the stuff of fairy tales. Not facts, and certainly not logic.

    Reply  |  Quote
  82. @ Eric Sell:

    ” Those who gamble and Win are those who know the odds and how to play them. You’ll never win in your use of Pascal’s Wager if you ignore important variables that considerably alter the odds.”

    Well said.

    Reply  |  Quote
  83. By the way, the fact the Bible seems to be able to “predict” what it will say next should not impress anyone with a healthy brain–particularly considering that we have highly capable Bible scholars who have some very good ideas about when, for whom and by whom the various documents were composed. It should come as no surprise that most of these scholars have abandoned or never entertained the prophecy superstition.

    Reply  |  Quote
  84. Welcome, Jace, to the club that considers me so important that I am worth expending time, mental energy, and even physical energy typing out words about me. I’m almost feeling giddy with joy now.

    Using other words, let me give you poor people another comparison, to help solve this seemingly insurmountable barrier separating yourselves from reality. If you have a 10 pound diamond worth over 5 million dollars, and x rays or other technology detects that the diamond is contaminated with 4 per cent lead in a certain small region, making the diamond still worth 4.7 million dollars, a reasonable, sane person will not throw away the diamond into the sea, claiming his delicate, emotional or intellectual dignity was irreversibly violated by the presence of a little lead.

    The above example demonstrates how you scoffers are reacting to a relatively very small amount of inaccuracies and contradictions in the Bible. Instead of throwing the Bible away, a reasonable person will humbly acknowledge the miracle of so many fulfilled prophecies and the secular confirmation of other parts of the Bible.

    What you skeptics are doing, that is even worse, you are trying to use this website to encourage others to think and act like you do.

    That is unacceptable.

    Reply  |  Quote
  85. @ Anonymous:

    And you’re a despicable liar, besides being an incompetent sheep. You aren’t ready to engage intelligent, honest people–and you certainly don’t have the integrity to engage their arguments, as you’ve amply demonstrated over and over again. I think it’s high time you skulked back to the pasture, you lying fuck.

    Reply  |  Quote
  86. Anonymous wrote:

    That is unacceptable.

    And there’s not a g*ddamned thing you can do about it. (Other than continue to whine impotently.)

    Anonymous wrote:

    If you have a 10 pound diamond worth over 5 million dollars, and x rays or other technology detects that the diamond is contaminated with 4 per cent lead in a certain small region, making the diamond still worth 4.7 million dollars, a reasonable, sane person will not throw away the diamond into the sea

    Ah yes, the old “baby with the bathwater” routine.

    Other religions usually make the same exact argument when confronted with certain unpleasantries in their holy books. Those arguments wouldn’t carry any weight with you, but you expect yours to do the same?

    Anonymous wrote:

    Instead of throwing the Bible away, a reasonable person will humbly acknowledge the miracle of so many fulfilled prophecies and the secular confirmation of other parts of the Bible.

    No, a reasonable person will inspect every possible aspect of the “miracle”. They will attempt to determine what elements of said miracle are credible and which are not. They will demand to see evidence. They will demand to see the math. They will use logic to weigh the likelihood of the answers for which no proof can be provided.

    Which is exactly what we’ve done. And what we continue to do. You continue to ignore our requests for evidence as well as our factual criticism of your ongoing diatribe. You stopped responding to the Volcano point. You stopped responding to the Tyre point. You never showed us the math you keep hurling into the discussion. You reverted back to the same tired “immortality” routine without ever once providing us with anything resembling proof.

    All we’ve managed to pry out of you are infantile analogies (pun intended), scare tactics, and more sophistry than I’ve ever seen before. You should be embarrassed, as well as your fellow believers who are almost certainly ashamed at the feeble attempts you have put forth here.

    Reply  |  Quote
  87. Oh, and click my name, asshat.

    Reply  |  Quote
  88. Some readers probably would like to know what you guys believe will happen to your conscious minds when you physically die on this earth.

    Will you die like animals and cease consciousness, and truly be dead forever, or will your minds somehow remain conscious allowing you to live in some other type of body now or later on the earth or elsewhere?

    Reply  |  Quote
  89. @ Anonymous:
    Probably most readers don’t really care what we think will happen to our consciousness, but since you seem to…from the evidence available, it appears that, as Solomon said (funny enough), in Eccl 3:19 “For that which befalls the sons of men befalls beasts; even one thing befalls them: as the one dies, so dies the other; yes, they have all one breath; so that a man has no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.” Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. It is a shame, I suppose. But on the other hand, not wasting the one life we have trying to qualify for the next life you’ve mentioned so often that you’re desperately hoping for, allows us to live our lives to the full! Accomplishing, living, doing, growing. When you have been brought up believing in the Wonderful World Tomorrow and being God Beings, Kings and Priests, then, yeah, this whole “there’s no evidence of an eternal after-life” is a major let-down at first. However, there is a wonderful quote from an old Roman Emperor, Marcus Aurelius, that is very uplifting: “Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.”

    Just have one small question for you: The diamond analogy was pretty good (until you think about it)…2 Tim. 3:16 says “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness.” Based on that statement, I would think it would be very hard to ignore the very glaring problems we’ve pointed out to you. That scripture, at least to me, raises more questions than faith can answer so far as the “so, numerous major prophecies have failed; also, Luke has clearly lied about key facts of Jesus’ life”. Since those are actual facts (and only two of many), how can the bible be the inspired Word of God when, supposedly, “ALL scripture is inspired by God”?

    But, I guess that can be explained by our differing approaches to this subject: I had a faith crisis, and in order to shore up my waning faith, I went hardcore into Proving All Things. Mr. Armstrong taught us to look at all sides of a subject instead of just assuming that what we were brought up with was right (even though he also forbade “dissident literature”, and preached against the dangers of Higher Education…go figure). So, I did that; I went where the evidence led instead of chucking evidence in order to hold on to the teachings I was brought up with. You are admitting, straight up, that you are willing to “look well past Armstrong’s mistakes” (mistakes that, according to the bible, preclude him from being a man sent by God), and you’re willing to look well past the prophetic (and scientific) failings of even the bible itself–counting the hits and ignoring the misses. Why? Because you are looking for the best ticket for the next life.

    Reply  |  Quote
  90. Since there are no other comments to my last question, it looks like your friends agree with you and with what Solomon said. Interesting. For me to have such a nonchalant, casual attitude towards death, though, would horrify me. So I guess we are truly different kinds of people, different kinds of spiritual species.

    Assume briefly that the Bible is overwhelmingly true and accurate (I know that’s hard, so play like you are in a dream), and that a mainstream Christian decides to start attending one of the WCG offshoots, or COGs. What harmful effects, if any, will the COG’s doctrines have on such a new member? If you think the bad effects will be many, at least give 3 or 4 detailed, specific adverse consequences, excluding potential challenging problems trying to obey the New Testament’s new marriage and divorce laws, laws that many mainstream churches also believe in obeying. Also exclude any problems caused by the COG’s past mistakes in setting premature dates concerning prophecy. In other words, specifically, just exactly how would a person’s life become “wasted,” as Eric Sell said, by becoming a devout COG member? Remember, let us assume that the Bible really is true and valid.

    Reply  |  Quote
  91. Anonymous wrote:

    Since there are no other comments to my last question, it looks like your friends agree with you and with what Solomon said. Interesting.

    Perhaps I missed the question. Would it be this?

    Anonymous wrote:

    Will you die like animals and cease consciousness, and truly be dead forever

    The answer, almost certainly, is yes. We will die like the animals we are and our brain (the very seat of our consciousness) will cease to function as it quickly decays in death.

    Anonymous wrote:

    For me to have such a nonchalant, casual attitude towards death, though, would horrify me.

    Nonchalance comes with the territory when you accept your mortality, like an adult. This crippling fear of the inevitable and the unknown (that you display) is horrific to me.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Assume briefly that the Bible is overwhelmingly true… and that a mainstream Christian decides to start attending one of the WCG offshoots… What harmful effects… will the COG’s doctrines have on such a new member?

    So now you’ve stopped trying to defend the indefensible and instead ask “What can it hurt?”

    That’s pretty simple:

    1) They will have to keep the Sabbath. This can be career-crippling as more and more businesses are open 7 days a week. People like my parents for instance, are small business owners who chose that path as a way to set their own schedules and avoid Sabbath issues. In their particular industry, their competition is overwhelmingly open on weekends. They are not, and have missed out on an incalculable amount of income as a result.

    2) They will have to tithe, losing a direct 20% of their income (gross or net depending on the splinter-cult). This is financially crippling to say the very least, and of course does not include 3rd tithe (pointless and likely misused anyway) and offerings. The COG’s are constantly experiencing “financial crisis” and are notorious for overextending themselves before launching into repeated and desperate requests for more and more money.

    3) They will have to adhere to archaic ritual feast days that will cause them to take more time off from work, putting further strain on relationships with employers and co-workers who have to pick up the slack in their absence. Those who have children in school will place heavy strain on the parent-teacher relationship, as they withdraw their children mid-semester and give the teacher extra work to prepare assignments/alter the curriculum to accommodate the missing student.

    4) They will adopt an overwhelmingly pessimistic “end-time” mindset, similar to one held by many mainstream Christians but exceedingly worse in that they will be endlessly deluged with doom & gloom articles/sermons/telecasts that are not only depressing, but designed to keep the focus on the church, on a nonexistent “place of safety” and ultimately, to scare the member into staying (and tithing)

    5) They will alienate friends and family by breaking with long-held (and admittedly ridiculous) traditions like keeping Easter, Christmas, etc. They will awkwardly stop eating foods they once ate, they will “set themselves apart” to the extent that relationships based on former religion will almost certainly be damaged if not outright disintegrate. Zeus forbid, if they are married (or in an existing relationship) and their spouse/partner does not join the COG, the relationship is almost certainly doomed to failure.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Also exclude any problems caused by the COG’s past mistakes in setting premature dates concerning prophecy.

    In other words, you acknowledge the suffering caused by those “mistakes” (people selling their homes and donating their life-savings, for instance) and just want us to ignore them. LOL!

    Anonymous wrote:

    Remember, let us assume that the Bible really is true and valid.

    Let us also then, assume that Yahweh exists, and that he is just as nightmarish as the Bible portrays. Let us assume that he killed most of humanity once, that he allows suffering and evil to be carried out in his name, and that he will one day allow a “time of suffering unlike any the world has ever seen” as being part of his plan. Let us imagine that he condones slavery, rape (marriage by murderous conquest if you prefer) and that he would rather kill his own son, than to just change his law or forgive the “crime”, and that it all was “necessary” and excusable as part of his divine plan.

    You expect us to want to spend eternity with that? You’re out of your mind.

    Reply  |  Quote
  92. @ Anonymous:

    “Some readers probably would like to know what you guys believe will happen to your conscious minds when you physically die on this earth.”

    Look, shit-for-brains. We get it. You’re a foolish coward who believes things are true because he is afraid of the alternative. That’s called an appeal to consequences and it is wholly irrational. It’s wishful thinking, not logic or evidence, that leads you to your sickly faith. You’ve already admitted as much. You have a pathetic sense of self-awareness with your continued talking down to people who have thought more deeply on these questions than you are anywhere near capable of. It is this cluelessness coupled with your incredibly unwarranted arrogance that makes you so irritating.

    Reply  |  Quote
  93. @ Anonymous:

    “Remember, let us assume that the Bible really is true and valid.”

    While we’re at it, let us assume Sauron exists and he wants the One Ring. Shouldn’t we be trying to find it first?

    Look, we who can separate fantasy from reality are not interested in validating your fairy tale for you. That’s your fucking job. Not that you have any hope of doing it–and not just because you are infuriatingly obtuse (you are), but because your propositions are famously unsupportable. But you go right ahead and double down–and we’ll go right on putting you over the barrel for it. It’s becoming an amusing exercise, if I may presume to speak for my associates.

    Reply  |  Quote
  94. @ Tohu:

    “So now you’ve stopped trying to defend the indefensible and instead ask “What can it hurt?””

    Yes, precisely. Another appeal to consequences: completely irrelevant. The question is not, “Is it harmless?”. The question is, “Is it true?”. Harmless propositions are not necessarily true–and, no surprise here, Anonypuss is being dishonest again. He is pretending as though he would like to frame Armstrongism as just one of those innocuous superstitions that isn’t going to hurt anyone, thereby reducing it to the same epistemological status as blowing on dice or leaving cookies out for Santa. But we all know he isn’t fooling anyone. The sophist’s trade is to use any trick whatsoever to misappropriate credibility for their failed proposition. Illogically asking, “What’s the harm?” is one of those tricks.

    Reply  |  Quote
  95. This comment is for Tohu.

    Yes, faithfully resting every Saturday definitely can cripple, sometimes even end some careers. Yes, never working commercially on Saturdays can result in making hundreds of thousands of dollars less in a lifetime. Years of COG attendance, though, shows that this problem affects very few people in the church. Most by far simply get other jobs, and many of them are actually better jobs than the old ones working on Saturday. This loss of much income for a relatively small percentage of the church members is the price they pay to worship the Lord, which is easily worth it. When you think about it long enough, though, from the Lord’s point of view such a financial sacrifice is a beautiful thing. Such a person, instead of trusting only in himself and money to support him in this life, is trusting the Lord to take care of him physically while he is on the earth working at a lower paying, Saturday off job. That trust is beautiful. Most men, similarly, would prefer that their wives trust them to support them, instead of watching the women go out almost daily to a full time job.

    Yes, observing the annual holy days can definitely strain some employer-employee relationships. Most church members, though, simply use their allotted vacation or sick time to allow them the time to take those days off. For others without those job benefits, they may lose money on the holy days, but that is just the cost of correctly worshipping the Lord, which is actually a very small price to pay. A heavy strain on the teachers? Well that’s just too bad. The COGs have the feds and the law on their side, and the teachers don’t dare create any problems for the students taking time off for the holy days, if they want to make sure they get their excessively fat, taxpayer funded pensions when they retire from their teaching jobs. If I was a student I would love the extra time off even if I was not a baptized church member.

    The “overwhelmingly pessimistic mindset” is part of what I wanted you to exclude since it involves mistakes in saying when prophecy will be fulfilled. Even many mainstream churches, though, are becoming uneasy or are warning members about the alarming speed of the “Arab spring” and its very strong anti-Israel implications and related events in the Middle East.

    Yes, friends and family can be alienated by COG doctrines. There’s even a New Testament verse specifically about that problem. Well, that’s just too bad for those outside the church. The Lord is obviously worth far more than family and friends. The choice is easy for those who love the Lord.

    Concerning mates, I told you to exclude potential marital problems. Other denominations have those problems too, such as when Jews marry/date Catholics, Baptists marry/date Mormons, etc.

    Concerning selling homes and giving life savings to the church? That is extremely wrong, according to some people. I have never personally heard or read of such requests in the WCG or several COGs I have attended. I read on the internet that the leader of one particular COG did make one or more such requests. Some people might say that is horrible, and I will say that I do not necessarily disagree. But all the COGs should not be condemned for that pastor’s mistakes.

    Concerning killing most of humanity before the Flood and allowing/causing suffering? In the deepest part of your heart or mind you should know that only through suffering, misery and chastisement, for most people, can people learn to be harmless and good for all eternity. Most of the time, you simply cannot raise a child correctly with absolutely no occasional punishment (misery, suffering, anguish, embarrassment, heartache, etc.) for hurting others, breaking important rules and laws, etc. The same goes for raising a child or adult spiritually. Some amount of punishment is almost inevitable. You seem to forget that the Lord has promised to “wipe away every tear” and replace it with joy in the next life to the point saved Christians won’t even, for the most part, even remember this earthly life. “He would kill his own Son” is an incorrect way to say that. Jesus was already permanently immortal before He was physically born. God knew very well that He would resurrect Jesus. Now I admit, I may not have perfectly explained that, but it is more accurate than saying “He would kill his own son” in the context you used.

    Concerning your lack of fear of death, well, that is impressive. I can understand the glory, though very temporary, that you must feel in being spiritually independent. But if my gamble is right, you’ll pay a murderously hellacious price for that glory, essentially receiving less than a penny for the trillion, billion, quadrillion, nonillion, sextillion, octillion dollars multiplied times infinity, or the equivalent, that I will receive if and when I am saved/resurrected.

    Regarding having to modify diet to conform to COG doctrines, you are really way off there by “light years.” You seem totally ignorant of the medical research validating avoiding eating the forbidden foods. COG’s food doctrines are not theirs, it is strictly from the Bible. Eric Sell seems to agree with that. The COG’s teaching to avoid the forbidden foods will make you healthier and live longer probably. Forty years of research involving many thousands of people has shown that bacon is the meat most often suspected in causing stomach cancer, for example. I could give many more examples of research upholding the “unclean meats” ban.

    Concerning tithing, I should have told you to exclude the first, or regular tithe because many if not most other mainstream churches also either demand or strongly encourage members to tithe the regular tithe. The festival tithe is basically a vacation tithe for you, not the church or minister. Everyone deserves a good, leisurely vacation once a year any way, so you should not complain about that. The third year food/charity tithe? Apparently you have never talked to a number of rich, orthodox Jews faithfully paying that tithe every 3 years, discussing the blessings from such charity tithing. From your words it seems that you also have never paid every single penny owed during such a third year, because if you had paid what the Bible said you owed, you should have received some kind of noticeable current or future blessing close to the value you tithed or paid. Actually, it really does not matter if you are blessed or not for the third tithe. It is strictly commanded, like it or not, and it is part of the worship of the Lord.

    Reply  |  Quote
  96. @ Anonymous:
    Hmmm, ok, Anonymous, let’s play this little hypothetical game. So far as I know, if the bible were true and accurate, then I think that the CoGs probably are closer to following the actual text of the bible than the mainstream. I have heard of strong arguments against the tithing system Armstrong says he got from the bible, but I haven’t actually seen/heard the argument, so we’ll even ignore that point for the moment. Thus, your reply to Tohu would be completely valid and no actual harm would come to one who left mainstream Christianity for the “truth” in the CoG, and all the “hardships” would just be building up their reward cache in God’s grand calculator. Of course, it would still be difficult for said Mainstreamer, since there are over 500 COGs…and the problem would be the same as for Christianity in general–which denomination has the TRUE interpretation of the Truth?

    Well, that was fun. Now back to reality. We have illustrated several facts that prove the bible is not accurate, and since the bible is supposed to be the very Word of God, and thus without error (meaning no failed prophecies, etc), then the reality is that we cannot indulge in living our lives in a fairytale dream world. As such, Tohu’s response to you was a very good summation of the damage that comes from being in the CoGs. Sure, some are more liberal, like UCG, but others, like PCG and RCG (I don’t know about COGWA) are far more controlling–breaking up families (like Armstrong did with his lies about New Revelation), controlling your access to information (no facebook for PCG at least…and since you’re Anonymous, I suspect there’s a degree of control in your group, too).

    Furthermore, nobody ever needed to set a false date for the tribulation for Tohu’s point, concerning how members are always bombarded with every bit of negative and depressing news, to be valid. For example, I know an old man who believes that Democracy is the worst form of government mankind has ever invented. Why? Because it is the time of the end, and democracy is the prevailing form of gov’t, thus, by definition, democracy MUST be the worst. Of course, EVIDENCE would suggest it is far from the worst. He’s living in one of the most advanced, liberal, well-to-do nations of Western Europe and he’s bloody well depressed about it. THAT is part of the harm.

    But I know…you’re scared to die, and greedy for the quintillions of dollars worth of Heavenly Reward you’ll get when you’re made a spirit being and get your own planet to play Spore on. It is refreshing you have at least been honest about your motivations. But, since we’ve proven major problems with the bible, maybe it is time to try some alternatives? Since you’re so worried about keeping the OT laws, perhaps you should convert to Judaism? I mean, all the problems with Luke making shit up, and all the inconsistencies between the Gospels are not a problem for them! But, since OT prophecies about stuff like Tyre, the impossibility of the flood story, etc, have also been proven false, maybe you’d best take a good long look at the Book of Mormon? I mean, if we’re going to play “let’s assume it is correct”, and if we’re going to “look well past” all the errors, then the clearly ridiculous (and recent) history of its founding should pose no problem for you! Then again…there’s always Islam! True, 72 virgins isn’t as appealing as a whole Planet (which promise, btw, is nowhere in the bible)…but then, if you’re going to gamble, you have to also figure out who has the worst Hell (just in case you’re wrong), not just who has the best heaven.

    Reply  |  Quote
  97. I have attended COGWA and I would say they are as liberal or maybe even slightly more liberal than UCG. Some local COGWA churches even list the time and location of weekly services, and the same for the annual holy days. So they definitely have a more “open door” policy (which I like) than the other COGs. Maybe that is one of the reasons they broke away from UCG. If the COG I have been attending knew I was commenting here, I don’t think the minister would take any action against me. He might even laugh about it. UCG, which I have also attended, never restricted information to my knowledge.

    Eric Sell, you say that the Bible has mistakes or at least inaccuracies and contradictions. I admit, that is obviously true for a very, very small number of items. However, have you ever done a little simple math to determine what percentage of the Bible is true and accurate (often miraculously so) and what percentage is not true and not accurate? Guesstimating, I think about 98-99 per cent is true and accurate, leaving only about 1-2 per cent not true and not accurate. Guess what? That leaves a humongous challenge for you to tackle and explain: how do you explain the true 98-99 per cent? You have completely and totally failed to acknowledge that problem, and offer absolutely no explanation whatsoever for the 98-99 per cent (how the miraculously fulfilled OT prophecies got in the Bible in the first place, and how secular sources verify the life of Jesus). In other words, you are ignoring it. I say the true part of the Bible MUST, repeat, MUST have been divinely put in the Bible by a superior God. Primeval human reasoning cannot come up with any other explanation that is reasonable.

    So, the big question– how did the true part of the Bible get put in the Bible (primarily fulfilled prophecies that could NEVER, NEVER, NEVER have occurred by random chance)?

    Can you really, convincingly, answer that question? It is a question that MUST, MUST, MUST be answered!!

    Reply  |  Quote
  98. @ Anonymous:

    “So, the big question– how did the true part of the Bible get put in the Bible (primarily fulfilled prophecies that could NEVER, NEVER, NEVER have occurred by random chance)?

    Can you really, convincingly, answer that question? It is a question that MUST, MUST, MUST be answered!!”

    I’ve already given you an explanation for why belief in prophecy is a fool’s game. How do you answer that?

    Until you can respond to that argument, you can just stop asserting that the Bible contains fulfilled prophecy, because it doesn’t. Period. Every time you assert without evidence that it does, you are merely stroking your tiny, limp faith ineffectually. You certainly aren’t persuading anyone else. For that, you would need to argue for the position–instead of just asserting it.

    And even then you would fail to support your claim. I can say this with confidence because I have seen all the arguments you haven’t yet begun to employ and have dispatched them a thousand times. When you’re ready to begin the debate, my precious moron, you’re welcome to set up an actual argument. Until then, take your stupid, irrelevant pseudo-challenges that seem so impressive to you and shove them up that thing you’re “thinking” with. They’re vanishingly small and inconsequential, so they’ll fit.

    Reply  |  Quote
  99. Caseywollberg, you’re only doing a mediocre job in the insult department. You need to step it up a little, and generate not only more but nastier insults. That way I feel more important to you. It sort of gives me a “rush.”

    Now I want you to google “fulfilled bible prophecies,” and spend the next 2 months thoroughly reading, studying at least 35 websites thoroughly confirming that many, many Bible prophecies have been fulfilled. Then I want you to contact the authors of those websites and tell each one of them that they are wrong, refuting the evidence on their websites. Then I want you to tell us here what those authors told you. You see, I am not necessarily asking you to believe me, I am asking you to believe the experts, not me.

    Now, the really big, big question is, will Eric Sell also make the statement “There are no fulfilled Bible prophecies”?

    Reply  |  Quote
  100. @ Anonymous:
    Telling Casey he needs to step up his insults b/c it gives you a rush? I know this is your sad attempt at schoolyard reverse psychology, but the more you keep saying things like that the more I get the feeling you have a BDSM fetish…

    So, Anonymous wants me to disprove the entire bible. hahaha! Or, failing that, you want me to do the work of converting myself back to some form of Christianity for you (preferably some COG or other…but which one? There are so many to choose from–and they’re all the TRUE church!). OK, so let’s say a Muslim or Mormon comes to you and you guys begin to discuss your faiths; would you be convinced by the argument “there are so many prophecies in my book that have come true (or, there is much more scientific truth in my book than the bible) and unless you can prove it all wrong you’re going to go to hell!” What would you say?

    Would that convince you? Or would you say “the burden of proof is upon you to convince me, not upon me to prove your notion wrong!”? You are the one coming forward with the proposition that: “I believe book A to be true. Book A speaks about the existence of deity B. Now, prove that I’m wrong!” Can I come to you saying “I can fly–now prove I can’t!” No, the burden of proof would be on me to show I can fly, since I’m the one coming forward with the claim. Ever heard of Russell’s Teapot? Google it.

    There is a maxim that states “that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence”. Now, how about you come back with a prophecy you feel has been fulfilled; if we cannot honestly disprove it, then the Bible will have gained considerable validity.

    Now, I know you’ve done that twice now, but so far those attempts have met with failure on your part. Those were Tyre and “Jesus’ life fulfilled numerous biblical prophecies”. Well, Tyre is still standing (instead of being destroyed for all time by Nebuchadnezzar), and at least some of the events of Jesus’ life have been proven to be lies made up by Luke in order to convince everyone that this man he was writing about was really the Messiah like Luke apparently believed he was.

    And again, 2Tim 3:16 says ALL scripture is inspired by God. Since there’s no reason to assume that God is some “divine trickster” who inspires false scriptures to be written down (or buries bones of critters that didn’t exist), then we have a problem. And “let’s guestimate that 98-99% of the bible is true”? I told you yesterday that we can’t go around assuming stuff is true just b/c it is fun/feels good to do it. If we can, then I am about to become Shogun of a newly reunified medieval Japan. And again, what would you say to someone who came to you saying “ok, let’s assume that 99% of the Book of Mormon is true; based on that, why don’t you want to live forever in heaven?” See how that doesn’t work?

    Here’s an example: The prophecy is II Sam. 7:13-16, where God promises King David that his house and his Kingdom would be established forever. Has it? “OH, but British Israelism!” you are about to say. “Queen Elizabeth II, and every other monarch on the throne of England/Scotland has been of David’s blood!” You do remember that BI (and the associated German Assyrianism) was disproved over on Armstrong Delusion, right? Or didn’t you read it? Maybe you should just google British Israelism…Wikipedia has a good article on it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Israelism#Research_findings

    So, example analysis: Prophecy put forward. Weight of evidence for the prophecy weighed. In this case, prophecy found to be false. And as a side note, however many other prophesies about Israel have also been shown false. I advise reevaluating your guestimate.

    OK, your turn! Bring forth your prophetic claims, make your arguments, that they may be weighed against the evidence in the Balances of Truth!

    Reply  |  Quote
  101. Anonymous wrote:

    Now I want you to google

    Hey there cupcake, I’ve got something for you to google:

    (nah, here ya go: http://silenced.co/2012/08/rolling-the-dice-confessions-of-a-cog-apologist/)

    Enjoy!

    Reply  |  Quote
  102. @ Anonymous:

    “You see, I am not necessarily asking you to believe me, I am asking you to believe the experts, not me.”

    Experts? More bald assertions. Just because you can find x number of websites ignorantly promulgating your view–and just because you can stupidly parrot their idiocy–doesn’t mean they (or you) have any merit. You conveniently believe only those things you read on the Web that you think confirm your point of view. You ignore the many (and higher quality) arguments that refute that point of view, which are readily available to anyone who is honest. You are not. You are a liar pretending your confirmation bias is a valid stance.

    The bottom line is that you get nowhere with this illogical appeal to the authority of unnamed websites (of which none of us are ignorant, by the way). Your job is to support your assertion with an actual argument. When you can do that, you’ll be ready to have your argument destroyed. Until then, all you’re doing is blowing smoke up your own ass and publicly thrilling to its effects. It’s a bit disturbing, really.

    Put up or shut up.

    Reply  |  Quote
  103. @ Anonymous:

    “Now I want you to google “fulfilled bible prophecies,” and spend the next 2 months thoroughly reading, studying at least 35 websites thoroughly confirming that many, many Bible prophecies have been fulfilled.”

    By the way–already been done. Years ago. You’re such a presumptuous little flea.

    Now, I want a response to my description of prophecy and why it is a stupid belief to begin with. Until you respond to that, you have nothing. All your unspecified prophetic “successes” are reduced to nothing if the concept of prophecy itself is nonsense. And it is. And you look silly prattling away with that big albatross around your neck. Why don’t you do something about it? Because you’re a cowardly sophist, that’s why.

    Reply  |  Quote
  104. Okay, you pack of self worshipping Bible skeptics insisting the proof of the fulfillment of every single Old Testament prophecy be “spelled out” to you, just wait a few more days. I’m assembling a large number of fulfilled prophecies for you to try to explain away. You can fool yourselves that the prophecies were not accurately fulfilled (mathematically impossible to have been fulfilled through just luck), but you cannot fool other people that have an open, objective mind humble enough to see the obvious truth that about 99 per cent or more of the Bible is divinely inspired.

    Yes, I acknowledge that the fulfillment of Ezekiel’s Tyre prophecy has a few problems, but overall a major portion of the prophecy was fulfilled. The original island city of Tyre (forget the mainland suburbs, they were not the original Tyre) still has never been rebuilt to its full former glory. You can try, but you cannot get away with condemning all prophecies because of the Tyre prophecy.

    Reply  |  Quote
  105. @ Anonymous:

    You insist that you want to have a debate, yet you continue to demonstrate a total disregard for the rules of debate. Here is what you must demonstrate instead if you wish to engage me further (and I hope my fellows will join me in requiring this of you):

    1. An understanding of the difference between an assertion and an argument. “About 99 per cent or more of the Bible is divinely inspired” is merely an assertion. It requires argumentation to support it. On its own it is as impotent as one of your more virile masturbation sessions.

    2. A willingness to authentically concede a well-made and well-supported argument, instead of ignoring it and hoping it will go away (you have treated every one of my arguments in this latter fashion, which is incredibly disrespectful and dishonest, particularly for someone who proclaims his religion as the one way of truth and love).

    There are other rules you have little hope of following, but we’ll try and keep it simple for the newb: just those two rules for now. You can start demonstrating them by addressing the elephant in the room. I’ll paste it here to jog your memory:

    Prophetic claims come in one of two basic forms:

    (1) Predictive, but useless. These predictions are made before the proposed event occurs, but are couched in such vague language they can mean anything (like fortune tellers who say, with spooky intonation, “I see peril in your future,” or the poetic spewings of Nostradamus). Or they refer to an event that is practically inevitable (“This city will fall…someday, under some circumstances–watch and see if I’m wrong!”). Or they refer to an event that is already being predicted by perfectly canny sources (like Armstrong’s stolen predictions of a reunited Germany, for example).

    (2) Non-predictive. These are the product of playing the game of postdiction. This is, of course, a fool’s game or a liar’s game (take your pick). It consists of searching scriptures or other ostensibly “prophetic” writings after the fact of some observed event, and claiming to find the event “predicted” therein. Of course, this is not a prediction at all, and, therefore, not evidence of prophetic powers. In any case, this trick necessarily relies on heavy interpretation of the writings in question in order to shoehorn them into a form that can appear to refer to the event in question, presumably by squinting one’s eyes just right and getting into the right frame of mind.

    Any so-called “prophecy” that doesn’t fall into one of these two categories (that is, it is predictive but useful in that it actually gives us something to go on) inexorably fails. Or, on the exceedingly rare occasions when such “prophecies” do succeed they are not capable of beating chance (and the burden of proof is on the claimant to produce a statistical analysis that demonstrates otherwise). These blind “successes” occur so infrequently that they have no statistical significance. The proponents of prophecy will not allow any of this to deflate their superstitions, however. They are quite skilled at counting the hits and ignoring the misses, giving themselves the impression that something spooky is happening. They tend to forget (or perhaps never realize) that someone can be “right” by accident (we’ve already covered being right by following the news, shrewd but perfectly canny analysis or common sense).

    Reply  |  Quote
  106. @ Anonymous:

    “Yes, I acknowledge that the fulfillment of Ezekiel’s Tyre prophecy has a few problems, but overall a major portion of the prophecy was fulfilled.”

    Such as?

    “The original island city of Tyre (forget the mainland suburbs, they were not the original Tyre) still has never been rebuilt to its full former glory.”

    Uh…moving the goalposts. The prophecy clearly states that Tyre would never be rebuilt–that it would forever be an uninhabited, bare rock where fishermen spread their nets. It doesn’t say that it would never be “rebuilt to its full former glory”, whatever those weasel words are supposed to mean. Below is a satellite image of Tyre (both the “island” and the mainland). Where in this bustling metropolis is the bare rock that supposedly represents the forever annihilated ancient city of Tyre? Please point it out.

    “You can try, but you cannot get away with condemning all prophecies because of the Tyre prophecy.”

    What you’re trying to do here, sophist, is to insinuate that although the Tyre non-prophecy is a complete bust, all other so-called prophecies are genuinely fulfilled by mere dint of the fact we can’t generalize from the specific! Don’t need to and therefore not trying. The onus is on you to provide what you think is the evidence for any given fulfilled prophecy. You must bear the burden of proof, as the claimant. Lay it out and we will refute it for you, as we have done with the Tyre prophecy.

    Reply  |  Quote
  107. Getting back to Tyre, thank you for the picture above. Not everything I said in my last comment about Tyre was accurate, because I had not studied the issue well previously. (See how humble and honest I am?)

    Your argument, though, that Tyre is a failed prophecy because both the mainland, old Tyre and the newer, island Tyre, now a peninsula, have both been “rebuilt” or “re-inhabited,” going against what Ezekiel “supposedly” said, is at best a very weak, purely speculative theory. If you are going to give me a failed prophecy, at least give me a more obvious, “cut and dried” example, then I won’t dispute it. You have
    3 problems with Tyre:

    1) Identifying the location of what “would not be rebuilt.”

    2) Determining if Ezekiel was referring specifically to the inhabitants or group of people alive on Tyre when the prophecy was made, the Phoenicians, or everybody forever afterward that lived on the island/peninsula. Ezekiel said that Tyre would “become plunder for all nations,” implying Tyre’s very real estate and construction potential would become part of the “spoils” given to other nations. It is impossible for you to prove that the prophecy was addressed to all nations, and to all people.

    3) No verse in the prophecy specifically says or implies that there will be no repopulating or rebuilding in Tyre by people other than the Phoenicians. The rebuilding or implied rebuilding is always directly addressed to the Phoenicians, not to any other race or political group.

    The prophecy is dual in that Ezekiel talks about both the original, mainland Tyre and the newer Island Tyre. You seem to ignore that the majority of Ezekiel’s Tyre prophecies did come true, against chance odds of 1 in millions. I assume you are claiming Ezekiel said in 3 different verses that Tyre would never be rebuilt, Ezekiel 26:14,20,21. Examining those verses really closely, though, you can see that Ezekiel never really said, clearly (beyond reasonable doubt), that the now existing ABOVE WATER peninsula/island would never be rebuilt or repopulated. His prophecy said several times that the island dwelling people, the Phoenicians, would be doomed to a watery grave, that they and their buildings, etc. would wind up UNDER WATER. Surely you have read of many sightings of the underwater ruins (castles, streets, palaces, market-places, etc.) of Tyre scattered for a substantial distance around the present island or peninsula. No wonder that area has never been rebuilt—it is under water (it is not easy to breathe under water). Builders do not like to build houses and buildings under water where people will drown.

    Ezekiel never said that Alexander’s constructed road dike to the island Tyre, nonexistent when he made the prophecy, would never be built up or populated. So you have to exempt that portion of the peninsula’s buildings/population from your argument. Seven thousand years ago the sea level around Tyre was about 18 feet higher. Extrapolating to the time when Ezekiel lived, the former Tyre island was about 8-10 feet higher (or the sea level was about 8-10 feet lower) due to land subsidence in the area. That means that much land around the former island would have been high and dry for buildings and other Phoenician construction to be, currently laying under water.
    Concerning rebuilding, if the English translation you are using is really accurate, the “rock” or rocky area on the first mainland Tyre that Alexander the Great leveled when he completely destroyed the old Tyre, there is still some dispute about where that rocky area really is. To give you a break, though, let’s assume it is at the mainland front or base of the peninsula where many people think it is. Guess what? There are no large, high fortress like walls surrounding that area. Ezekiel said the rocky area would be a place “to spread fishing nets.” To this day sometimes such nets are spread, by fishermen. It is reasonable to assume that these fishermen would have some kinds of houses and other constructed facilities on the old Tyre mainland, instead of living in houses 50 or more miles away.

    Ezekiel 26:14:

    “14 And I have given you up for a clear place of a rock, A spreading-place of nets you are, You are not built up any more, For I, Yahweh, I have spoken, An affirmation of the Lord Yahweh.” (Concordant Literal Version)
    “14 And I have given thee up for a clear place of a rock, A spreading-place of nets thou art, Thou art not built up any more, For I, Jehovah, I have spoken, An affirmation of the Lord Jehovah.” (Young’s Literal Translation)
    “14 ….. A place for the spreading of nets, shalt thou become, Thou shalt not be but anymore, ……” (Rotherham Emphasized Bible)

    In the above 3 respected translations and others there is no clear indication rebuilding by nonPhoenicians will never occur in the area where the Phoenicians lived on Tyre. God was angry at the Phoenicians, not the whole world at that time. The Phoenicians died out around 300 B.C. Their culture is now gone, and the Phoenician language is not even spoken anymore, true to Ezekiel’s prophecy. The Phoenicians had multiple gods and sacrificed to them, and they live primarily on 4 or 5 coastal cities excelling in maritime trade as a confederation among those cities.

    Ezekiel 26:20,21

    “I will send you to the pit to lie there with those who descended there long ago. Your city will lie in ruins, buried beneath the earth, like those in the pit who have entered the world of the dead. Never again will you be given a position of respect here in the land of the living.
    26:21
    I will bring you to a terrible end, and you will be no more. You will be looked for, but you will never be found. I, the Sovereign LORD, have spoken!” (The New Living Translation
    26:20
    “At that time I will send you down to the place of the dead to join those who died long ago. I will make you live with the dead below the earth in places that are like old ruins. You will not come back from there or have any place in the world of the living again.
    26:21
    Other people will be afraid of what happened to you, and it will be the end of you. People will look for you, but they will never find you again, says the Lord GOD.” ( New Century Version)
    26:20
    “then I’ll push you down among those who go to the grave, the long, long dead. I’ll make you live there, in the grave in old ruins, with the buried dead. You’ll never see the land of the living again.
    26:21
    I’ll introduce you to the terrors of death and that’ll be the end of you. They’ll send out search parties for you, but you’ll never be found. Decree of GOD, the Master.” (The Message translation)
    26:20 ]
    “I will bring you down with those who descend to the grave to join the people of long ago. I will make you live below the earth among the ancient ruins with those who go down to the grave. You will never return or take your place in the land of the living.
    26:21
    I will turn you into a terror, and you will no longer exist. People will look for you, but they will never see you again,” declares the Almighty LORD. (God’s Word translation)
    “20 …..so that you have no inhabitants …..” (Modern King James Version)

    In Ezekiel 26:20,21 the verses in the above translations are addressed to “you,” the Phoenicians specifically targeted in Ezekiel 26:2, not just anybody or everybody. Only the Phoenicians lived on Tyre. The Hebrew word for “inhabitants” in the MKJV of Ezekiel 26:20 above is yashab, Strong’s number 3427 which can mean “dwell, REMAIN, settle, ABIDE, CONTINUE,” as well as “inhabit.” There is no clear claim in these verses that other races or nationalities will be unable to rebuild Tyre.
    References: http://master2.cerege.fr/IMG/pdf/TYR_JCH05.pdf to verify high subsidence rate.
    http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=13&article=1790 to verify underwater palaces.
    Concluding, the odds still stand at about 1 in 75,000,000 that Ezekiel’s well fulfilled prophecy was the result of just blind luck, calculated by http://ed5015.tripod.com/BTyreDeMyer111.htm.

    Reply  |  Quote
  108. i’m looking for a sermon that i believe that Mr. Dave Meyers spoke on about Hannah. It had so much good informtion and history during that time. could you please send it to me.
    Thank you
    Roxanna

    Reply  |  Quote
  109. Roxanna, I do not have that sermon or any information about it. The best way to get it is to contact UCG or whatever church he is in, for Dave Myers’ email address or telephone number.

    Reply  |  Quote
  110. I see why this debate is ongoing…of course, as already admitted, Anonymous is deathly afraid of his own mortality and is desperately grasping at straws. That aside, here is a “wonderful” site showing why the Ezekiel prophecy of Tyre is “fulfilled”: http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=13&article=1790

    So…even though Ezekiel said that “God says” Tyre will be destroyed by NEBUCHADNEZZAR and NEVER BE REBUILT, the fact that Nebby didn’t destroy it, and that after it was partially destroyed by Alexander, it was rebuilt…I mean, talk about grasping at straws!

    And no, we’re not saying that “all the bible is wrong b/c the Tyre prophecy is wrong”…though the bible does say that ALL of it is inspired by God, so a failure of this magnitude would, understandably, cast aspersions upon the rest. But no, we’re not that sloppy. We’ve looked at many other prophecies over the years. Remember that promise I pointed out about King David’s house and Kingdom being established forever? Also hasn’t happened. DNA, linguistics, and simple history prove that people from the Middle East, and people from Northern Europe, are two very different sets of people. So, again, all the prophecies connected w/ British Israelism are gone.

    Speaking of prophecy…Anonymous, I looked at that “100 Prophecies” site. It made me lol. Why? Do you want to know the high standard of proof they have? One of them was “Jesus said that no man would know the day or the hour of my return.” They say this “prophecy” has been FULFILLED several times in history…basically every time someone said “Jesus is coming back next year…or very soon…or 1975…” and he hasn’t come back–TADA! Fulfilled Prophecy!

    But anyway, we aren’t throwing out the whole Ten Pound Diamond b/c of 5ounces of lead–we’ve examined the whole “diamond” and found it to be naught but a cubit zirconium at best.

    At any rate, we look forward to the oodles of evidence you are preparing to bring forth. Not to be too self-aggrandizing, but you may want to actually read through some of the stuff on Armstrong Delusion before you do…we may have already covered it. In that case, you are free to say “you wrote on AD that thus and such blah blah blah, and it is wrong (or I think it is wrong) b/c of Evidence A, Evidence B, and Evidence C. Checkmate!” We will then respond. Easy, right?

    Reply  |  Quote
  111. Eric Sell wrote:

    But anyway, we aren’t throwing out the whole Ten Pound Diamond b/c of 5ounces of lead–we’ve examined the whole “diamond” and found it to be naught but a cubit zirconium at best.

    Hear, hear!

    Reply  |  Quote
  112. @ Anonymous:

    You just wasted a lot of time proving my point. All your specious rationalizations do is demonstrate that you have no way to prove that the prophecy against Tyre was fulfilled, which is exactly your task, as the claimant. Bravo, fool. It’s like saying the end really did happen in 1975–it’s just that all its effects are undetectable–and then crowing about the great odds against it (i.e., nothing) happening by chance (a statistic you pulled out of your ass to begin with). When will you knuckleheads learn how to use logic? To sum up, I will ask you a simple question:

    Q: What would the situation look like if the prophecy against Tyre had failed.
    A: The situation would look just like it does, in fact, look.

    You have demonstrated nothing except your own foolish desperation to believe a fairy tale.

    Reply  |  Quote
  113. @ Anonymous:

    By the way, you missed a relevant scripture in your useless struggling upon the barrel we have you over. This comes from one of my favorite authors on Biblical subjects, Farell Till:

    A stubborn fact that inerrantists choose to overlook is that Ezekiel more or less apologized later in his book for having erred in predicting that Nebuchadnezzar would destroy Tyre. This passage clearly shows that Ezekiel meant that Nebuchadnezzar would destroy the island stronghold and not just the mainland suburban area as Bromling has tried to distort the prophecy into meaning.

    “In the twenty-seventh year, in the first month, on the first day of the month, the word of the LORD came to me: Mortal, King Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon made his army labor hard against Tyre; every head was made bald and every shoulder was rubbed bare; yet neither he nor his army got anything from Tyre to pay for the labor that he had expended against it. Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: I will give the land of Egypt to King Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon; and he shall carry off its wealth and despoil it and plunder it; and it shall be the wages for his army. I have given him the land of Egypt as his payment for which he labored, because they worked for me, says the Lord GOD (Ezek. 29:17-20).”

    The prophecy against Tyre in chapter 26 was dated in the “eleventh year” and this one in the “twenty-seventh year,” so the one immediately above was made after the other one. Notice that Ezekiel said in the first italicized statement above that “neither [Nebuchadnezzar] nor his army got anything from Tyre to pay for the labor that he had expended against it,” but if Bromling is right in his claim that Yahweh had intended for Nebuchadnezzar to defeat only the mainland area, then it would not be true that he had received no pay for the labor he expended. In reality, he would have gotten exactly what Yahweh had wanted him to have… the mainland villages of Tyre. Obviously, then, Ezekiel was saying here that the original prophecy had failed to materialize because Nebuchadnezzar did not accomplish what the prophecy had promised, and so Yahweh was going to give him the land of Egypt “as his payment for which he labored.”

    You feelin’ that yet?

    Reply  |  Quote
  114. @ Anonymous:

    “No wonder that area has never been rebuilt—it is under water”

    You really are stupid enough to think this supports your position (and the backwards “reasoning” on display here typifies your entire argument). So, let me get this straight. Underwater ruins don’t get remodeled, and instead of this being evidence merely of basic construction principles and common sense among the people involved, you believe it is evidence of a prophetic event? Presumably, then, under this “logic”, if a coastal area of modern Tyre were to be flooded, it too would be added to the area ostensibly covered by the so-called “prophecy”. If it’s underwater, it counts as fulfilled prophecy, since underwater cities are not rebuilt! Wow. That’s pristine bullshit right there. Underwater cities are not rebuilt not because they were prophesied to stay destroyed, but because they are–get this–underwater. Moron.

    And, like I said, this is a subset of your overall argument, which goes something like this: “Yes, the city still exists, but only in part–and we can’t really say which parts Ezekiel was talking about.” In other words, you can’t support your position. The situation looks exactly as one would expect it to look if there were no such thing as prophecy.

    You have the burden of proof. It is not our job to prove that the prophecy failed. That is the null hypothesis. You have to prove that it succeeded. And you have not even begun to do that. Moving and obscuring the goalposts with specious rationalizations might help to prop up your faith in prophecy, but they are not valid forms of argumentation and they prove nothing with regard to the question at hand.

    Reply  |  Quote
  115. @ Eric Sell:

    You know, it really grinds my gears to have spent years in an honest search for the truth, trying to get to the bottom of these very questions, judiciously examining both sides of every debate and sincerely agonizing over the results–only to have this precious simpleton, this decadent lackey, this faith-fattened untermensch come on here and pretend as though he’s done his fucking homework.

    That Farell Till article? I read that thing over five years ago. This question was settled the moment Nebuchadnezzar settled on a tribute. Will someone please inform our Brave Anonypuss here that all of this is old news–that he’s arrived late to a party that doesn’t want him? All those bold pronouncements about how he’s going to keep arguing for his superstitions–enough already! We’ve all heard it all before–the impotent slapping of deflated arguments against the impregnable wall of logic and facts always was a pathetic sound. How can they tirelessly flaunt such flaccid inadequacy and not at some point become embarrassed? Don’t they realize that their failed arguments will never strike true no matter how long they wag them around?

    Reply  |  Quote
  116. @ Anonymous:

    “Not everything I said in my last comment about Tyre was accurate, because I had not studied the issue well previously.”

    You still haven’t. To attain that comparatively high level of education, you’d have to meaningfully and honestly consider the counterarguments–something for which you simply don’t have the gumption. You aren’t speaking to equals here, sophomoric nitwit; you should start behaving accordingly or catch up.

    “(See how humble and honest I am?)”

    Yes–hardly.

    Reply  |  Quote
  117. @ Casey:
    WOW! Another fulfilled prophecy! How does Ezekiel do it?! Clearly he was inspired by God! I mean, since he was clearly writing around 582BC (like hundreds of years before Nebby went against Tyre), and to prophecy that the first prophecy would fail–what are the mathematical odds of THAT! hahahahahaha!

    But seriously, I had never seen that later scripture pointed out in that Farell Till article (or maybe I did and just forgot). Of course, by the logic being used in the Tyre apologetics, we can say that Jerusalem was never rebuilt–I mean, how long has that city been there? How many times has it been demolished? There can’t be even a single brick of the original city left…maybe not even of the 2nd or 3rd Generation of that city. Thus, Jerusalem doesn’t really exist–b/c it is buried under tens of feet of sand and the buildings of this place that is NAMED jerusalem but really isn’t!

    Minerva save us from the stupidity…my head hurts!

    OK Anonymous…next one please. You yourself claim that AT LEAST 1% of the bible may be wrong. So accept that this has thoroughly been beaten to death before you embarrass yourself further. Find another prophecy that has been fulfilled that we may marvel at the power of your god…or not.

    Reply  |  Quote
  118. Casey wrote:

    @ Eric Sell:
    You know, it really grinds my gears

    haha! Someone’s been watching Family Guy!

    Reply  |  Quote
  119. You people keep saying, gloatingly, that Ezekiel predicted Tyre would never be rebuilt. Yes, that may have been what Ezekiel said or meant, but the original Hebrew word, Strong’s 1129, does allow for the word “established” or “manufactured (or whatever tense)” to also be used in the translation, instead of “rebuilt” or “built” possibly saying that Tyre (more probably the Phoenicians) in Ezekiel 26:14 “would not be re-established.” 1129 if it means build or rebuild can also mean it figuratively as in building a family or dynasty. The Concordant Literal Version, Young’s Literal Translation, and the Rotherham Emphasized Bible translations of verse 14 were given in my last comment. Do re-read them.

    It may look like I am grasping at straws, but I am just stating facts. Your arguments are far from “airtight.”

    I’ll have more to say about this in my next comment.

    Reply  |  Quote
  120. @ Anonymous:

    (1) You’re moving the goalposts. At the beginning of this useless exercise in theistic backpedaling, you claimed that Tyre was destroyed and was never rebuilt. Challenged with the facts of the actual situation, you fell back on several convenient and specious rationalizations, culminating with this latest one of completely altering the nature of the mythical “prediction”.

    (2) Let’s assume for the moment that your interpretation is correct (and we are being excessively generous to do so, even for the sake of argument)–that the “prophecy” spoke of an end to the Phoenician civilization, and not necessarily of the city of Tyre. In that case, so what? All you’ve done is to reduce a useful prediction to a useless one. That is, a prediction that some undisclosed circumstance would bring about the end of the Phoenicians at some undisclosed point in time is hardly impressive. Predicting essentially inevitable events is something anyone can do. A mythical clairvoyant in the sky is not required for that! It is not uncanny or even interesting. In other words, it is not prophecy.

    (3) Fortunately for all of us, Ezekiel was a little clearer than you are letting on (because you are a liar). He predicted that Nebuchadnezzar would be the one to do the job for Yahweh. This, quite simply, did not happen. The Phoenician Empire continued on until 65 B.C., and Nebuchadnezzar had nothing to do with its decline and fall–he barely made a mark with his failed conquest, in fact. Case closed. Case. Fucking. Closed. You have no answer for that, except to retreat to the stockpile of excuses your ilk have piled up to heaven over the years.

    (4) Excuses are not good arguments, and they certainly don’t entitle you to proclaim your case won. When you have to backpedal and hem and haw and use weasel words, alternative explanations, just-so-stories, rationalizations–in a word, excuses–to “support” your position, it indicates a weak position. But this doesn’t seem to faze you. You are in retreat, blowing the horn of victory. This makes you a fool. I suggested you Google “Dunning-Kruger Effect” earlier. Were you able to comprehend it?

    (5) This whole clownish affair is predicated on the mistaken notion that “prophecy” is a valid concept to begin with. I robustly challenged this assumption without answer from you. Therefore, you’ve already lost the debate. The rest of this is just for entertainment value. Demonstrating the failure of a single so-called “prophecy” is nothing more than a fun way to exemplify the larger point: that belief in prophecy is irrational and, quite frankly, stupid.

    Reply  |  Quote
  121. @ Anonymous:

    “It may look like I am grasping at straws, but I am just stating facts.”

    Conveniently interpreting the obscure scribblings of superstitious mystics from the Bronze age is not “stating facts”. It’s rather what we call speculation. Speculation is not exactly, well…how did you put it?…

    “Your arguments are far from “airtight.””

    The question is, are yours? You’re the one with something to prove here, genius. As for our arguments, if you think they’re so weak, why can’t you answer them? All you’ve done is to ignore the most damning of them and make excuses for the rest.

    Reply  |  Quote
  122. @ Anonymous:

    Also, you’re still ignoring rule number 2…

    2. A willingness to authentically concede a well-made and well-supported argument, instead of ignoring it and hoping it will go away (you have treated every one of my arguments in this latter fashion, which is incredibly disrespectful and dishonest, particularly for someone who proclaims his religion as the one way of truth and love).

    There are other rules you have little hope of following, but we’ll try and keep it simple for the newb: just those two rules for now. You can start demonstrating them by addressing the elephant in the room. I’ll paste it here to jog your memory:

    Prophetic claims come in one of two basic forms:

    (1) Predictive, but useless. These predictions are made before the proposed event occurs, but are couched in such vague language they can mean anything (like fortune tellers who say, with spooky intonation, “I see peril in your future,” or the poetic spewings of Nostradamus). Or they refer to an event that is practically inevitable (“This city will fall…someday, under some circumstances–watch and see if I’m wrong!”). Or they refer to an event that is already being predicted by perfectly canny sources (like Armstrong’s stolen predictions of a reunited Germany, for example).

    (2) Non-predictive. These are the product of playing the game of postdiction. This is, of course, a fool’s game or a liar’s game (take your pick). It consists of searching scriptures or other ostensibly “prophetic” writings after the fact of some observed event, and claiming to find the event “predicted” therein. Of course, this is not a prediction at all, and, therefore, not evidence of prophetic powers. In any case, this trick necessarily relies on heavy interpretation of the writings in question in order to shoehorn them into a form that can appear to refer to the event in question, presumably by squinting one’s eyes just right and getting into the right frame of mind.

    Any so-called “prophecy” that doesn’t fall into one of these two categories (that is, it is predictive but useful in that it actually gives us something to go on) inexorably fails. Or, on the exceedingly rare occasions when such “prophecies” do succeed they are not capable of beating chance (and the burden of proof is on the claimant to produce a statistical analysis that demonstrates otherwise). These blind “successes” occur so infrequently that they have no statistical significance. The proponents of prophecy will not allow any of this to deflate their superstitions, however. They are quite skilled at counting the hits and ignoring the misses, giving themselves the impression that something spooky is happening. They tend to forget (or perhaps never realize) that someone can be “right” by accident (we’ve already covered being right by following the news, shrewd but perfectly canny analysis or common sense).

    Reply  |  Quote
  123. I read a few more contradictions in the New Testament on the site Eric Sell gave some time ago. One verse says that the chief priests bought the “Field of Blood, and another verse in another book says that Judas bought the Field of Blood. And the genealogy of Jesus in one book doesn’t match up with at least 2 fathers in another book describing the genealogy of Jesus. Since those and another contradiction I knew about, and most of the other contradictions listed on that “contradictions” website (listing mostly contradictions in historical, not doctrinal details), are in the New Testament, it is a little puzzling, awkward, and troubling. (See how honest and humble I am?)

    So I started to do a little thinking. 2 verses came to mind, “God is not the author of confusion,” and 2 Timothy 3:16: “All Scripture is inspired by God.” Since the first verse seems reasonable and trustworthy, I didn’t do any research on that verse. Men are not God, and the authors or recorders of the contradictory verses are the ones immediately or directly responsible for the errors. Studying the second verse, though, turned up several things I had not fully realized before.

    First, when Paul said that all Scripture is inspired by God, he definitely was referring to the Old Testament, and the Old Testament only because the New Testament was not officially in existence when he said those words. Using common sense, though, we realize that what Paul said should be able to be applied also to the New Testament. Technically, though, there is no verse that specifically says that every word in the New Testament is divinely inspired.

    Another thing I learned is that there is no “is” in the original Greek in 2 Timothy 3:16,17. The “is” was made up and artificially inserted into the verse by translators. So instead of “All Scripture is inspired by God,” the literal Greek really says “All Scripture inspired by God (or all God inspired Scripture) and profitable for teaching, for conviction, for correction, for discipline which in righteousness; 17 that complete may be the man of God …..”

    So the New Testament literal Greek does not specifically say that every Scripture is divinely inspired, only that at least some Scripture is definitely inspired by God, especially apparently those verses dealing with salvation and leading sinless lives. The context in verses 16 and 17 is primarily Christian living, or righteousness, not minute historical details where most of the contradictions are. The “and,” Strong’s 2532, in “and profitable” in the above verse can mean “so then,” “certainly,” “now,” “for,” and “therefore.”

    “All God inspired Scripture (or All Scripture inspired by God) certainly profitable for teaching, for conviction, for correction, for discipline in righteousness; that complete may be the man of God …..” is the literal translation of the Timothy verse.

    So misunderstanding 2 Timothy 3:16,17 does not justify rejecting the whole Bible. Your wholesale dumping of the Bible is based on flawed assumptions. Technically, or literally, the New Testament does allow a very small number of mistakes in recorded small historical details.

    A Catholic site brought this to my attention.

    http://www.usccb.org/bible/2timothy/3/

    Reply  |  Quote
  124. The “All” in the above verse can also be translated as “Altogether.”

    Therefore another acceptable translation of 2 Timothy 3:16 is “Altogether Scripture inspired by God certainly profitable for teaching, for conviction, for correction, …..”

    Reply  |  Quote
  125. @ Anonymous:

    “Your wholesale dumping of the Bible is based on flawed assumptions.”

    I don’t think Eric rejects the Bible based on what the Bible ostensibly says about the Bible. You can flog exegetical schemes upstream all day long and this will still be a strawman. Stick to the subject.

    Reply  |  Quote
  126. @ Anonymous:

    Also, you’re still ignoring rule number 2…

    2. A willingness to authentically concede a well-made and well-supported argument, instead of ignoring it and hoping it will go away (you have treated every one of my arguments in this latter fashion, which is incredibly disrespectful and dishonest, particularly for someone who proclaims his religion as the one way of truth and love).

    There are other rules you have little hope of following, but we’ll try and keep it simple for the newb: just those two rules for now. You can start demonstrating them by addressing the elephant in the room. I’ll paste it here to jog your memory:

    Prophetic claims come in one of two basic forms:

    (1) Predictive, but useless. These predictions are made before the proposed event occurs, but are couched in such vague language they can mean anything (like fortune tellers who say, with spooky intonation, “I see peril in your future,” or the poetic spewings of Nostradamus). Or they refer to an event that is practically inevitable (“This city will fall…someday, under some circumstances–watch and see if I’m wrong!”). Or they refer to an event that is already being predicted by perfectly canny sources (like Armstrong’s stolen predictions of a reunited Germany, for example).

    (2) Non-predictive. These are the product of playing the game of postdiction. This is, of course, a fool’s game or a liar’s game (take your pick). It consists of searching scriptures or other ostensibly “prophetic” writings after the fact of some observed event, and claiming to find the event “predicted” therein. Of course, this is not a prediction at all, and, therefore, not evidence of prophetic powers. In any case, this trick necessarily relies on heavy interpretation of the writings in question in order to shoehorn them into a form that can appear to refer to the event in question, presumably by squinting one’s eyes just right and getting into the right frame of mind.

    Any so-called “prophecy” that doesn’t fall into one of these two categories (that is, it is predictive but useful in that it actually gives us something to go on) inexorably fails. Or, on the exceedingly rare occasions when such “prophecies” do succeed they are not capable of beating chance (and the burden of proof is on the claimant to produce a statistical analysis that demonstrates otherwise). These blind “successes” occur so infrequently that they have no statistical significance. The proponents of prophecy will not allow any of this to deflate their superstitions, however. They are quite skilled at counting the hits and ignoring the misses, giving themselves the impression that something spooky is happening. They tend to forget (or perhaps never realize) that someone can be “right” by accident (we’ve already covered being right by following the news, shrewd but perfectly canny analysis or common sense).

    Reply  |  Quote
  127. @ Anonymous:
    Wow. Just wow. Do you have any idea what you’ve done? It is hilarious and yet I can’t help feeling embarrassed for you.

    So, all God inspired scripture is profitable for etc etc. Reasonable translation…except now you’ve basically foregone your entire argument about the inerrancy of the bible. “Well, it doesn’t matter if Tyre was destroyed or not, and it doesn’t matter if God’s promise to King David was kept or not, b/c only the God-Inspired parts of the bible are expected to be inerrant.” Really? REALLY?!?

    So you’re saying God is so impotent he can’t keep control of who writes what in his Instruction Book to Mankind?? And now, of course, the Big Question is: which parts are the God-inspired parts? The parts you agree with, of course! HAHAHAAHAHA!

    Small historical details? You mean like the thing we’ve always been taught is the major proof of the bible (and the very thing you’ve been crowing about the whole time)–PROPHECY?? You say that a correct reading of 2Tim means we’re all throwing out the bible erroneously b/c of small errors and really 2Tim says there’s likely to be errors anyway. No…if the new interpretation of 2Tim is right then THAT would be reason to basically throw out everything b/c it is admitting that the book can’t be trusted! I mean, which parts are the God-Inspired parts?? Are all the failed prophecies part of the “not God-Inspired” part of the Bible? This is exactly what the Muslims say (when confronted with certain scriptures in the Koran) “oh, yeah, those–no, those are the Satanic Verses, where instead of Gabriel inspiring the Blessed Prophet, Satan got a few lines in.” They actually say this. Not that it matters, but you can google Satanic Verses if you want.

    But this just goes to show–the bible is unreliable. One can read almost any verse any way one wants in order to try to prove a point, or try and wiggle out of a corner where you’re being pounded with facts you don’t like. So, the new reading of 2Tim says that “you’ve got it all wrong, man…I never said the whole bible was inerrant–only the God Inspired parts!” *sigh* You know how the CoGs all say that Traditional Christianity is twisting the scriptures? You know how Catholics say Protestants are twisting the scriptures? You know how Protestants say that cultish groups like the CoGs (and, of course, the Catholics) are twisting the scriptures? And we haven’t even touched on the Eastern Orthodox interpretation…Yeah. They all are b/c the scriptures are so bendable in the first place–as you have so skillfully illustrated. hehehe…dude, you didn’t just shoot yourself in the foot, you blew your foot off with a Desert Eagle.

    Now, what truth might the Septuigant or the Apocrypha hold? Who is to say that those books don’t have God-Inspired bits in them? I mean, the bible we have now was gathered together by the ancient Catholic Church and THEY decided which books to include/exclude. Were their choices inspired by God? If the god of the bible is so impotent that he can’t even keep control of what people write in his book to mankind (and inspires Timothy to tell us that…or did he?), then what hope is there that he was successful in making sure the correct books were in there in the first place? I mean, was the inclusion of the Gospel according to Luke inspired by God? Was Luke, himself, inspired by God? He makes up a census with parameters that were never done (go back to your childhood home for the census), and during a time that couldn’t have happened (Quirinius never ruled when Herod was alive)…all to try and say “see? The Messiah came from Bethlehem just like the Prophecies said he would…even though he’s known as ‘Jesus of Galilee’!”

    Seriously man, you will find fewer contradictions in the works of Tolkein–and he was INTENDING for it all to be fairy tales!

    Reply  |  Quote
  128. Yes, those parts of the Bible I agree with, those are the inerrant parts of the Bible.

    Casey Wollberg, I will try to respond to your previous comments in my next comment. I think your hostile attitude towards all Biblical prophecies is blinding you to some obvious truths. It was extremely remarkable, for example, for Ezekiel to have made such a dire prophecy against a powerful, highly fortified, booming city like Tyre which still to this day has about 10 million gallons of fresh, drinkable water flowing into the city each day

    Eric Sell, I’m just joking about my first sentence above. Yes, I knew that what I said in my last comment not only had the capacity to open “a can of worms,” but open about “50 barrels of huge, hairy, zebra striped worms.” My purpose in discussing 2 Timothy 3:16 was to try to get you and your faithful buddies to better accept and maybe start believing the Bible a little more, and to not continue throwing such “a big fit” over a relatively few minor, inconsequential historical details incorrectly stated in the Bible. Yes, the few, insignificant Bible inaccuracies are hard to explain. Maybe they are a type of “test” to see just how much, or how little you love the Lord, and how quickly you will dump the Bible, which in turn reveals your attitude towards your Creator.

    The real problem you have, Eric Sell, is the same problem Casey Wollberg has, attitude. Since it is obvious that fulfilled prophecy has added a divine dimension to the Bible even though it has only a relatively extremely few historical mistakes, you should (if you really wanted to worship the Lord and perpetuate your life beyond this one) want to jump at the opportunity to take advantage of what the Bible teaches. The really inerrant part of the Old and New Testaments consists of what they teach about how to correctly think, speak, and act towards God and other fellow humans, to prepare them for an eternal life free of offenses and other evil. Perfection is possible. There are no errors in defining righteous behavior, the main focus or goal of both the Old and New Testaments. Since fulfilled prophecy (again I ask you, what part of mathematically impossible do you not understand [that it was impossible for just luck to have explained miraculous fulfillments of prophecies]?) has identified the Bible as the most logical, best available means to know more about God and the next life, everything that it says should be believed until adverse proof shows something to be in error.

    Over 99 per cent of animals and over 99 per cent of insects would not only like to live beyond this life, but would very strongly like to live into the next world, if their present robust determination to stay alive in this world is any indication of their strong will to live. If insects could think and talk like humans, Eric Sell, they would tell you that of course they have a very strong desire to live forever.

    So the instinctual self preservation of insects reveals that you, Eric Sell, don’t even have the common sense to try to live forever that most insects have, if they could understand it. Insects, if they could talk like humans, would not say that death “is part of the territory of life,” or “a shame,” like you and Tohu have described death. Insects would energetically and enthusiastically pursue immortality, if given the chance.

    You people and I are different “spiritual species.” Eric Sell says basically he doesn’t want to “waste” his life pursuing Christianity. Wasting eternity alive and happy, though, even if it is a gamble (which it is not) is an even far, far, bigger waste. Your incompetent attitude glows like a neon light at night concerning your continuing refusal to acknowledge the almost universally accepted mathematical impossibility that life originated from dead material, without God’s help. Your lack of belief in God, well, there is just no good excuse for it. Period. End of discussion. Case closed.

    Reply  |  Quote
  129. @ Anonymous:
    Wow, I am certainly put in my place! You know, you’re right, I should want to live forever and I should accept the bible as the road to get to immortality!

    Its just…just…I can’t accept something that purports to be divine and yet has such GLARING errors. You keep talking about the mathematical impossibility of prophecies being fulfilled by random chance as opposed to being the result of divine guidance, yet you haven’t provided examples of which prophecies you mean, precisely. Still. Well, you did (or someone did) bring up Tyre, but that is clearly not a fulfilled prophecy. I tried to show you how to present examples by bringing up the promise that the god of the bible supposedly made to King David and how that has not been kept. Third, we’ve talked about how Jesus’ life fulfilled numerous prophecies…or rather, how unlikely that his life fulfilled anything, what with the inability of the Gospel writers to even get his genealogy correct and Luke making up stories to try to make it look like Jesus did stuff he didn’t.

    Now, come forward with a NEW example. If I come to you saying “I can fly” I can’t then say “now prove I can’t!” No, the burden of proof is on me to prove I can. You are trying to prove that the Holy Book you hold fast to is the surest road to immortality, and that fulfilled prophecy is a major proof of that fact. So…SHOW ME! I used to live in Missouri, so SHOW ME a fulfilled prophecy!

    The failure of the prophecy concerning Tyre (and the interesting admission by Ezekiel a few chapters later that Nebby FAILED to take Tyre sure makes it look like Ezekiel was writing during the time this was happening instead of a few hundred years earlier…) is not an “inconsequential historical error”. I am not throwing out the bible b/c of “inconsequential historical errors”! I’m throwing out the bible b/c it gives prophecies that DON’T COME TRUE. It makes promises that don’t come true.

    Furthermore, the “where did life come from if not from a Divine Creator” argument doesn’t prove your case. Yes, it is possible (though very slight) that a Deity created life, or maybe even created the universe…but if he/she/it did, it has left no signs of its existence, nor any indication that it wishes to be worshiped. There’s even a name for this: Deism. The belief that a Deity made everything, set up the laws of nature, and is now setting back watching what happens. But that’s all. There is no evidence for the god of the Bible. Besides, how do you know that the bible is the most “logical” and most correct path to immortality? Have you read the Quran? Have you read the Book of Mormon? Have you looked into Judaism (all the legalistic fun of the CoGs but w/o worrying about Jesus). Until you’ve looked into those, you can’t say “the bible is the most correct”…esp. when there are so many Failed Prophecies.

    Would I like to live on? Yeah, sure. But wishing it to be true doesn’t make it true. Wanting, above all else, to be a real-life Spider-Man does not mean I’m going to gamble on getting bitten by a radioactive spider. If I’m going to gamble on a book to lead me to the loving embrace of Mr. Deity, I’m going to bet on one with far fewer FACTUAL ERRORS–its no good to put all your money on a hand of cards when one of the cards is the 13 of Horseshoes (in this case, that made-up card represents the failed prophecies in the “hand” of the bible).

    And seriously, “maybe god put/allowed the errors to be in there to test our attitude of acceptance”?? Dude. That is just the lamest excuse ever. “Maybe the earth really is 6000yrs old and god just put “dinosaur” bones in the ground to trip up those who didn’t have the right attitude of just sit down, shut up, and accept everything the priest tells you that the bible says!” You’re sounding like Gerald Flurry (and probably most of the other CoG leaders) when he said “you have to study with the right ATTITUDE–the attitude of proving it True! If you go into it trying to prove it (“it”, I think, was him being That Prophet) wrong, of course you will! If you go into anything with the attitude of proving it wrong you can!” No, that’s not true. I can try to disprove Gravitational theory, or Electro-magnetism for the rest of my life, but I won’t be able to b/c you can’t disprove facts. Attitude doesn’t change anything. If the bible prophecies we’ve spoken of were clearly proven to be FULFILLED, it wouldn’t matter how much I “hated god” or “hated the bible”, they would still be true. So, it doesn’t matter how much you want to live forever, Nebuchadnezzar never destroyed Tyre like Ezekiel supposedly “prophesied”. Tyre was not destroyed “for all time never to be rebuilt”. These are facts, and your attitude of “its GOT to be true b/c if it isn’t then I don’t get to live forever” isn’t going to change anything.

    Accepting reality is why I can say “it is a shame” that the promises of immortality we were fed aren’t true. Yeah it made me sad when I first realized it, but now I am doing my utmost to make the most out of the one life I have. There might be another life after this, but there’s no EVIDENCE for it. There might be Leprechauns, but there’s no evidence for them, thus I don’t believe in them no matter how badly I’d love to get my hands on their lucky charms and their pots of gold.

    Reply  |  Quote
  130. Eric Sell wrote:

    Accepting reality

    …is something for rational people like yourself. It is entirely lost on Anonymous. Trying to help him see reason is like trying to teach Calculus to a toddler. It does not possess the mental capacity to comprehend, no matter how much you simplify things for it. Luckily for the toddler, its mental powers will increase with time. I don’t believe we can say the same for Anonymous.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Your lack of belief in God, well, there is just no good excuse for it. Period. End of discussion. Case closed.

    I ask you again, which god? You clearly have never given the Book of Mormon a try, same for the Quran, or the Buddhist Tipitaka, but you’re perfectly comfortable stating with certainty that Yahweh is the god to worship. Unfortunately, no amount of “period. End of discussion. Case closed.” will actually help your case.

    Anonymous wrote:

    Maybe they are a type of “test” to see just how much, or how little you love the Lord

    But wait, I thought you used the bible to prove the existence of god… But now, you’re saying that you have to first believe in god to be able to read the bible and pass the test? Pass the test?. Are you fucking kidding? Your god is playing games with people, testing them, and that’s ok with you? Maybe you should be worshiping Loki. The trickster god seems to be more to your liking!

    Reply  |  Quote
  131. @ Anonymous:

    “Casey Wollberg, I will try to respond to your previous comments in my next comment.”

    No, you won’t. You don’t have the cajones.

    “I think your hostile attitude towards all Biblical prophecies is blinding you to some obvious truths.”

    Interesting theory. How do you explain my former adoration of all biblical prophecies? And, obvious truths? No, you have to argue for these propositions first. You have failed gloriously in doing so.

    “It was extremely remarkable, for example, for Ezekiel to have made such a dire prophecy against a powerful, highly fortified, booming city”

    No, it wasn’t. (1) “Prophets” have a tendency to make endless prognostications of this very kind on the off-chance they’ll get one right. If they do, they can continually flog their one “success” (I refer you to Armstrong’s “prediction” about a reunited Germany). (2) Again, cities get destroyed, particularly strategic military targets in an ancient world beset with warring civilizations. The fall of Tyre was guaranteed, an especially safe bet, which is why it happened many times throughout history. (3) I’m not at all convinced that this “prediction”, in the first place, was not manufactured by scribes long after the fact. Can you argue for the opposite? If so, how do you answer the first two of my more damning challenges?

    “…like Tyre which still to this day has about 10 million gallons of fresh, drinkable water flowing into the city each day”

    Pretty impressive for a city that doesn’t exist, wouldn’t you say?

    “The real problem you have, Eric Sell, is the same problem Casey Wollberg has, attitude.”

    Irrelevant. Stick to the subject, sophist.

    “Since it is obvious that fulfilled prophecy has added a divine dimension…”

    Hold it right there! You have not argued for this proposition; you are merely asserting it in a perseverating manner, like a mentally unstable person who repeats meaningless phrases over and over. It doesn’t make it true by virtue of your continuously vomiting it out of your lie-hole, you know.

    “The really inerrant part of the Old and New Testaments consists of what they teach about how to correctly think, speak, and act towards God…”

    You are even less prepared for the task of defending the often deplorable moral preachments of the Bible than you are for having the debate at hand. You should probably not try to take on two foes at once, feeble as you are. Again, I advise you to stick to the subject.

    “Since fulfilled prophecy (again I ask you, what part of mathematically impossible do you not understand [that it was impossible for just luck to have explained miraculous fulfillments of prophecies]?)…”

    Incredible projection! You are so unaware of your own incompetence it would be astounding to me if I hadn’t already seen such displays a thousand times from your ilk. I suggest you not talk about subjects you don’t have the slightest comprehension of (like probability and logic and…well, basically anything).

    “…has identified the Bible as the most logical, best available means to know more about God and the next life, everything that it says should be believed until adverse proof shows something to be in error.”

    You’re a liar. You have not successfully defended this proposition against the many unanswered challenges with which we have laid it to rest. Again, I say: you are a liar. And that makes the baby Jesus cry, don’t you know? All this pious rhetoric is for naught if you burn for bearing false witness, liar. “And all liars–their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur.” Feeling toasty yet, liar?

    “If insects could think and talk like humans, Eric Sell, they would tell you that of course they have a very strong desire to live forever.”

    You’re setting the bar pretty high there, aren’t you, pond scum?

    “So the instinctual self preservation of insects reveals that you, Eric Sell, don’t even have the common sense to try to live forever that most insects have, if they could understand it. Insects, if they could talk like humans, would not say that death “is part of the territory of life,” or “a shame,” like you and Tohu have described death. Insects would energetically and enthusiastically pursue immortality, if given the chance.”

    Jesus fucking Christ, you’re an idiot! Listen. Self-preservation has nothing to do with pursuing immortality, and ascribing such an intentional ambition (even as a potentiality) to FUCKING INSECTS is the absolute apogee of ignorance. The whole reason we evolved senescence in the first place is that we don’t have a natural inclination toward pursuing immortality. Rather, the natural pursuit of all biological entities is procreation. This is why most insect species evolved a strategy whereby they die almost immediately after mating. Having a bunch of wizened, old mayflies buzzing around, eating alongside their great-great-great grandspawn and contributing nothing further to the gene pool, is a glorious waste of resources! We humans pursue immortality for reasons quite beyond mere biological self-preservation, because we have evolved highly complex brains that can contemplate our own mortality; are intensely self-aware (some more than others, obviously) and exist within elaborate, culturally evolved societies composed of other such self-aware individuals. Other mammals may have intimations of this tendency, too (elephants, certain apes, etc.), but it is not the result of the basic, innate drive to perpetuate oneself in offspring that is characteristic of all life. It requires the ability to contemplate mortality. Insects don’t have that.

    But we do. You’re further mistake here is in assuming that, because a given atheist isn’t pining after an eternal existence in your mythological paradise, they don’t want to live forever. That just doesn’t follow, and it’s a stupid, useless argument. It doesn’t prove anything–certainly nothing relevant to the topic at hand. If you want to discuss non-theistic immortality paradigms, go talk to the transhumanists, or the very serious scientists working at unraveling human senescence. Or don’t you want to live forever?

    “You people and I are different “spiritual species.”

    No such thing.

    “Your incompetent attitude glows like a neon light at night concerning your continuing refusal to acknowledge the almost universally accepted mathematical impossibility that life originated from dead material, without God’s help.”

    “Incompetent attitude”? What does that even mean? Like I said before, you should just stick to what should be the relatively simple task at hand: defending Bible “prophecy”. If you go rambling off into a debate about the probability of abiogenesis, I guarantee you it will not end well for your delusions. You happen to be in the midst of a group of fellows who is well-educated in this particular subject–not that it’s any arcane secret that Creationist arguments are complete bunk and always have been. I could crush this little flea of yours without much effort, seeing as it is one of the most basic and hoariest mistakes Creationism has to offer, and a ridiculous canard on its face, if you just had the intelligence to think it through a bit. But you don’t. Just stick to the subject for now so we don’t get sidetracked. You still have a lot of challenges to answer already, and I, for one, am not going to let you wriggle out of them with this albeit tasty serving of red herring.

    “Your lack of belief in God, well, there is just no good excuse for it. Period. End of discussion. Case closed.”

    That kind of “logic” works for morons, I suppose. But your interlocutors are not morons. We have considered the relevant excuses for theism and found them quite lacking in rigor. You don’t have the spine or the brain for that conversation, though. Like I said, keep your hand to the lowly plow you have selected: you yet have quite the row to hoe, in case you have forgotten.

    Reply  |  Quote
  132. Remember these old chestnuts?

    “What you and your other antiCOG, antiBiblical buddies need to do is put your “tails between your legs,” where they belong, admit defeat (because I can whip you with secular arguments or with Biblical arguments)…”

    “I’m assembling a large number of fulfilled prophecies for you to try to explain away.”

    Reply  |  Quote
  133. @ Eric Sell:

    “maybe god put/allowed the errors to be in there to test our attitude of acceptance”

    The Satanic Verses? Whether it’s done by Muslims or by Christians–either way, it’s special pleading. Also, does this mean Anonymous accepts the errors as errors? Or is he just rhetorically oozing all over the place like the invertebrate he is? “Those aren’t errors: look here at my convenient exegetical scheme! Besides, those errors might have been put there as a test!” He’ll try any ad hoc excuse once, I guess. Or twice, if he thinks you’ve forgotten that he abused it already. Watching this guy operate enhances my respect for slime molds, who are intrepid by comparison.

    Reply  |  Quote
  134. God’s word will not fail. Go to the site and prove for yourself if it is Life Hope and Truth centered.

    Reply  |  Quote
  135. Mary Lee Johnston wrote:

    God’s word will not fail. Go to the site and prove for yourself if it is Life Hope and Truth centered.

    Mary, “god’s word” has failed, numerous times. Why will you not see that?

    And as for the site? You’re only fooling yourself.

    Reply  |  Quote
  136. not sure if someone already commented on this (i know, i’m late. and not even gonna bother reading through everything) but can i just say, this is quite a gem:

    Anonymous wrote:

    What you skeptics are doing, that is even worse, you are trying to use this website to encourage others to think and act like you do.

    That is unacceptable.

    why you dirty little skeptics! we christians would never try to make others think the way we do (never)! tsk tsk, how pitiful!

    completely unacceptable!

    Reply  |  Quote
  137. @ S Harris:

    LOL yeah, I missed that too.

    Reply  |  Quote

 Leave a Reply

(required)

(required)

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>