It's often said "Never enter a battle of wits with an unarmed man". But I like to think there's a footnote which runs "Except for practice, or curiosity, or because you've got nothing better to do...or you just really want to because it gives you a perverse pleasure".
And where better to do it than the home of witless battles, youtube comments. But as the bishop said to the actress, it's probably too long for one session, and there's a chuckle at the end.
Theaccousticaddict: Lol, i never said Jesus was God, Jesus was and still is the son of God, that's why God spoke while Jesus was being baptised, he said "This (Jesus) is my beloved son in whom i am well pleased". God clearly specified Jesus as his son. God is Lord, but only through Jesus can we get to him, only through Jesus can we be saved by the grace of God, why? Cos Jesus is the intercessor between man and God he paid the price salvation on the cross of Calvary and defeated death.
Kap: Congratulations, you've just rediscovered the Aryian heresies - the first big theological punchup of christianity. Actually the fudged solution was that god and jesus are 'of the same substance'. Later the holy spirit, not jesus, was given the job of intercessor.
So I'm afraid you've got the creed wrong, and you're actually a heretic. Bad luck.
[I was actually thinking of the Russian Orthodox position when I wrote that. Most of the European and American positions are less worked out.]
Theaccousticaddict: The holy spirit is our comforter not our intercessor, Jesus alone is our advocate and intercessor and the bible is quite specific about this fact. I think it would do you good if you studied the bible well rather than spend time believing in some "creed" that was developed not according to the word of God, but according to tradition. It looks as if you need a bit of schooling with issues in the bible. The holy spirit is not an intercessor, but only a comforter for the sons of God.
Kap: Actually in most forms of christianity it's Mary who's the intercessor. The bible is obviously not specific about the role of the spirit, as the spirit is an extrapolation of a single passage which, after 150 years, led to the father-son pair being expanded into the trinity we know today. You may indeed have read the bible but you don't know much about it.
Theaccousticaddict: well that's not what the bible says a true Christian adheres to the bible and anything apart from that is unchristian and not according to the word of God.Catholics base their mode of worship mostly on tradition rather than the word of God, they pray to saints and Mary instead of the true God. Mary is not an intercessor, she did not pay the price for that on the cross, Jesus did and Jesus alone is our advocate
Kap: So the protestant superstition of the magic sky daddy is more in accordance with a book of fairy tales than the *catholic* superstition of the magic sky daddy. Big deal.
Theaccousticaddict: I dont know what a "Magic sky daddy" is, maybe its one of your fantasised characters, but that is not scriptural neither is that Christian, so i have nothing to say to that. true Christian adheres to the bible, whether you are a protestant or not, it doesn't matter, what natters is adhering to the word of God. I dont know what you mean by "A book of fairy tales", i only know of the bible which is the word of God, stop confusing the bible with your fairy tale stories.
The bible is quite very specific about everything there is to know. We are spiritual beings, and we must live our lives according to the will of God as we will one day give accounts for our deeds. I dont know what you mean by "The role of the spirit". Right from the beginning, Jesus was the son of God and still remains the son of God, yes the trinity is made up of father,son and holy spirit, but that does not mean they are one being or entity.
Kap: Yes, the bible specifically says there are dragons and unicorns, bats are birds, insects have four legs, the world is flat, animals can talk, people come back to life, people fly, and human parthenogenesis is possible.
Theologins have added that jesus existed before he was born, there's a shadowy third 'spirit', and the three both are and are not the same thing in different aspects. Theologins are good at fudging.
[We'll rejoin this thread soon, but first a sideline....]
Theaccousticaddict: Listen, you have no idea what you are talking about. Catholic faith is based on tradition, a true Christian abides and adheres to the bible. Matthew 3;17 clearly specifies how God refers to Jesus as "His beloved son in whom he is well pleased with". Before you decide to proof me wrong, try studying the bible first, i,ve been a Christian all my life and i clearly understand what the bible is saying. Jesus is the son of God and God is our father which art in heaven.
Kap: The tradition changes constantly to suit the church. If you knew the history of your own faith you'd realise that. The term 'son of god' originally signified any (male) member of the Israel tribe. Misunderstanding this, theologins thought it referred to Jesus the prophet being the adoptive son of god, and then to him simply being the result of the divine impregnation of Mary.
Theaccousticaddict: I dont base the way i worship God on tradition, but on the holy word of God. Anything out of that is unspiritual, unchristian and unholy unto our God in heaven. There are so many false religions out there as well as false prophets and wolves in sheep clothings who are out there to confuse the mind of the masses from the path of light. If you want to know about God, then adhere to the word of God, the world will only just confuse you.
Kap: [The holy word of god]...as interpreted and institutionalised in, um, tradition. One of many traditions.
You're like someone who learned one version of a folk song in childhood, and on finding there are variations, insists that theirs must be the true one. Because it's the best. Because it's the one *they* learned.
Theaccousticaddict: No, not on tradition, but by the holy word of God. Traditions are man made, the word of God is life. You are clearly misinterpreting the bible.
Kap: Ah, so you admit that the bible has to be interpreted to be understood. Interpretation (and mistanslations) become traditional. You are following one tradition, claiming it as the only correct interpretation. All the other sects do the same thing. Simply asserting that your tradition isn't a tradition just isn't good enough.
Theaccousticaddict: There's only one true interpretation for what the bible is saying. "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth", in what other way can that be interpreted to mean anything? the bible is clearly specific of its messages so i dont get what you are moaning about. You have no reason for not worshipping God, you are doing the same sand things your kinds do, and that is try to come up with all little and flimsy excuses to support your course, well you have no excuse so get over it!
Kap: I have no reason for not worshipping a small stick either - except that I have no need for superstition. You seem angry that others don't have the same needs as you - an odd position for someone secure in his faith.
In the beginning 'Elohim' created the land and sky. Elohim is plural, and female - you claim your god is neither. What was the order of creation? There's two irreconcilable account in Genesis. You call this 'clearly specific'.
Theaccousticaddict: No reason? well he created you in his own image, he gave you life, without him you would not exist so therefore, you owe your existence to him and therefore must worship him. Yet, out of love, he still gave you the freewill to chose whether to worship him or not. Most people might say "I created you, so you must worship me" but God out of love gave us freewill to chose.
You have nothing important to say, you just repeat after me.
Kap: So your reasoning is: I should believe god created me, because I should worship him, because he created me.
And I should believe in hell, because if I don't...I'll go to hell, which is a terrible threat, if I believe in hell.
And you should believe in the invisible gun pointed at your head, because if you don't, it will fire. So why don't you believe in the gun, Mr Accoustic? I'm telling you it's there, and you have the same reasons for believing in it as you do in god.
Theaccousticaddict: No, whether you believe God created you or not, it changes not the fact that he did actually create you, there's nothing you can do to change that fact except be used to it. He created you and therefore deserves your worship. Whether you believe in hell or not, it does not change the fact that it is real. You just keep twisting things to suit your point.
Kap: And whether you believe in the the flying spaghetti monster or not, he still sees you with his meatball eyes.
If you can provide any reason to believe beyond your repeated assertion, it's about time you did so. If you can't you must by your own thinking join every religion which has ever existed - or ever could exist.
Theaccousticaddict: Now you are trying to talk about God from an academic perspective instead of from a spiritual perspective. You cant learn about God by going to school, you learn of him by reading and understanding his holy word. The truth is right there in our faces, the door is open, its our choice to either remain outside or walk in. Jesus is the son of God, the only one ever who died and ressurected from the death. He is Lord and none can be saved except through his grace.
Kap: Jesus is unique. No one else rose after three days and will return again, and he is the only path to truth.
Apart from Osiris. And Isis. And Prometheus and hundreds of other religious figures with near-identical biographies. Check the dead sea scrolls for stories about many mythical figures which eventually coalesced into jesus.
Then check out the contemporary accounts of jesus' life. That should be easy, because there aren't any.
Theaccousticaddict: lol, Isis never died and ressurected, that is all pure myths. If you read the true history of Isis very well you,d realise that Isis never died, rather he merged with the son god Ra. The evil ones have twisted these myths to be identical with Jesus cos (1), they want to confuse the minds of the masses from the truth, (2), they want people to believe that the story of Jesus is a myth alongside these mythical characters. Read the real stories of Isis and Osiris.
Kap: Oh I see, there's a massive anti-christian conspiracy to discredit jesus, dating from 2-4000 years before he was supposedly born. Perhaps you think I'm part of this massive conspiracy, together with every single folklorologist in the world.
Or maybe the jesus story is the conspiracy, created to discredit Isis by 'the evil ones'. It's equally plausible, given the evidence.
Theaccousticaddict: You are not part of the conspiracy, but you,ve been brainwashed and denied the truth by these conspiracies. The story of Jesus i no conspiracy, its been supported by texts which are not biblical. Am asking myself why am wasting my time responding to your flimsy excuses.Listen to yourself, why would the "evil ones"create a story of salvation, hope and eternal life filled with bliss, no death and happiness? think before you speak.
Kap: You argue because your belief can't stand on its own - you need to find evidence because faith isn't enough.
There are no extrabiblical texts which mention a jesus of nazareth. The one paragraph in Josephus is a later insertion. The gospel of barnabas is a (bad) fraud. The gospel of thomas is a collection of quotes and miracle stories from over the 2000 years before jesus - most of which reappear in the synoptics with character names changed.
Theaccousticaddict: obviously there's an anti Christian conspiracy, there always was right from the beginning, that's why Satan made Adam and Eve sin cos he hated God and hated God's creation. He has also strived to destroy God's name and image right from then till now, pulling men to become his servants and rewarding them with worldly riches, fame and fortune.
Kap: Interesting that Satan seems to be winning the war. Especially as he's fooled 99% of all the christian groups into following the wrong interpretation.
You have given no reason to believe any of your claims, beyond asserting they're clear in the bible, and when they're not, Satan's obscured them, conveniently for you.
Theaccousticaddict: we pull men to God so that they might have eternal life not so that they might be rewarded with worldly riches, fame. The bible clearly specifies these things as vanity, "What shall it profit a man if he gains the world and looses his soul". You have no idea what you are talking about.
[And now, we return to the subject of, um zoology.]
Theaccousticaddict: No, the bible says nothing about 2Unicorns", that's another lies. Yes, the bible talks of mighty dragons, and that's a fact cos what the bible refers to as dragons are what we call "Dinosaurs" today. The bible does not say that the world is flat, again, another lies. Yes, God made Baalam's donkey talk, he created the whole universe so making an animal speak would be piece of cake fro him. Yes Jesus died, and came back to life, after which he ascended into heaven.
Kap: So dinosaur co-existed with humans...and then god erased all the evidence and made the world look like there were millions of years between the two. Because...well, he enjoys telling pointless lies. And punishing those who believe them.
Theaccousticaddict: Yes dinasours co existed with man, there are drawings of life dinosaurs on caves, rocks by ancient civilizations and its clear that they co existed. I dont know why you think dinosaurs existed millions of years before humans just cos some radiometric machine told you so, so lame.
Kap: So on the one hand there are cave drawings showing animals, which people who can't tell a psittacosaurus from an apatosaurus try to interpret as dinosaurs. And on the other, the most consistent and proven long-term dating technology in the world.
Only a creationist could take such pains to be so stupid.
Theaccousticaddict: Listen, the carvings were of dinosaurs, not like anything we,ve seen today, real life dinosaurs. That alone is sufficient proof that ancient civilization lived and co existed with these creatures. You can say otherwise, but that's just cos u re ignorant. Well your equipment may be the "most consistent and long term dating technology" but (1) that is your opinion and (2) it still does not change the fact that its answers and results are based on probabilities, not factual truth.
Kap: So you don't grasp what probability is - no surprise. And saying over and over again "These are pictures of generic dinosaurs" doesn't make it true.
There were 9000+ dinosaur species. Link to a picture of a painting or carving, and identify the species, explaining why it couldn't be any animal known by science to exist at the same time as early humans.
Theaccousticaddict: probability is not factual, its just almost like a presumption, there's no specific conclusion. The carvings showed real lived dinosaurs including the T rex and the rest of em, you are just ignorant based on the lies you,ve been fed with.
Kap: If probability theory didn't work, astronomy would be impossible. There would also be exactly zero point in taking a census every few years.
Show us the pictures. Link to to evidence that the Flinstones is a documentary.
Theaccousticaddict: Probabilities are not facts, simple as that. Facts are specific, probabilities aren't.
[Back and forth like this a few times]
Kap: A probabilistic estimate of the time the dinosaurs died out is around 65 million years. Let's say the estimate is out by a truly massive amount, much much more than has ever happened before - say 10 million years.
Lets say the evidence for humans is also out by the same amount. There's still 10.8 million years between the two. Even if you exaggerate the error of radiometric dating beyond any plausibility, you still can't put humans and dinosaurs in the same timeframe.
Theaccousticaddict: Well that estimation is wrong sir. I have witnessed occasions were radiometric testings has provided a variety of results for one test. That is no truth, truth is not based on estimation.
Again, i need proof from you that the universe is billions or even millions of years old.
Kap: The existence of Hubble pictures, combined with the Michealson-Morley experiments on the speed of light prove the age of the universe.
You say truth is not based on estimation. Go to your bible and count the estimates. You are confusing precision with accuracy - an elementary confusion when talking about statistics.
If you have any evidence that 'that estimation is wrong sir', post it. Together with evidence that cave paintings show dinosaurs.
[Ommitted rather pointless discussion of whether the bible outsells the Quran, and if it does, whether that indicates that it's all true.]
Theaccousticaddict: Tell me how the world looks like the dinosaurs and man are millions of years apart. What evidence do you have for this claim? and please dont refer me to some "radiometric" dating, that's not real and accurate facts, its based on probabilities. I have proof that dinosaurs and man co existed, there are human drawings of variety of dinosaurs on rocks, caves and even drawings of men hunting down these creatures.
Kap: You're forbidding me from using using radiometric evidence, because you think probabilities don't exist or something. Okay, look at the geological evidence. Dinosaurs in one set of bands, hominids in a higher set, laid down later.
You on the other hand have...some stick figures hunting some buffalo-like round things.
Theaccousticaddict: Am not forbidding you from using radiometric evidence, am just against you posing it as factual evidence when they are nothing more than information based on nothing more than probabilities. Now maybe ancient civilization did not really know dinosaurs like we do, but they co existed with them, hunted them and used them for food, all these evidence is recorded in carvings and drawings and that is sufficient for the wise man.
Kap: Show us the evidence.
Theaccousticaddict: Show me the evidence that dinosaurs existed millions of years before humans. Dont tell me anything about radiometric crap, give me believable evidence. No one was there, so for you to be so certain of this thing, then which means that you have evidence beyond reasonable doubt that you are right. Its amazing how you are in a blind faith without realizing.
Kap: I have given you the evidence - fossil bands. You ignored it because it was inconvenient. Address the issue or admit you can't.
Theaccousticaddict: fossil bands?? REALLY?? so fossil bands supercedes real evidences left by human beings?? and how the hell does fossil bands prove that dinosaurs existed millions of years before humans? cos to me it doesnt.
Kap: Then you don't understand the most elementary geology.
Oh, and you have yet to back up your claim of 'real evidences left by human beings'. Please do so, if you can.
Theaccousticaddict: i wanted to prove to you that dinosaurs and man co existed, and i did so by showing you the evidence of man's drawing and carving of dinosaurs on caves and rocks.
Kap: You have claimed this mysterious evidence exists. You have not shown the evidence. For the forth time, where is it?
You also have to show that what you claim are dinosaurs could not be drawings of animals already known to exist at the time. So far you've proven nothing beyond your own capacity for repeated baseless assertion.
No more prevaricating. Provide the evidence. Now please.
Theaccousticaddict: what re u talking about? we are talking about spirituality here not physical matter. Ok, what evidence do you have to show that love, hate, jealousy etc exists?
Please stop asking physical proof for things that are of a spiritual nature, it only shows you have no idea what spirituality is.
Kap: We are talking about dinosaur bodies and human bodies, living at the same time. Bodies are matter. Whether or not spirits and even emotions exist, bodies are corporeal. You are making claims about the corporeal universe. Stop trying to dodge the issue. Substantiate them.
Theaccousticaddict: Humans and dinosaurs lived together, that's a fact. spirits exists, like a bottle preserves wine, so does the body preserve the soul which is our spirit.
Kap: If it's a fact you should be able to show us the proof.
For the fifth time, please do so.
Theaccousticaddict: Jesus existed before he was born, that's fact. He always existed, he just came in form of man to die for our sins, after which he ascended back to heaven, to where he had always been before.
Kap: There is nothing in the bible to suggest any of that. You are imposing extra-biblical traditions onto the text.
Theaccousticaddict: humans and dinosaurs did really co exist.
Kap: How difficult can it be for your to find a link to some of this evidence you claim exist? Are you really unable to find something in AIG or a similar wingnut site? An article by an expert, some jpgs of the cave paintings, a youtube clip?
I've now asked you six times to substantiate your claim that cave paintings show dinosaurs and humans lived together. You say there's lots of evidence. Where is it?
After twenty four hours, he did something amazing. He posted a link to some evidence. And here it is!
I know. I'm as blown away as you are. A plesiosaur, which was a sea-dwelling dinosaur, badly drawn onto a muddy blob which might once have been part of a cave painting. Not a caveman painting from about 32,000 years ago - an Anasazi painting, from 400-1800 CE.
I never thought I could be overwhelmed by how underwhelming something is. But then I met a creationist.