| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"lizzard woman" |
| Date: |
11 Jan 2004 11:56:05 AM |
| Object: |
Jason Gastrich vs. Sean McHugh debate |
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=378e085d60a588f06ba7d92adcaeb729&threadid=72745
Apparently Gastrich used his opening gambit almost entirely for solicitation
and never mentioned the debate topic of:
Resolved: The Gospel accounts of the post-resurrection period are in harmony
and are without contradictions.
As someone in the peanut gallery pointed out, it there really any point in
going on?
--
sharon, aa #2153
"(of creationism) ... Only apocryphal tales told by goat herders around the
campfire after it became too dark to continue to molest their charges." --
TvG (Rec.Equestrian, 2003)
.
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Jason Gastrich vs. Sean McHugh debate |
11 Jan 2004 03:24:36 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 17:56:05 +0000 (UTC), lizzard woman
<kimosabe@shaw.ca> posted to alt.atheism:
As someone in the peanut gallery pointed out, it there really any point in
going on?
There's never any point in "debating" Gastritis - we know what his
"arguments" are going to be before the topic is decided.
--
"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid
consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and
ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who
works on the basis of reward and punishment. "
- Letter to M. Berkowitz, October 25, 1950; Einstein Archive 59-215
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "raven1" |
|
| Title: Re: Jason Gastrich vs. Sean McHugh debate |
11 Jan 2004 12:20:00 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 17:56:05 +0000 (UTC), lizzard woman
<kimosabe@shaw.ca> wrote:
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=378e085d60a588f06ba7d92adcaeb729&threadid=72745
Apparently Gastrich used his opening gambit almost entirely for solicitation
and never mentioned the debate topic of:
Resolved: The Gospel accounts of the post-resurrection period are in harmony
and are without contradictions.
I challenged him to demonstrate that position on alt.atheism about two
months ago. His rationalizations were truly breathtaking.
As someone in the peanut gallery pointed out, it there really any point in
going on?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bobby D. Bryant" |
|
| Title: Re: Jason Gastrich vs. Sean McHugh debate |
11 Jan 2004 12:29:50 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 17:56:05 +0000, lizzard woman wrote:
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=378e085d60a588f06ba7d92adcaeb729&threadid=72745
Apparently Gastrich used his opening gambit almost entirely for
solicitation and never mentioned the debate topic of:
Resolved: The Gospel accounts of the post-resurrection period are in
harmony and are without contradictions.
As someone in the peanut gallery pointed out, it there really any point
in going on?
Was there really any point in starting?
--
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Adario" |
|
| Title: Re: Jason Gastrich vs. Sean McHugh debate |
11 Jan 2004 09:54:02 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 17:56:05 +0000, lizzard woman wrote:
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=378e085d60a588f06ba7d92adcaeb729&threadid=72745
Apparently Gastrich used his opening gambit almost entirely for solicitation
and never mentioned the debate topic of:
Resolved: The Gospel accounts of the post-resurrection period are in harmony
and are without contradictions.
He says:
"I affirm that the entire Bible is inerrant. Not every translation is
inerrant, but the original manuscripts were inerrant and the manuscripts
we have today and even the KJV are essentially inerrant."
The original manuscripts were inerrant? If Jason knows that it must mean
that he has seen them. Otherwise, his statement would be a fib. They
would fetch a pretty penny on ebay. How about it Jason, with that kind of
dough you could offer your book for free.
Adario
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David" |
|
| Title: Re: Jason Gastrich vs. Sean McHugh debate |
11 Jan 2004 12:57:52 PM |
|
|
lizzard woman <kimosabe@shaw.ca> wrote:
Apparently Gastrich used his opening gambit almost entirely for solicitation
and never mentioned the debate topic of:
Well what a surprise!
[From Gastrich web site ]
Would you prayerfully consider supporting JCSM
with $5 per month?
[Defended by Uncle Davey]
Thou shalt not muzzle the ox as it treadeth the corn.
[But is contradicted by Paul]
In Corinthians, Paul says "Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I
may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my
power in the gospel."
The Skeptic's Annotated Bible: Corrected and Explained retails at
amazon.com for $32.
The debate should be:
'Is this business approach to religion consistent with the scriptures?'
Gastrich is so transparent it's pathetic.
David
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "khartoum" |
|
| Title: Re: Jason Gastrich vs. Sean McHugh debate |
11 Jan 2004 12:07:44 PM |
|
|
lizzard woman wrote:
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=378e085d60a588f06ba7d92adcaeb729&threadid=72745
Apparently Gastrich used his opening gambit almost entirely for solicitation
and never mentioned the debate topic of:
Resolved: The Gospel accounts of the post-resurrection period are in harmony
and are without contradictions.
As someone in the peanut gallery pointed out, it there really any point in
going on?
I tried to click on the link and it crashed Mozilla. Is the thread in
free.christians or somewhere else?
--
***********************************************
Khartoum aa#2110
When two men of science disagree, they do not invoke the secular arm;
they wait for further evidence to decide the issue, because, as men
of science,they know that neither is infallible. But when two
theologians differ,since there is no criteria to which either can
appeal, there is nothing for it but mutual hatred and an open or
covert appeal to force.
Bertrand Russell
Can Religion Cure our Troubles 1954
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Jason Gastrich vs. Sean McHugh debate |
11 Jan 2004 03:30:28 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 18:07:44 +0000 (UTC), khartoum
<khartoumNOSPAM@insightbb.com> posted to alt.atheism:
I tried to click on the link and it crashed Mozilla. Is the thread in
free.christians or somewhere else?
Basically, Nightshade introduced the debate, then introduced Jason.
Gastritis advertised his web site and his book. Then he (as expected)
claimed that the "supposed contradictions" were just omissions.
Nightshade called him on the advertising (which had been deleted),
since solicitation is a violation of the forum. End of debate.
--
"If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can
solve them."
-Isaac Asimov
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "khartoum" |
|
| Title: Re: Jason Gastrich vs. Sean McHugh debate |
11 Jan 2004 04:10:28 PM |
|
|
Al Klein wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 18:07:44 +0000 (UTC), khartoum
<khartoumNOSPAM@insightbb.com> posted to alt.atheism:
I tried to click on the link and it crashed Mozilla. Is the thread in
free.christians or somewhere else?
Basically, Nightshade introduced the debate, then introduced Jason.
Gastritis advertised his web site and his book. Then he (as expected)
claimed that the "supposed contradictions" were just omissions.
Nightshade called him on the advertising (which had been deleted),
since solicitation is a violation of the forum. End of debate.
Thanks, I tried again and was able to view the page.
--
***********************************************
Khartoum aa#2110
When two men of science disagree, they do not invoke the secular arm;
they wait for further evidence to decide the issue, because, as men
of science,they know that neither is infallible. But when two
theologians differ,since there is no criteria to which either can
appeal, there is nothing for it but mutual hatred and an open or
covert appeal to force.
Bertrand Russell
Can Religion Cure our Troubles 1954
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
