POLL: What is the World's Most Evil Religion?

Your on. by the way hope you had a nice weekend?

Thank you for your reply. I did however notice that you did not address the other issues both have rather chosen to concentrate on Jesus resurrection issue. Is that because you believe that I can not demonstrate this piece of historical fact to be true.

Since you are such the debater I'm sure you are familiar with the works of : Simon Greenleaf?
I'm sure you know that he was the Royal Professor of Law at Oxford. And a world renown expert on evidences admissible in a court of law.


Quote from axeman:

GA,

You ask for a real formal debate without the Ad Hominems,
and yet you clearly show us that you are incapable of this.

At the very beginning of your post you asserted that
jesus coming back to life is a HISTORICAL FACT that you can PROVE.

Further, you challenge me to prove this is NOT the case.

This points out 2 very important things:

1) You don't know what constitutes evidence, since I
can only assume your going to use your bible as the
source for proof of jesus's resurrection.

Sure. What's wrong with doing that once I've demonstrated that the Bible is divine rather than human in origin?

2) You ask me to prove a negative. Something a real debater
would NEVER ask because he understands the logical FLAW
of asking something so silly.

What do you mean?
If that were so then that would mean that ALL of those scholars (those much brighter than you or I and with more advanced degrees) that their past efforts to do so were a mere exercise in futility?

Nonsense. There is nothing wrong with setting out to examine evidence that either proves or disproves of a scientific hypothesis.
Man has always inquired about his existence and pondered the validity of the claims of the Bible.

Now.... #1 needs some clarification, so why don't you provide
us with your PROOF that 1) Jesus even existed, since this is
still hotly debated, and #2) That he came back to life.

More importantly, explain to me why asking your opponent
to prove something is NOT true is so illogical.

Likewise asking someone of your intellectual prowess (who is so well versed on the subject of religious history) to prove something so widely known and discussed as you stated above "hotly debated". Surely you have made yourself familiar with the opposing arguments?



If you can at least address issue #2, and identify your
logical error, then I will accept the challenge to your formal
debate under set of debating rules which allow for OBJECTIVE
scoring.

But first, lets see if you are even capable of reasoning correctly
by identifying and describing in detail why it is silly to ask
someone to prove something is NOT true.

Sure. defense Lawyers do this everyday in a court of law.
My client is innocent! Prove it!
The defendant is guilty! Prove it!

The burden of proof lies within both camps.

A college debate professor would shoot you down in an instant
for doing this. Explain why.

No he would not. I have debated religion with the likes of such in formal debates. Again. it is a matter of perspective. If you shift all of the burden of proof to the opponent then if he or she fails to convince you then you simply say I am not convinced and so therefore - YOU LOSE!

The outspoken atheist Kai Nielsen recognizes this: "To show that an argument is invalid or unsound is not to show that the conclusion of the argument is false.....All the proofs of God's existence may fail, but it still may be the case that God exists."



peace

axeman
More...
 
Im familiar with him. But his conclusions, even If I were
to accept them, are only valid if we ASSUME the bible
is not a fictional piece, which is also debatable.




But in any case, I actually do not want to bother on the
jesus supposed resurrection. This is not my focus.

I would rather hear you explain point #2, proving that
you are capable of reasonable debate.

So Im waiting for you to identify the flaw in demanding
that I prove a statement is NOT true.

Someone who doesn't not understand why such a demand
is totally illogical proves that he does not posses the tools
required for a formal debate.

So the question is: Am I wasting my time with someone
who is not capable of basic reason and logic? Or will you prove that you
at least have minimal reasoning capabilities by explaining
the flaw you just made?



peace

axeman


Quote from Guardian Angel:

Your on. by the way hope you had a nice weekend?

Thank you for your reply. I did however notice that you did not address the other issues both have rather chosen to concentrate on Jesus resurrection issue. Is that because you believe that I can not demonstrate this piece of historical fact to be true.

Since you are such the debater I'm sure you are familiar with the works of : Simon Greenleaf?
I'm sure you know that he was the Royal Professor of Law at Oxford. And a world renown expert on evidences admissible in a court of law.
More...
 
Quote from Specul8r:

Alfonso,

I do not believe the religion to be "evil" in and of itself, but when it comes down to which of the above religions have had more blood shed in the name of it, then anyone with even a remote sense of history would have to choose Christianity...

What is "evil" anyway?

I do not know enough about the Islamic religion to induce whether this "evil" label should be applied or not; hence I did not vote.
More...

Maybe - but the blod shed was against The Bible and Jesus' lessons. But the muslim terror is according to their holy books. That's the difference.
 
Quote from aradiel:

Lets put it this way

Christian nations are more evil to the other nations (because they are more powerful)

while

Islamic nations are more evil to their own people (still waiting for them to evolve and separate religion from the state, and stop "electing" "presidents" who dont have the ability to manage the state increasing their personal fortune while making the country rich)
More...

The problem with Islam that you can't seprate religion from the state because Islam is a lawreligion.
 
"Christianity" should not be confused with followers of the Roman Catholic Church which many "Christians" including myself, consider to be apostate......"Christianity's" message is more than benign...there is a demand of charity and self-sacrifice which is expected of everyone.....it is best done parochially(take care of your own who are less fortunate) but is expected of all for all......it IS NOT socialism or communism which demand you check all religion to the left of atheism at the door and serve the fallible, man-made political institutions and laws of the hour......I understand it has been the agenda of "many" (a few?) in this former country since they were turned loose from the formerly beautiful and wealthy russia, especially since the turn of this century, they have worked assiduously to quiet this message and replace wagner with gangsta rap and call it progress.........anyone with half a vision knows it to be a major crime whose sentence is coming up before the parole board.

grimer11
 
love your brother as you love yourself.....this doesnt mean lowering the bar for everyone until everyone is mired in the mud and then says "now what".

grimer11
 
Quote from grimer11:

love your brother as you love yourself.....this doesnt mean lowering the bar for everyone until everyone is mired in the mud and then says "now what".

grimer11
More...

You are so full of shit, you hate-mongering little creep. Think the evil Jews at Schonfeld and Spectrum might be interested to learn of the vile garbage you've been spewing from their offices? Something to think about, isn't it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top