|
|
Post by pim on Nov 16, 2012 9:34:58 GMT 10
That is the end of the matter.How I wish ... 
|
|
|
|
Post by jody on Nov 16, 2012 15:19:14 GMT 10
Buzz you may know what you're talking about for you......others however don't agree with this and are getting tired of it being pushed at them from ever angle. It is probably best off to back off somewhat if you want people to continue to discuss certain aspects of religion with you.
|
|
|
|
Post by jody on Nov 16, 2012 16:01:49 GMT 10
Buzz, just as a christian, you'll gain more without the preaching.
|
|
|
|
Post by jody on Nov 16, 2012 16:13:34 GMT 10
ok
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Nov 18, 2012 12:04:30 GMT 10
Jesus is Lord, end of story!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2012 10:46:38 GMT 10
Jesus is Lord, end of story! Jesus is Dead, end of story! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2012 11:53:15 GMT 10
Jesus is Lord, end of story!  |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Nov 21, 2012 19:42:27 GMT 10
Buzz,
You are recycling old arguments I had answered over a year ago.
I have better things to do with my time.
|
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Nov 21, 2012 22:25:24 GMT 10
And this time last year you said I was Buzz. ;D
But hey, that's just another one you got wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by fat on Nov 22, 2012 6:42:59 GMT 10
"That is the end of the matter."
Betcha it ain't!
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Nov 22, 2012 10:40:53 GMT 10
I will credit Boyce may know more about Zoroastrianism than most, but that doesn't make her a qualified Bible scholar, or historian.
You are trying to use her authority OUTSIDE of her field of study. I'm afraid if you are going to make an objective attempt at connecting Zoroastrianism and Judaism, you'll be forced to seek out authorities on other Old Testament Documents.
You can't just pick and choose your favourate scholar, only because he/she suits your agenda. That means, if you really want us to take you seriously, you will need to look at the work of theistic scholars, as well. Otherwise your work is wrought with bias and prejudice at it's onset.
|
|
|
|
Post by fat on Nov 22, 2012 23:19:53 GMT 10
I win  |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Nov 24, 2012 6:57:49 GMT 10
You haven't read a single thing I just wrote.
What is my incentive for trying to reason with you, when you are just going to go about in circles arguing argumentum ad verecundiam.
The question you ought to be asking yourself, is if Boyce's findings were so pervasive, then why do they remain in the scientific fringe? Why aren't they mainstream? Why do they only exist in your delusional rants and nowhere else?
You know, there are people who still claim the lunar landing never happened too.
Besides, your book misses it's mark. If you are attempting to disprove the Bible by pointing out the similarities between it and Zoroastrianism. Witness accounts that coincide often lend to the text's validity. Rarely has multiple witness accounts ever detracted from the truth.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Nov 24, 2012 7:35:55 GMT 10
I will admit you are likely far better at writing fiction than I.
Your mind isn't hindered by such things as realism and facts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Nov 24, 2012 7:41:00 GMT 10
Well damn it. I know what I am talking about - I have read Boyce who spent a lifetime studying Zoroastrianism and when I see imbeciles like Veritas belittling her scholarship because it conflicts with their delusions it makes my blood boil. Once they put out multimpe books refuting Boyce and have an equal level of scholarship - which is never going to happen - these clowns can't even read a f***ing book let alone write one - then the review by peers - then these delusionaries can be talken seriously - and its not going to happen. Not ever. Veritas demolished my argument - oh please - pffffft what an insult to Boyce and her lifetime of achievement for Veritas to demolish her agrument - f*** me what a bunch of nincompoops. I didn't realize that Boyce was here to answer for herself. I thought I was talking to you, a fraud and armchair student of her studies; purporting to be an expert on the field. Quite overstated in my opinion. If you wish to use Boyce as a reference, please don't soil her name by hiding behind her credentials. If your findings are true, they will stand on their own merit. |
|
|
|
Post by fat on Nov 24, 2012 8:15:08 GMT 10
Great discussion technique there Buzz.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Nov 24, 2012 12:12:17 GMT 10
Great discussion technique there Buzz. It's Buzz's way. Dismissal without discussion. If you don't agree with him, then YOU are the crazy one. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Nov 24, 2012 12:13:27 GMT 10
...Is Mary Boyce here now, to speak on her own behalf, Buzz? Yes or no.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Nov 24, 2012 13:14:37 GMT 10
Right.
So then I am not arguing against her, I am arguing against you.
|
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Nov 24, 2012 13:19:24 GMT 10
I will admit you are likely far better at writing fiction than I. Your mind isn't hindered by such things as realism and facts. Says he who believes that there is super-natural creature watching us! Just brilliant! ;D |
|
