CreateDebate


The Public Waterfall RSS

Every argument gets a chance to be on top!
The Public Waterfall shows you all arguments, looking across every debate.

As always, you are the fool wasting my time. I have differentiated establishment rino's from Conservative repubicans a thousand times, but as always you ignore it. Bye

LOL, what it proves is you are a waste of time, spewing your lies and rhetoric.

You prove my point. People on the Left will speak VOLUMES on this issue of global cooling, global warming, climate change..... BUT NEVER do they speak to this hideous debt that willl bankrpt this nation. DENIAL!!!!!!!!

Do you want to address this argument or simply spew your climate rhetoric.

If it is the latter then we are through here.

1 point

I don't think you even watched the video as you are ignoring the fact that your "skeptic objections" were answered in the video, and you do not address any of those points but just paste your plagiarized junk which you have made no effort to research.

1 point

Tacitus is considered one of the greatest historians of Rome and could not have earned any respect if He was not accurately stating the events he referred to regarding Christ under Pontius Pilate. He was not a Christian, and called the story of Jesus' resurrection "pernicious superstition, suppressed for a time, which broke out again....". spreading form Judea to Rome. Tacitus refers to heresy vs confirmed accounts around 70 times in his history, and if he had not gotten his information from Roman Records, he would have inserted his usual disclaimer that the account was unverified. Tacitus did not believe everything Pliny the Younger said, and made that clear in Annuls 55. What you call "the inception of the Christian religion" began after the disciples saw Jesus alive after finding His tomb empty, and because they knew He was alive, no amount of torture and executions could suppress the "movement". The most extensive record of this "suppression" which is more commonly known as feeding the Christians to the lions for entertainment, or using them as human torches, spurred by the Jewish religious leaders who feared losing control of Judaism, was endorsed and supported by Roman procurators of Judea beginning with Pontius Pilate when the Jews coerced by threatening to report that Jesus had been allowed to call Himself a King which would be painted as a challenge to the Roman Emperor.

Pliny the Elder was not a historian. You act like he was a historian and Pliny the Younger followed in his footsteps. You are misleading because you are misled, and I doubt that you have done any research into any of this yourself because you are not interested in facts but prefer to use "gotcha" tactics which ignore facts. Pliny the Elder wrote nothing of Christ and Christianity because he was not a historian. Did Pliny the younger EVER reference his father in any of his historical accounts? You're lazy Bob, and I doubt you will do the research so why should I answer for you? You just hate God and run with whatever you can find to help support your belief that you are better, stronger, smarter than God and have the right to exist without God outside of Hell.

You state that Pliny the Elder wrote during the time of Christ as if Pliny the Elder was a historian, which he was not. I suggest you do a little research into Pliny the Elder so you know who you are talking about when you use him in support of your myth argument.

It's a waste of time arguing with somebody like you. You won't research the facts yourself, won't listen to reason. This whole "myth" thing you are teaching has never been an issue through all of history until recently. Even the historical text books at the totally atheistic and evolutionary secular college I attended a few years ago, as well as some of my friends, never implied Jesus was not the same historical Jesus of the Bible. The only real dispute they have is the same as it has always been, denying His claims of being divine and denying He is risen from the dead.

I'm sure that if we look at your list of "historians" we will find much the same of how you imply Pliny the Elder was a historian. You are ignoring history, Bob. Your approach really is childish, as is the whole modern "myther" movement.

1 point

you buy into this modern "myth" movement, and you plainly stated there are no historical references to Jesus Christ outside the Bible and I have proven you are a fool for believing in this modern myth movement which somehow you believe people recently exposed the whole story of Jesus to be a myth when His story never stopped being told from the time He first appeared alive after He rose from the dead, and hundreds of years of torture could not suppress the story. You're a fool, Bob. Keep on fighting against God, keep on saying He is not there, keep on saying you are going out of existence in death, keep on saying you die for your own sins and Jesus did nothing for you when He died for you, keep on saying you totally reject Him as your Savior, and see who you face as your Judge.

Thank you for your input, but since you are ignoring the facts and reasoning presented in the videos, I'll be ignoring you and you said all you have to say in this debate. I should have banned you before you had a chance to pop in here, I know you will not allow reasonable discussion but will always push your distortions and insults like a typical atheist in the modern "myther" movement.

1 point

You are being ignorant, willfully, and maybe it will help if you watch the video again and try to listen, but I doubt you have that capacity because you think you know everything.

1 point

You and those who believe like you are the only people who exist that matter.

Not hopeful you will ever have the light go on

Fyi God does exist

And he is a God of love, he created us to choose him and be called his children

He is the Good Shepherd. His sheep hear His voice and another they simply will not follow.

There will be a day we each alone stand before Him. And that day we will hear 1 of 2 things.

31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

1 point

The argument you are disputing:

TrumpsHair(312) Disputed

2 points

Wait, when did I preach that?

1 point

The argument you are disputing:

TrumpsHair(312) Disputed

2 points

Wait, when did I preach that?

1 point

A nossa perspetiva como grupo está dividida, portanto iremos dividi-la em 2:

Maggie:

Acredito em Deus e por isso tenho de concordar que a vida não teria propósito se vivêssemos todos os dias sem olhar para uma vida eterna.

Bia:

Também acredito em Deus, pois sei que este garante a vida interna, e que a morte não é um fim definitivo, e desta forma acho que se não existisse Deus a vida não teria sentido.

Daniela:

A crença de que Deus é o sentido da vida não é para mim lógica pois eu não tenho numa crença absoluta de que ele exista.

Inês/Daniel

Não que Deus seja o sentido da vida, pois não acredito na sua existência.

1 point

Did I reply to this? I wont' be reading any of your stuff, I'm sure you understand, God loves you and I hope you get saved from Hell before it's too late and you can never again believe God is good or that He loves you because in Hell there will be nothing to indicate that God cares for you

1 point

Booo Hooo to you, you feel like a troll is luring you in. If I'm a troll, then you are an idiot for letting me lure you in, aren't you? Personally, I think calling people "troll" is only a sign of your the caller's own intellectual weakness and emotional insecurity. It's very childish, the kind of stuff you expect from a twelve year old brat. I'm sure you find me to be unpleasant once again because I'm being truthful. How do you like me now?

If you can't learn to show some respect, you will always find me to be unpleasant no matter how reasonable I am. It's the same things between you and God, you find Him to be impersonal and uncaring because of your own attitude against Him when he is nothing but good and good to you and to all in this world all of the time......yet they provoke Him to anger and He lets them have the ungodly reality they want in Hell.

Saintnow(1462) Clarified
1 point

You don't bother me by insulting me, you feel my material us unpleasant because you are in rebellion against God and really don't know what you are doing by using me as a scapegoat for your anger against God. It's the same for all of the idiots who attack me like you do......I really don't hold anything against you, your own words testify against you and I'm not the One you have to answer to.

You are consistently unpleasant toward me, so what do you expect to get from me? I'll just tell you that if you don't get saved, you will be lost forever in Hell and I tell you that because I know I am saved and I know you can be saved now and have eternal life now. I can't hold back from telling the truth just because you find me unpleasant.

HighFalutin(1283) Clarified
1 point

I'm referring to the US only. In the Mid East, you have very little freedom of speech, religion, lifestyle etc.

1 point

First I would like to mention that Nazism is a Christian based ideology. Hitler was a Catholic and had ties to the Catholic Church. He was exterminating the Jews who killed his savior.

I would argue that atheism does NOT cause people to be heinous and barbaric. The same can not be said of religion. The secular regimes that perpetrated so many evil deeds did so not due to a lack of religion but a quest for wealth and power. In history many more folks have suffered barbaric heinous treatment due to religion. It continues today with the Islamic faith. The cause of this treatment is not a quest for wealth or power it is religion.

When people oppress gays it is due to religion. Religious people put down those of us who don't believe in Gods as if they have some moral authority over us. Not all religious people are this way but many are which causes tension between the groups. This is what Hitchens is talking about.

1 point

Hi Saintnow, I would like to mention the obvious for those of us who desire actual truth over faith that things are true. Your sources fail to mention pertinent information which is important to the discussion.

Cornelius Tacitus AD 56 – after 117AD He could not have been witness to the events he describes. More troublesome is the FACT that he wrote the Histories and the Annals. In 112 AD or 113 AD.

Factually speaking this means that his writing was influenced by the current events of that time "The Christian" movement. The inception of the Christian religion was around 65 to 70 AD this would have given enough exposure over 40 years to have influence yet not be of historical value.

To put this in it's proper perspective Tacitus was friends with Pliny the Younger, His dad Pliny the Elder wrote during the supposed life of Christ. What mention of the person or event of Jesus did he write? Rhetorical Nothing, is the correct answerbecause the events didn't happen and the person didn't exist.

Lucian was 2nd century nothing of historical value from 0 to 33AD.

Flavious Josephus The info in the video doesn't cover the whole story. The reason that the passages are so controversial is because from the 1400's they were known to be forgeries.

http://www.truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm

A partial list of historians living at the time of these supposes events who are silent about the man or the events There are 120 total

Philo-Judaeus

Seneca

Pliny the Elder

Suetonius

Juvenal

Martial

Persius

Plutarch

Justus of Tiberius

Apollonius

Quintilian

Lucanus

Epictetus

Silius Italicus

Statius

Ptolemy

Hermogones

Valerius Maximus

Arrian

Petronius

Dion Pruseus

Paterculus

Appian

Theon of Smyrna

Phlegon

Pompon Mela

Quintius Curtius

Lucian

Pausanias

Valerius Flaccus

Florus Lucius

Favorinus

Phaedrus

Damis

Aulus Gellius

Columella

Dio Chrysostom

Lysias

Appion of Alexandria

1 point

Haha you are that guy hahhaha what was his name? Slapshot? You have a very obvious tell my friend ;)

You took the bait, hook line and sinker and got yourself well and truly wound up. Ahhh, I love it when a plan comes together, roars of laughter from the back stalls.

1 point

Finally you are outing yourself as a troll. You keep this character going for a long time.

religion is a personal choice, and should play no part in any laws or government issues.

Government should be from a neutral stance for the benefit of all not look after the interest of the few.

Better paying for abortions than keeping the brats on welfare for the rest of, what would be, their useless lives. As a direct consequence of uncontrolled mass immigration and ''welfareism'' the United States is sinking fast. If the population of unwanted babies being born into poverty can be reduced then this is one expense the hard pressed taxpayer won't have to meet.

Atrag(3669) Clarified
1 point

(reponse to other message) nooe i think is rather just keep pointing out what an unpleasant tit face you are :)

1 point

Damn it. You got me there.


1 of 39 Pages: Next >>

Results Per Page: [12] [24] [48] [96]