Rampage explains how outer space is a hoax

[Deleted member 577981]

Most, if not all, unbiased scholars know for a fact that the original apostles did not write the Gospels. Not a single author ever met Jesus and likely never met anyone who met Jesus.
Non of the original apostles would have had the literary ability to write Greek.

this is a false belief widely accepted by some people. in fact majority scholarship believes that the new testament is accurate to what the early church believed and accurately reflects the early churches thoughts. its a total exaggeration to pretend an alternative view is a necessary one. in fact most atheists who debate even admit to this.

if you are nitpicking about who put pen to paper and when rather than the authors possibly dictating the gospels that's old news and nobody cares about that. but even going further and stating that the disciples did not write the gospels still would not matter...it would just mean they used the common approach of attributing a writing to the teacher/master rather than the disciple/student. some Christians hold this belief and I was taught about this perspective in my Catholic formation even.... its nothing new or impugning and makes no difference to the authenticity of the works. there's no gotcha there.

edit I've got study bibles that bring all of this up even.....

 

[THEfightsAREfixed]

rampage is a scholar and a gentleman it seems

 

[Fedora Millionankles]

this is a false belief widely accepted by some people. in fact majority scholarship believes that the new testament is accurate to what the early church believed and accurately reflects the early churches thoughts. its a total exaggeration to pretend an alternative view is a necessary one. in fact most atheists who debate even admit to this.

if you are nitpicking about who put pen to paper and when rather than the authors possibly dictating the gospels that's old news and nobody cares about that. but even going further and stating that the disciples did not write the gospels still would not matter...it would just mean they used the common approach of attributing a writing to the teacher/master rather than the disciple/student. some Christians hold this belief and I was taught about this perspective in my Catholic formation even.... its nothing new or impugning and makes no difference to the authenticity of the works. there's no gotcha there.

edit I've got study bibles that bring all of this up even.....

I’ve studied extensively in this subject and you are wrong.
“Most scholars agree that they are the work of unknown Christians and were composed c. 68-110 AD. The majority of New Testament scholars also agree that the Gospels do not contain eyewitness accounts; but that they present the theologies of their communities rather than the testimony of eyewitnesses.”
Luke was likely a traveling physician with Paul and again, Never met Jesus or anyone who knew him.
The earliest books that dominate the New Testament, Paul’s epistles, were written by a man that never met Jesus.
The Dead Sea Scrolls, actually written in Aramaic, contradict the teachings of the Gospel writers.
“Gospel” itself means Good news of Military Victory in Greek and is exceedingly pro Roman.
All of the Gospels contradict each another to a laughable degree.

 

[Fedora Millionankles]

you understand all of NASA's "photos" are artist renditions, right?

You made the claim, the burden of proof is on you prove your claim.
They have been forthcoming about their photos and if you could catch them lying about it, it’d make world news and you’d be famous.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

I’ve studied extensively in this subject and you are wrong.
“Most scholars agree that they are the work of unknown Christians and were composed c. 68-110 AD. The majority of New Testament scholars also agree that the Gospels do not contain eyewitness accounts; but that they present the theologies of their communities rather than the testimony of eyewitnesses.”
Luke was likely a traveling physician with Paul and again, Never met Jesus or anyone who knew him.
The earliest books that dominate the New Testament, Paul’s epistles, were written by a man that never met Jesus.
The Dead Sea Scrolls, actually written in Aramaic, contradict the teachings of the Gospel writers.
“Gospel” itself means Good news of Military Victory in Greek and is exceedingly pro Roman.
All of the Gospels contradict each another to a laughable degree.

Like I said man even if I grant you that and I don't... but if I do because it is a possibility so what? what do you think that means?

@Fedora Millionankles Don't miss this edit. I'm just wondering what you're getting at because it's a commonly taught perspective that if a gospel is attributed to luke it's because it was his disciples or his disciples disciples same with Matthew or Luke and so on and so forth....

 

[Fedora Millionankles]

Tbh, I can't say whether the earth is flat or a sphere. I'm just a guy that asks questions. This debate apparently hasn't been put to bed for whatever reason, so I'm just having some fun with it.

You’re just a moron who can’t do basic experimentation or high school level math who lives in a false sense of reality where you believe you are part of a special group of people that hold the truth while the rest of the world are Satanic deceivers and their puppets.
You’re a case study in flat out idiocy.

 

[Deleted member 592570]

Why the fuck is this still here?

 

[Deleted member 577981]

@Fedora Millionankles

the gospels are not signed docs...

this is a matter of scholarly controversy but nothing of substance hangs on it... and its not a lock as you pretend but also nobody cares man. remember in my first post I conceded john could be the source without being the author.... but its not a concession.. its common knowledge.

what we want to know is what is the date of the doc and was the author in a position to know the facts? thinking can go like this-- whoever wrote Luke for instance was probably a companion of Paul who traveled to Jerusalem where he was able to interview witnesses. but in every area where acts of the apostles for instance overlaps with known history it is accurate. nobody thinks the author of acts was a fraud.

but we do think there are older sources, written and verbal that some of the gospels were taken from. but scholars that hold this notion do not think that Christianity was lost or something... they think what Jesus taught and stood for more or less is what is in the gospels. the historicity of the crucifixion, his burial by Joseph of Arimathea the discovery of the empty tomb by a group of women etc are all thought to be accurate history. also the original disciples are genuinely thought by majority scholarship to have really believed what they wrote and died for it...even that Jesus rose from the dead despite every predisposition to the contrary.

none of these facts depend on traditional authorship so I am often surprised that people act like its some kind of gotcha.


much more interesting than this rabbit hole is does Christianity work? can it deliver what it says it can? can it reproduce sainthood from generation to generation reliably? are its maps accurate to what happens to human consciousness as a person grows and develops spiritually? are its teachings reliable to navigate specific stages of growth successfully?

the answer to these way more important questions is a resounding YES!!!! its not an easy task as any reliable tradition will tell you and it cannot be done by plebs who dont have it for real.

contrast that with any religion started by some pleb that cannot deliver on this very difficult line of results and the truth of Christianity becomes apparent in its ability to deliver enlightenment of a very specific kind diametrically at odds with say... eastern mysticism... something brand new even...

edit @Fedora Millionankles

this is hard as I'm quite busy at the moment so forgive any misspellings. I often tell people that it would not matter if the whole thing were a myth... nearly nothing would change for me because the path works to bring a person into profound intimacy with god and whoever crafted it (if it turned out to be crafted) were masters of the spiritual life.

 

[Blayt7hh]

Thinking people are being honest about the division between the scientifically-minded and those who are trusting their gut reactions more. Obviously we want everybody to be scientifically minded but something has gone wrong.

One of the things that has gone wrong is a polarization on both sides where contempt prior to investigation rules each side's perception of the other. Contempt prior to investigation on the part of the scientifically-minded is seen rightly as hypocrisy and hubris by those who are trusting their gut reactions. When that hubris also includes slander, dishonesty, misrepresentation and lying, it creates a very powerful divide among the two groups.

Mocking and denigration and casting insults furthers that divide and creates a barrier where neither side can see the good or truth in the other side's positions... or even wants to.

These threads serve as a perfect microcosm of that macrocosm and play out the dynamics perfectly. Both sides are causing deep harm and division. Both sides are in the wrong and both sides have a part to play in the solution. It just depends what's motivating us whether or not we want the solution and whether or not we want it to take the kinds of actions that lead to solution rather than division.

The only motive I can find for mocking from either position is emotionalism and pettiness and immaturity. There seems to be no reasoned purpose behind it.

I am part of a large meditation community with theological connections to groups all over the country and I can tell you that the world's philosophers are thinking about this issue and so are we. and it is so obviously an important one. We're slowly dividing as a country and this is one of the factors that is causing it. And its an easy one to fix because it's root cause is just pettiness and emotionalism and bullying. Some of the most base motivations we have as human beings.

Those of us on a meditation path can see no reason whatsoever why we wouldn't already be ceasing this ridiculousness, but it seems a whole sect of the country on both sides is hell bent on being total assholes and further dividing everyone from one another and causing harm rather than good in the world.

This conversation is being had by lots of thinking people as I have said and it's part of a larger discussion around the damage social media is doing where people seem to think that being an a****** all day on social media doesn't make one an a****** in real life naively forgetting that they're actually being that person a great deal of the time and forming their character that way and poisoning the world that way.

The root cause of all of this is not reason but emotionalism and emotional immaturity.

What sides are you even talking about? Like specifically to this thread.

You’ve accused me of hubris multiple times but only one of us has implied they’re smarter than everyone else and told the other poster that “greater minds than theirs are thinking about it”. And only one of us feels like we are shouldering the burden of healing national wounds.

There’s a lot of harm being caused by social media but I’d wager people being an asshole isn’t the biggest problem. Honestly, I’m beginning to think you might have been personally offended because I mocked something you believed in even though you’ve denied it. Before you get more bent out of shape about people being mean online, I want you to remember that you’re on an mma forum and specifically, the subforum of that’s designated a weapons free flame zone. I also want you to remember that your buddy you felt like chiming in to defend is flaming other people as well. In fact I’m pretty sure he picked the fight in this thread that got us into talking about stupid triangle ships and Bigfoot.

I asked you something you never answered that I really would like to know. When do you stop giving credence to some of these theories? Does it really not matter to you that they have practically no verifiable supporting evidence and are riddled with holes? You still think they deserve to be respected and given time because some people believe them?

 

[Deleted member 577981]

What sides are you even talking about? Like specifically to this thread.

You’ve accused me of hubris multiple times but only one of us has implied they’re smarter than everyone else and told the other poster that “greater minds than theirs are thinking about it”. And only one of us feels like we are shouldering the burden of healing national wounds.

There’s a lot of harm being caused by social media but I’d wager people being an asshole isn’t the biggest problem. Honestly, I’m beginning to think you might have been personally offended because I mocked something you believed in even though you’ve denied it. Before you get more bent out of shape about people being mean online, I want you to remember that you’re on an mma forum and specifically, the subforum of that’s designated a weapons free flame zone. I also want you to remember that your buddy you felt like chiming in to defend is flaming other people as well. In fact I’m pretty sure he picked the fight in this thread that got us into talking about stupid triangle ships and Bigfoot.

I asked you something you never answered that I really would like to know. When do you stop giving credence to some of these theories? Does it really not matter to you that they have practically no verifiable supporting evidence and are riddled with holes? You still think they deserve to be respected and given time because some people believe them?

you need to respond to what I actually write not what you THINK i say after skimming. so far you are one of the worst posters for this I've ever seen man.... its like you are taking to the wrong person most the time... I never implied I am one of those greater minds!! ffs dude. just read more slowly ok? I DONT think I'm very smart actually.... I really don't. I think slowly and have to take more time than most to process info. its just not something that I have ever been attached too or gained self esteem off of. I'm more the tough guy type that took false pride in being able to kick someones ass. I'm not the brain guy. I WISH I had identified with intelligence instead... I would have had a better life!!

as far as when to stop giving credence I think the answer is going to vary from person to person on that. I think it does require actually taking in information that is available like with bigfoot and Jeff meldrum, and the long list of contemporary accounts and the long list of indigenous accounts too. BUT I have never argued for the necessity of my position. I'm not even attached to my position and argue against it often. I only argue that it is a reasoned one and it is reasonable and that mocking is NOT in order.

you can draw the line anywhere you want on all of these things imo. but if we are arguing for reason I would guess that saying there is no evidence for bigfoot without reading the evidence is not a reasoned stance.

I vaguely remember accusing you of some hubris but I think that was when you pretended to be certain about something you cant have certainty about and that would be hubris. but if that is not the case post where I did and you will receive a genuine and sincere apology. I mean that.

to your other point about me not defending against the ct people.. I guess I don't like punching down. I'm not that type. I prefer love and kindness and gentle prodding in better directions than attacking them. but as I've already said... I expect those who claim reason as their guide to be driven by reason and not emotion and I expect them to be rigorous in their offerings and that is sadly and tragically often not the case when it comes to fringe topics as I have demonstrated with the Jeff Meldrum stuff.

the division is real though and social media is a big part of it and the toxicity is really who you become when you spend time online being toxic and it does hurt people and I think there has to be something missing in any human being that cannot see it. its being spoken about by many of today's intellectuals....

also it would be nicer if you engaged all of my thought rather than just shotgunning little things all the time. that's not a discussion and you are not here to interrogate me dude.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

It also really depends on the theory man. If it's flat earth, we should stop giving it creedence hundreds of years ago if it's Bigfoot not yet... certainly not yet with UFOs or the paranormal or god.

Each of these topics must be taken case by case. And pretending certainty on them is anti-scientific even though some of the leading atheist scientists display it constantly.

@Blayt7hh

 

[Poon Goon]

Why the fuck is this still here?

Stop whining you wannabe mod nerd

 

[pinger]

This thread is the holy grail of stupud. CT conspiracy tards, flat earthers, and Trump supporters

 

[BearGrounds]

This thread is the holy grail of stupud. CT conspiracy tards, flat earthers, and Trump supporters

You forgot science frauds. They're everywhere.

Kind of people that will ignore evidence and demand you provide proof of something (or you're stupid for believing it), while believing things with no proof whatsoever, like Hitler's death (where proof doesn't matter, because Daddy government told them to believe it).

It's hilarious, and I'd say more pathetic than any CTer. At least CTers have autonomous thought, even if it takes them into crazy land here and there.

 

[Copper Burner]

There’s a scientifically illiterate asswipe.

Still crying about your defeat.

 

[Copper Burner]

You’re just a moron who can’t do basic experimentation or high school level math who lives in a false sense of reality where you believe you are part of a special group of people that hold the truth while the rest of the world are Satanic deceivers and their puppets.
You’re a case study in flat out idiocy.

You couldn't even answer how far the distance is before a ship falls beneath the curve and out of sight. That should be simple stuff for the globe side.

Lol, you try to sound smart by talking about abstract theories that cannot be proven, but fail to answer a basic question. Yeah, noone believes you.

 

[Andy Capp]

You couldn't even answer how far the distance is before a ship falls beneath the curve and out of sight. That should be simple stuff for the globe side.

Lol, you try to sound smart by talking about abstract theories that cannot be proven, but fail to answer a basic question. Yeah, noone believes you.

And you haven't said what is fake about my photos or where the Sun goes during a lunar eclipse. See below.

Then how do you explain the appearance of the Moon in the photographs I posted earlier ITT? During a lunar eclipse, where does the Sun go?
Edit:
Here's a timelapse sequence.

Full disclosure, I didn't take these particular photos but the ones I have posted ITT look just like several of them and I have more. You can see for yourself.

Further to this, counting from top left to bottom right 1-14 above, compare with these ones I took,
See #8,

#11,

#14, or close to,

Note the difference in the angle of incidence of the Sun's light compared with the reference images above because I'm further north here. That should help to establish that I took them.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

You couldn't even answer how far the distance is before a ship falls beneath the curve and out of sight. That should be simple stuff for the globe side.

Lol, you try to sound smart by talking about abstract theories that cannot be proven, but fail to answer a basic question. Yeah, noone believes you.

Doesn't that depend on the height of the ship though? And why would needing to know that exact number have anything to do with the effect of sinking below the horizon because of the round earth? He could have just googled it.

 

[Fedora Millionankles]

Like I said man even if I grant you that and I don't... but if I do because it is a possibility so what? what do you think that means?

It means that basing your belief system and “eternal life” on an ancient book that has been used to justify and condone countless atrocities is foolish at best.
It means that a book that condones slaughter, rape, and slavery has no right to push its “morality” onto people and be used to negate Science when it contradicts it.

You couldn't even answer how far the distance is before a ship falls beneath the curve and out of sight. That should be simple stuff for the globe side.

Lol, you try to sound smart by talking about abstract theories that cannot be proven, but fail to answer a basic question. Yeah, noone believes you.

Ive explained numerous times why your question was idiotic and needs more info to solve. Not my fault if you can’t comprehend that.
Still waiting for you to provide your “formula that scientists came up with to calculate it,” though I know why you never gave it. I already debunked it and your idiotic argument.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

It means that basing your belief system and “eternal life” on an ancient book that has been used to justify and condone countless atrocities is foolish at best.
It means that a book that condones slaughter, rape, and slavery has no right to push its “morality” onto people and be used to negate Science when it contradicts it.

Ive explained numerous times why your question was idiotic and needs more info to solve. Not my fault if you can’t comprehend that.
Still waiting for you to provide your “formula that scientists came up with to calculate it,” though I know why you never gave it. I already debunked it and your idiotic argument.

That's as spurious as me saying believing in science is bad because it's been used to kill millions of people.... It's just terrible reasoning man. This kind of omission of facts allows for one to paint a negative picture of two things that also produce profound good in the world.



But I agree with some of your post in that I do not think it is Christianity's job to push morality on non-Christians. I think this is a profound mistake and I don't see the early church making it. Rather they were content with not having power and working out their own salvation surrounded by a pagan society with very different sets of moralities. What christians should be doing is focusing on their own spirituality their own spiritual growth and holding themselves to the standards that many Christians seem to point outward to the world instead. I agree with you wholeheartedly on this one because I think it's a distraction that keeps people from attaining their own spiritual growth.


But also it just.pisses people off!!


I have no trouble defending Christianity and have put in a fair bit of effort to do so but this is off topic so I invite you to tag me elsewhere if you want to get into the weeds with it.

But goodwill towards you in either case man!!