• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Myth: man invented electricity

No you haven't you've done as is your custom, that is claim to have shown evidence when in fact you have not.

You said "by pointing out most of it is factually incorrect."

I pointed out that Joseph's Well is referred to by the book of John and that the well exists, thus confirming that on that point the book is in agreement with what we know, you have not pointed out a single "factual error".
Is the well an idea of Christian faith?
 
The majority of your posts are factually incorrect.
What idea or claim is the bible can be proven factually correct by someone who isn't a member of any of the 3 Abrahamic religions without the use of faith or belief?

The central idea of Jesus as the son of God is still very much unsupported factually.
 
What idea or claim is the bible can be proven factually correct by someone who isn't a member of any of the 3 Abrahamic religions without the use of faith or belief?

The central idea of Jesus as the son of God is still very much unsupported factually.

If it were supported factually, how might that support look to us?
 
Are you asking me a question? if so what exactly are you asking me?
I'm asking you because you made the claim that the bible mentions the well and the well supposedly exists. Is that well's existence a central idea to the Christian faith?

If it were supported factually, how might that support look to us?
If it were correct then the claim could be corroborated by multiple 3rd party courses and factually proven to be true.
 
Did anyone ever claim to have "invented" electricity? Basic misunderstanding/misrepresentation of science noted. Men invented ways of generating transporting and using it, but nobody invented it.
 
I'm asking you because you made the claim that the bible mentions the well and the well supposedly exists. Is that well's existence a central idea to the Christian faith?

Depends who you ask, Christ does draw the analogy between drinking liquid water from a well and drinking spiritual water from a him, so it has a symbolic significance.

If it were correct then the claim could be corroborated by multiple 3rd party courses and factually proven to be true.

Yes but tell me what would such proof look like to us? what would you regard as "factual" proof for a claim that purportedly happened 2,000 years ago?

Other than creating a written record of it, what could the people, witnesses at the time, do to make sure people thousands of years later knew it was true?

What would you have done, if you'd seen Christ rise from the dead or turn water into wine? what steps could you take to ensure people knew this happened even 2,000 years in the future from you?
 
Coincidence in evolution? A logical development of a fish? Eels are smarted than humans?
Still waiting for an answer to this:
Did you 'invent' your ability to ejaculate? To digest food? :rolleyes:
Looking for an answer, not another question. Answer mine and then I'll answer yours.
 
If it were supported factually, how might that support look to us?
If it were correct then the claim could be corroborated by multiple 3rd party courses and factually proven to be true.
Depends who you ask, Christ does draw the analogy between drinking liquid water from a well and drinking spiritual water from a him, so it has a symbolic significance.



Yes but tell me what would such proof look like to us? what would you regard as "factual" proof for a claim that purportedly happened 2,000 years ago?

Other than creating a written record of it, what could the people, witnesses at the time, do to make sure people thousands of years later knew it was true?

What would you have done, if you'd seen Christ rise from the dead or turn water into wine? what steps could you take to ensure people knew this happened even 2,000 years in the future from you?
There is no proof that Jesus as the son of god ever existed. We have written records far older from Egypt, China, and India, plus Mesopotamia and yet there is only 2nd hand mentions of Jesus from people who got those claims from believers. The Romans were excellent record keepers and if someone actually rose from the dead there would be first-hand accounts recorded. There is nothing outside the bible to say that he rose from the dead or performed any miracles. The idea of a dying and rising savior born of a virgin birth is a very old religious idea.
 
Depends who you ask, Christ does draw the analogy between drinking liquid water from a well and drinking spiritual water from a him, so it has a symbolic significance.



Yes but tell me what would such proof look like to us? what would you regard as "factual" proof for a claim that purportedly happened 2,000 years ago?

Other than creating a written record of it, what could the people, witnesses at the time, do to make sure people thousands of years later knew it was true?

What would you have done, if you'd seen Christ rise from the dead or turn water into wine? what steps could you take to ensure people knew this happened even 2,000 years in the future from you?


There. Is no indication that anyone actually saw Jesus change water into wine or “rise from the dead.” These are clearly myths.
 
Has anyone seen Sherlock Holmes and Angel post at exactly the same time?
 
If it were correct then the claim could be corroborated by multiple 3rd party courses and factually proven to be true.

There is no proof that Jesus as the son of god ever existed. We have written records far older from Egypt, China, and India, plus Mesopotamia and yet there is only 2nd hand mentions of Jesus from people who got those claims from believers. The Romans were excellent record keepers and if someone actually rose from the dead there would be first-hand accounts recorded.


There is nothing outside the bible to say that he rose from the dead or performed any miracles. The idea of a dying and rising savior born of a virgin birth is a very old religious idea.

I asked but you did not answer me - what would you have done if you had witnessed Christ turning water into wine and other miracles? what would you have done to ensure people thousands of years later were made aware of these events?
 
Depends who you ask, Christ does draw the analogy between drinking liquid water from a well and drinking spiritual water from a him, so it has a symbolic significance.



Yes but tell me what would such proof look like to us? what would you regard as "factual" proof for a claim that purportedly happened 2,000 years ago?

Other than creating a written record of it, what could the people, witnesses at the time, do to make sure people thousands of years later knew it was true?

What would you have done, if you'd seen Christ rise from the dead or turn water into wine? what steps could you take to ensure people knew this happened even 2,000 years in the future from you?

History is not determined by simply evidence provided by the written word from one source, especially a source with an apparent purpose to promote a religious belief. Where are the personal writings of jesus? Where are personal writings of anyone from that time.

In addition, where are the artefacts from that time which support the bible story?

Are all bible stories literally true? How do you tell the difference? Are all the stories in all the religious texts ever written literally true? How can you tell?

Any stories which claim remarkable things should be treated with skepticism. Why? Because there has never been any documented evidence of such things occurring today.
 
History is not determined by simply evidence provided by the written word from one source, especially a source with an apparent purpose to promote a religious belief. Where are the personal writings of jesus? Where are personal writings of anyone from that time.

In addition, where are the artefacts from that time which support the bible story?

Are all bible stories literally true? How do you tell the difference? Are all the stories in all the religious texts ever written literally true? How can you tell?

Any stories which claim remarkable things should be treated with skepticism. Why? Because there has never been any documented evidence of such things occurring today.

Perhaps you'd care to answer a question (for a change): what would you have done if you had witnessed Christ turning water into wine and other miracles? what would you have done to ensure people thousands of years later were made aware of these events?
 
Perhaps you'd care to answer a question (for a change): what would you have done if you had witnessed Christ turning water into wine and other miracles? what would you have done to ensure people thousands of years later were made aware of these events?

Sorry, but your game is silly. People write things for many reasons. In this case, they wrote something to promote a belief.
 

Coincidence in evolution? A logical development of a fish? Eels are smarted than humans?

Well, if that surprised you, just wait until you get a load of this.
lightening-2.jpg
 
Sorry, but your game is silly. People write things for many reasons. In this case, they wrote something to promote a belief.

Everything that shows you for what you truly are is silly isn't it David.

Too terrified to answer a very reasonable hypothetical question because you know you're defeated, your "logic" is vacuous.

Here's all I asked and you get upset at the prospect of answering, we both know why:

Perhaps you'd care to answer a question (for a change): what would you have done if you had witnessed Christ turning water into wine and other miracles? what would you have done to ensure people thousands of years later were made aware of these events?

Trapped you didn't I !

Phlegmatic my @$$
 
Last edited:
Everything that shows you for what you truly are is silly isn't it David.

Too terrified to answer a very reasonable hypothetical question because you know you're defeated, your "logic" is vacuous.

Here's all I asked and you get upset at the prospect of answering, we both know why:



Trapped you didn't I !

No, your hypothetical question is a thinly disguised rhetorical question which does nothing to support the conclusion you obviously think it does. We examine these writings for what they are. Writings used to promote a religious belief, not to report for posterity an amazing event that took place.
 
Back
Top Bottom