- Joined
- Mar 30, 2016
- Messages
- 34,697
- Reaction score
- 13,299
- Location
- Massachusetts
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Another ad-hominem, here's what I assume you're referring to David:
Note that "miracle" is in quotation marks David, note too that "turning vats of water into wine" is prefixed with "e.g.", describing anything in that as dishonesty is an ad-hominem attack, nothing more.
The question is asking what you would do, had you lived some two thousand years ago, were you to witness something inexplicable, shocking, remarkable whatever it may be, for example someone turning water into wine.
The post then goes on to show that in the case of the gospels, these documents do fit the pattern of what we'd expect if they did originate from an event or observation like that, you've said nothing of substance that counters that view.
I never said anything was "written about at the time they happened", this is a strawman argument David.
I'd hoped for a stimulating discussion about this but instead I get repeatedly insulted and attacked.
But this is no surprise I suppose, this is what atheism ultimately amounts to, where it always leads to, false accusations, personal attacks, assaults on one's character, vitriol; this is in fact what atheism is, this is what it looks like in the cold light of day.
In almost every discussion I've had with atheists in this and other forums, 99.9% of the time this is how it goes, this is how the atheists conduct themselves.
The real problem is how you conduct yourself.
You didn't hope for discussion, you hoped to ram a point down our throats. A point which is based on a whole lot of "ifs". Just because a thing is written down does not mean it is about something that really happened, even if it is the only means to record it. So you argument fails. There are many reason s to write things down. You make assumptions and try to derive something factual from them. It can't be done.