Jo's dishonest pretence of debate.

126 posts / 0 new
Last post
Talyyn's picture
@Jo

@Jo

I don't understand what all of this has to do with the purported facts contained in the Bible that I showed you. But a little evasion is good, no?

And for you, I am a French citizen, a good chunk of my ancestors where people living in the defunct colonial empire... So what?

Cognostic's picture
@Facts in the bible? You

@Facts in the bible? You must be referring to the cities the archaeologists found. The stories are all made up. Most of them did not happen. Which biblical story do you think is a fact? Choose one. How do you know it is a fact?

Talyyn's picture
@Cognostic

@Cognostic

You misunderstood, I said purported facts. Maybe it wasn't the good term. Of course , i don't believe it happened, much like the so-called Exodus out of Egypt.

Cognostic's picture
Talyyn: Purported or alleged

Talyyn: Purported or alleged to be true by Theists, I will give you that. *sigh* I may be a bit over reactive. When I see the words "facts" and "bible" in the same sentence the hair on the back of my neck prickles.

Talyyn's picture
Cognostic: No offense, I will

Cognostic: No offense, I will be more cautious in the future, about placing these two terms in the same sentence lol.

Cognostic's picture
@Talyyn: Get me all fired

@Talyyn: Get me all fired up, poo in my hand. All ready to fling...... and then I just stand there like a statue attracting pigeons and flies. Sometimes it sucks to be me.

David Killens's picture
@Jo

@Jo

"I will address them again with you if you can give me the reference to your claim of "instances of genocide, rape and murder contained in the Bible."

English Standard Version

Numbers 21:2–3

2 And Israel vowed a vow to the Lord and said, “If you will indeed give this people into my hand, then I will devote their cities to destruction.
3 And the Lord heeded the voice of Israel and gave over the Canaanites, and they devoted them and their cities to destruction. So the name of the place was called Hormah.

Here is an example where your god sanctioned mass murder.

Response please?

Jo's picture
@ David Killens

@ David Killens

Please see my above response to Tallyyn.
Please see the previous verse in Numbers 21:1.

I have addressed this type of question before at length.
If you did not see it I will try and find it to repost.

David Killens's picture
@Jo

@Jo

I will sadly refer you back to the OP post by Sheldon.

"You can pretend it's.me you have a problem with Jo, but do you really think we can't all see you're dishonestly evading questions you don't like."

You are on your own. I really wished you tried to reform yourself, but my efforts were in vain.

edited to correct typo

Jo's picture
@ David Killens

@ David Killens

When I address your claim of mass murder in the Bible.
I am in the near impossible position of trying to disprove your claim, to your satisfaction.
It really should be you evidencing your claim, and not me trying to disprove your claim.
But I agreed to answer and so here it is. Sorry it took me so long to respond.

This was a war and not "mass murder".
You have to look at all that is going on, and not just a sentence or two.

The escaping slaves were trying to return to their land.
As described in verse 1, the Canaanites had attacked them and taken prisoners.
So they defended themselves and fought back.
If country A is attacked, they defend themselves and wipe put country B, is that mass murder?
If so, than most wars and many battles are mass murder.

Why did they have to destroy them?
The Canaanites were exceptionally detestable.
Deut18:12 "Because of these detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you”.
Lev18:24-25 “Even the land was defiled; so I punished it for its sin, and the land vomited out its inhabitants”.
Deut 20:16-18 “Otherwise they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods..”.

The punishment was the same for all ethnicities including the Israelite's, when they became like those around them.

The larger story is one of survival and restoration.
About providing a safe place to live.
It is also about judgment of wickedness.
It was a temporary measure.
Like a life boat situation.

God's ultimate goal is not destruction but salvation.
For all people, for all time.
You can't make one incidence the whole story.
You have to look at the entire story from Gen to Rev.

David Killens's picture
@Jo

@Jo

Still playing your stupid game, I see.

You god decided to have the great flood, and it is estimated that the great flood would have killed over twenty million people. This was not war, this was YOUR GOD murdering innocent women and children just because.

"God's ultimate goal is not destruction but salvation.
For all people, for all time.
You can't make one incidence the whole story.
You have to look at the entire story from Gen to Rev."

What a crock of shit. If I lived a wonderful and compassionate life, never hurting as much as a bug, then went to a mall and gunned down twenty innocent people, do you believe that if your defense was offered MY lawyer would not be laughed out of court? And you really need to lift that veil of cognitive dissonance, you god repeatedly and constantly commits horrific acts. This is a behavior, not a rare occasion.

Your god is a bloodthirsty god. Even the death of jesus was a blood sacrifice.

edit: changed "your" to "MY"

Sheldon's picture
@Jo

@Jo

So you're saying that murder, even mass murder and ethnic cleansing, is objectively moral for a deity with limitless power and knowledge? How about the sex trafficking of women and girl prisoners, is that moral as well?

So much for your claim of objective morality. How about drowning every living thing in Noah's flood, was that moral? It certainly was mass murder, and just as certainly wasn't war.

I'm afraid your apologetics is as dishonest as it ever was Jo.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Jo

@ Jo

I have never "espoused genocide rape and murder."

You have defended your god's use of slavery, rapine, pillage and genocide in many threads on these pages. When asked the direct question you answered in the affirmative.

That is by any definition "espousing"

I am not in competition with you.
I only wanted a debate, and an attempt to convince the other with our arguments.
You seem to be interested in something else.

I've been sick for a couple of days but I do have all your relevant responses on file, so don't lie any more Jo.

Don't introduce a straw man Jo, it is just another dishonest ploy you attempt and they are as tiresome as they are old.

I have debated you over many threads and always answered you with facts, where you have answered with apologetics(lies) 'Biblical hermeneutics" (more lies), misquotes and evasions.

Is it because I didn't recant that I must be condemned?

No Jo, you are condemned for your lies, evasions and condonement of crimes against humanity. You claimed you came here to these forums to "live in truth".

Look in a mirror, Jo, even your reflection will be warped.

Talyyn's picture
You actually keep records of

You actually keep records of the conversation here??????

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
All the convos can be viewed

All the convos can be viewed from your profile. Right hand side.

That is why liars do not prosper here. The denials are served up back to them.......admin keep records so if they try to edit those are also recorded. That is why when we (the regulars) change a post you will see at the bottom ( edit for.....)

Talyyn's picture
Mmmmmmh. Okey. More

Mmmmmmh. Okey. More ammunition for me then. Thanks.

Jo's picture
@ Old man shouts

@ Old man shouts

I am sorry that you were sick.

Regrettably, what routinely happens is a devolving into "even my reflection is warped."

Nyarlathotep's picture
Don't forget:

Don't forget:

  • Claiming that life has only occurred once in the universe. A claim that if taken seriously might imply omnipotence on the part of the claimant.
  • Claiming that their opinion is objective. Another claim that seems to hint at the divinity of the claimant.
Sheldon's picture
@Nyarlathotep

@Nyarlathotep

Jo has also repeatedly claimed that all the evidence (he's presented none) and logic show his deity exists.

Yet not once has he (Jo) ever even acknowledged his relentless use of common logical fallacies. If he doesn't see how dishonest that is then I'd be very surprised.

He has repeatedly used argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacies, mainly in a futile attempt to reverse the burden of proof onto those who disbelieve the claim a deity exists.

He grossly misrepresented what atheists had claimed on here in my thread asking theists to list ten beliefs they held without any objective evidence, but that formed NO PART OF their religious beliefs. His reply to that contained 6 beliefs, most of which were clearly part of his religious beliefs, the others could be objectively evidenced, then after that sham pretence tried to hijack the thread for yet another of his dishonest attempts to assign a burden of proof to atheism.

And on and on and on he goes....he may be slightly more subtle than poster like Leper, but he's every it as relentlessly dishonest. Yet started to sulk when I started pointing this out, and the dishonestly tried to misrepresent my points as ad hominem.

Jo's picture
@ Nyarlathotep

@ Nyarlathotep

"Claiming that life has only occurred once in the universe. A claim that if taken seriously might imply omnipotence on the part of the claimant." Didn't I correct that?

How is "Claiming that their opinion is objective...seems to hint at the divinity of the claimant."?

Nyarlathotep's picture
Jo - How is "Claiming that

Jo - How is "Claiming that their opinion is objective...seems to hint at the divinity of the claimant."?

Maybe it doesn't suggest that to you, but it screams it to me.

Jo's picture
@ Nyarlathotep

@ Nyarlathotep

Is everyone who claims their opinions are objective hinting at their divinity?
Are saying that all opinions are subjective?

David Killens's picture
@Jo

@Jo

"Is everyone who claims their opinions are objective hinting at their divinity?
Are saying that all opinions are subjective?"

Let's see, let us discount laws enacted to protect society. But even then, lawmakers argue vociferously in agreeing on which laws to enact.

When it comes to politics, everyone has their own opinion, thus subjective.

In finance, everyone has their own opinion, thus subjective.

Ham or steak for dinner? Wait until half-time to go to the washroom? Quarter pounder or Cheeseburger?

My point is that in almost every area of a person's life, their opinions and decisions are subjective. With the glaring exception of religion.

Unless a person is bound by the hard laws of physics (should I step in front of this bus and expect to survive?) can you identify any part of your life (notwithstanding religion) not determined by subjective opinion?

Jo's picture
@ David Killens

@ David Killens

Now I understand. Thanks for your help.

When I used the word objective I was not trying to claim divinity or perfection.
I was trying to express that it was not just an emotional response.
That I had thought it through and tried to be logical.
That I had tried to consider all the evidence and arguments.

Jo's picture
@ David Killens

@ David Killens

If I may impose another question on you. I sincerely thank you in advance.

Now that the mob has shown up at my door with pitchforks and torches, to burn me at the stake
With no evidence presented, to sins I did not commit.
Only accusations and condemnations.
May I at least know what was the purpose of this witch trial?
What were the motives behind it?

Did I expose some flaw in a sacred belief?
Did I not run away quick enough, with my tail between my legs?
Is it because I did not recant?

I did not come on AR to play gotcha.
To have a pooh throwing contest.
To feel intellectually or morally superior.
To attack or condemn.
But it seems I am in the minority.
It seems that most (including theists) are not really interested in a healthy debate or discussion.

What am I missing or misunderstanding?
Where am I wrong?
How can I fix it, or make amends?

David Killens's picture
@Jo

@Jo

Just read the OP by Sheldon, take a day to digest it very slowly and carefully, and attempt to understand what he is saying.

And if you grok, then do not apologize (that doesn't seem to carry much weight here), but just carry on with the lessons from the past and apply them. This can be a major stumbling block, because many in here have seen a theist apologize for their actions, but do not change their behavior.

Hint: when you run across a post that makes your eyes water, just take a deep breath, and try to comprehend what the real message is before you reply. One of the major impedimants to understanding the other is communication. Really take your time to try to figure out what the real message is, not just words on a monitor.

IMO the goal between our two differing viewpoints is not to "win", but have a healthy exchange of opinions so we each have a better understanding of each other, why we have differing viewpoints, and everyone wins.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Jo

@ Jo

And now the victim card...how unexpected.

Now that the mob has shown up at my door with pitchforks and torches, to burn me at the stake
With no evidence presented, to sins I did not commit.

The evidence for your bad faith, lies, evasions and all the rest of your behaviours highlighted in the OP and in my post are on the forums for all to read.

This latest post of yours just adds to the shitpile of lies you have already built....

What am I missing or misunderstanding?
Where am I wrong?
How can I fix it, or make amends?

And finally the last tired refuge of the scoundrel, faux humility. Stop lying Jo, that is your first step.

David Killens's picture
@Old man shouts ...

@Old man shouts ...

I give up.
I tried to be patient, to give Jo the benefit of the doubt, and even when asked by Jo on how to stop the lynch mob, I suggested Jo re-read Sheldon's OP post.

But Jo pulled a lame theist trick, confessed, and then went back to Jo's same old crap of evasion and dishonesty.

Jo, this is not the confession booth where you can ask for forgiveness, say three hail mary's, and just return to your same old ways.

I am disappointed.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ David K

@ David K

Yep, I gave him many chances to distance himself from where his apologetics and evasions were taking him.

I have met only two theists that I could trust: One an elderly Benedictine Monk and the other a Jesuit priest. Neither played the games that Jo thinks will win him a convert.

What a sad waste of a life.

Sheldon's picture
@ David Killens

@ David Killens

Welcome aboard, I lost patience with his dishonesty, and tedious repetition some time ago. He has been using an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy now repeatedly for months, and refuses to acknowledge this even once.

When I refused to carry on and simply kept pointing out his dishonesty, he simply gave up any pretence of debate at all, and is now not childish refusing to respond to my posts directly, shades of Breezy again.

Why do theists who come here think mendacious evasion, and tedious repetition of polemic we know contains known logical fallacies, represents debate, or that anyone here will be swayed by such puerile apologetics?

I've seen this so many times before. At least he hasn't started trying to save me with private messages. What was his name was it Great Hope? Something equally grandiloquent, and his faux piety and humility in almost every post was presented without a hint of irony, along with the endless saccharine idea he was acting solely out of love for me. Nauseating stuff.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.