Search results

I'm sorry I don't have time to discuss each of the gospels tonight, but if I can start with the Gospel of John: I thought most scholars these days doubt that this gospel was written by John the apostle, but was instead written anonymously some time after the death of Jesus, and furthermore, very...

That seems like a long way to say "x text is an eye-witness account". Of course, none of the writers of the gospels were eye-witnesses. At least, so far as I know, but please feel free to correct me as I'm still learning. Far from there existing any conclusive proof of anything, as you assert...

Forgive my ignorance, but can you please point me to these eye witness accounts backed up by outside sources? I'm very interested. I'm sorry I keep asking you to back up your claims, but I find it hard to believe such people exist. Can you give me an example of a single prominent atheist who...

We? Who is this "we" that insists for or against eternal damnation as if such insistence matters?

You said that atheists get agitated when people mention the existence of a deity, and I disputed that (albeit in a round-a-bout way). In doing that I did say that questioning the existence of a deity is perfectly fine, but I didn't say you said anything was wrong.

Actually I do. But I'm ready to be convinced otherwise, so please, provide me with some quality sources that establish that the gospels are historically accurate eye witness accounts. If that isn't possible, then I don't see I have any reason to believe they are.

So much wrong :(

Because every human is perfectly rational, right? (see: young-earth creationist remark above)

Aye. Interesting scenario: If there were any proof at all, atheists would probably be considered as crazy as young-earth creationists are now.

These can all be justified as a means to defend others (or themselves). Serious question, is it illegal for an ordinary citizen to tase someone out of self defence?

Umm, do you have some examples of "power they shouldn't have" in mind?

Honestly, it sounds more like you're agitated by the fact that someone questions your claim of the existence of some deity. There is nothing wrong with questioning the claims that some person makes. It's healthy, and has resulted in humans learning and gaining plenty. Testament to this is the...

Of course, everyone can simply say "no" to anything they like, but the ability to say "no" is not exactly my idea of "we're not ramming stuff down your throat". As you know, many Christians take it a whole lot further than a TV show or a book - in fact, the TV shows I see early in the morning...

Sure, stand out (and also a good descriptor of what they discuss - that is, a good, relevant, title), but hardly what anyone would call "ram down your throat" tactics. Nobody is forced to pick up the book and read it. Nobody. And if you do pick it up, you're free to put it down at any time.

YouTube - 'A Universe From Nothing' by Lawrence Krauss, AAI 2009

I disagree with pretty much everything you wrote, but I think it's too far off topic again. What you said in your last message though: is just wrong. For the third (heh) time, the third derivative of a function is needed to apply the second derivative test to the stationary points of the...

What do functions of two variables and their mins and maxs have to do with this thread? And can you explain to me how the second derivative of y = x4 tells me that (0,0) is a minimum of that function? Or isn't the second derivative as sufficient as you suggest? At the end of the day you're...

Bored of Studies Statistics Threads: 180,006, Posts: 3,883,319, Members: 334,610 Corollary: I am God!

The 20th derivative test: If the 20th derivative of a function y is the first non-zero derivative when evaluated at a stationary point of the first derivative of y, then that point is not a point of inflection of y. Example: y = x^20 does not have a point of inflection at (0,0) since the 20th...

Eh? You're looking for mins and maxs of the function y', so the second derivative test applied to any stationary points of the function y' (ie, when y''(x) = 0) would surely be the best option? Just because we're working with the third derivative of some function (ie, y) doesn't mean we should...