The following discussion took place when someone on the Quora site asked: Is it possible that the Nephilim still affect the human government through the spiritual realm ever since Noah’s flood?
A certain Steve Leonard took the insta-jerk approach by commenting
Well, lookie here…
Marc Bloemers yet AGAIN asking me yet ANOTHER baseless, ridiculous, and irrelevant question!
I feel so special!
Are the Nephilim those alleged giant humans that allegedly existed before Noah’s flood?
If so, that is the extent of by knowledge concerning these mythical creatures…
Look, sonny…
My suggestion to you is to quit huffing spray paint while reading your bible…
Another bedazzling A2A by the legendary MARC BLOEMERS!
sheesh!
I, Ken Ammi, replied
You seem to be experiencing some psycho-emotional problems. Probably better to not (pseudo) “Answer” such question. However, I agree that Nephilim were merely “alleged giant” (supposing you were implying that modern usage of “giants”) since we’ve no reliable physical description of them.
A certain Jason Shearin chimed in with
You seem confused. This is what happens when theists ask us M I L L I O N S of ridiculous questions based on proven lies. It’s called being annoyed.
Ken Ammi
If you can ever go beyond jumping to conclusions which you merely assert, please let me know.
For now, I’ll note this:
“seem confused”: mere assertion since you don’t’ even bother saying confused about what, how so, etc.
“ridiculous”: subjective assertion and that which seems ridiculous to you isn’t a standard.
“proven lies”: another assertion, you say “lies” but don’t bother proving it, don’t bother saying how you know they’re lies, don’t bother telling me what’s wrong with lying, on your worldview, and don’t bother elucidating the alleged proof.
“annoyed”: that which seems ridiculous to you or Steve (who is always annoyed that anyone dares to question him) isn’t a standard.
Jason Shearin
Ok then. Prove to us that a global flood wiped out half angel half human giants.
Begin with showing us a global genetic bottleneck event in every terrestrial species, as well as geologic evidence on all 7 continents.
So far nobody in human history has managed this. This is why the global flood and everything related to it are myths and not facts.
Ken Ammi
I’ll take “Ok then” as an admission that your previous comment was utterly fallacious (do fallacies matter, on your worldview?).
Now, you’re continuing to begin with conclusions so the first step is that you justify demanding me to “Prove” on your worldview.
Meanwhile, before answering, I would also need to know what you mean by the generic, vague, subjective, multi-usage, and undefined modern English word “giants.”
Then, move on to telling us what would be wrong if it were true (is adhering to truth a universal imperative, on your worldview?) that some people believe “myths and not facts” (is adhering to facts a universal imperative, on your worldview?)
Steve Leonard
I will continue to answer questions however the hell I choose to answer them, bubba…
Ken Ammi
In typical Atheist form, you have somehow managed to stick a perfect balance of ignorance and arrogance—and childishness.
I mean, you literally have zero idea what you’re talking about but, by golly, you’re very, very zealous for your Atheist worldview—even though it utterly discredits you, of course.
Steve Leonard
Obviously, your whole flock doesn’t know what they are talking about
Ken Ammi
“Obviously, your whole flock doesn’t know what they are talking about” is a half-thought of an assertion since you didn’t elucidate how so, nor do you have a premise upon which to condemn that.
So, this is very simple then: since you’re supposed to be, what, more evolved than thou and enlightened to the one truth of Atheism then why are you literally incapable of actually doing anything but being a childish jerk—other than that’s an Atheist 101 tactic?
Steve Leonard
Magical forces aren’t part of reality, so, magical entities aren’t part of reality…
That’s the bottom line, and claiming otherwise is a childish fantasy..
Ken Ammi
So, you’re saying that magical forces aren’t part of reality then you surely gave up believing that the universe, and all it contains, was magiced up accidentally—including “reality” and your thoughts, of course. Thus, you complain about “a childish fantasy” but you never bother saying what would be wrong with that, on your worldview (not your subjective personal preference).
Steve Leonard
Obviously the eternal universe has always existed in one form or another, considering it’s commonly accepted by physics that matter cannot be created nor destroyed, which makes creation or formation unnecessary
Ken Ammi
That which you subjectively consider to be obvious is neither a standard nor evidence. That the eternal universe has always existed (the “Steady State Theory”) was disproven in the 1930s AD. There’s literally nothing in physics about that “that matter cannot be created nor destroyed.” If you re-read about that issue you’ll see how you just made a simple error: see if you catch the qualifying term you missed and then we can discuss.
Ken Ammi
That’s a positive affirmation so you must prove it. But what, on your worldview, does it matter if someone believes that myths are actually real?
Jason Shearin
It’s harmful to the collective human IQ
Ken Ammi
You seem to not realize that you are merely pilling up assertions. So, I must now as, what, on your worldview, does it matter if the collective IQ of accidentally existing apes (supposedly, since that was merely another assertion of yours) is harmed?
Ken Ammi
You seem to be experiencing some psycho-emotional problems. Probably better to not (pseudo) “Answer” such question. However, I agree that Nephilim were merely “alleged giant” (supposing you were implying that modern usage of “giants”) since we’ve no reliable physical description of them.
Steve Leonard
I will continue to answer questions however the hell I choose to answer them, bubba…
Jason Shearin
You seem confused. This is what happens when theists ask us M I L L I O N S of ridiculous questions based on proven lies. It’s called being annoyed.
Ken Ammi
If you can ever go beyond jumping to conclusions which you merely assert, please let me know.
For now, I’ll note this:
“seem confused”: mere assertion since you don’t’ even bother saying confused about what, how so, etc..
“ridiculous”: subjective assertion and that which seems ridiculous to you isn’t a standard.
“proven lies”: another assertion, you say “lies” but don’t bother proving it, don’t bother saying now you know they’re lies, don’t bother telling me what’s wrong with lying, on your worldview, and don’t bother elucidating the alleged proof.
“annoyed”: that which seems ridiculous to you or Steve (who is always annoyed that anyone dares to question him) isn’t a standard.
Jason Shearin
Ok then. Prove to us that a global flood wiped out half angel half human giants.
Begin with showing us a global genetic bottleneck event in every terrestrial species, as well as geologic evidence on all 7 continents.
So far nobody in human history has managed this. This is why the global flood and everything related to it are myths and not facts.
Ken Ammi
I’ll take “Ok then” as an admission that your previous comment was utterly fallacious (do fallacies matter, on your worldview?).
Now, you’re continuing to begin with conclusions so the first step is that you justify demanding me to “Prove” on your worldview.
Meanwhile, before answering, I would also need to know what you mean by the generic, vague, subjective, multi-usage, and undefined modern English word “giants.”
Then, move on to telling us what would be wrong if it were true (is adhering to truth a universal imperative, on your worldview?) that some people believe “myths and not facts” (is adhering to facts a universal imperative, on your worldview?)
Wayne Fiddler
How about this, You prove Nephilim even existed, and I’ll concede your right about whatever you want. Just remember The bible is the claim, not the evidence.
Or the Flood, go ahead and provide evidence that entire globe was underwater, despite us having historical records from China, Egypt, North and South America all saying they were never underwater for a year.
Prove literally anything you’ve been talking about, no more spin the burden of truth game, if you’ve got any real evidence, Put up or shut up
Ken Ammi
Apparently, I have to take, “How about this” as that you’re going to keep running away from issues that are inconvenient to your worldview.
Let’s review this one:
“You prove Nephilim even existed”: 1. running away from making positive affirmations you can’t prove, 2. pulling a tu quoque fallacy (does that matter, on your worldview?), 3. implying an assertion that proving things is some sort of universal imperative on your worldview without a premise.
“The bible is the claim, not the evidence”: implying an assertion that evidencing things, and doing so as per your subjective standards, is some sort of universal imperative on your worldview without a premise.
So, wait, “The bible is the claim, not the evidence” but “us having historical records from China, Egypt, North and South America” is evidence?!?!
Finally, “Put up or shut up” is your ways of demanding that I play your games by your subjective rules.
Oh, I get it: the Atheist 101 tactic is that the Atheist shows up, yells “Jump!” and expects—nay, demands—and I only reply with, “How high sir?!” yet, I replied, “Why?” and you fell apart and can’t recover.
Yet, you can’t recover because your worldview is a collapsed failure: that’s why you’re incapable of replying to the many, many, many questions I’ve asked.
Steve Leonard
I probably don’t even have a “worldview” because I don’t even know what that is supposed to mean
Ken Ammi
A “worldview” is a view of the world.
Steve Leonard
I don’t have a detailed view of the world
Ken Ammi
I’m not aware of anyone having a detailed view of the whole world (with “world” meaning anything/everything) but you do have very, very strong opinions (that you can’t support) about many things and it is about those things that I have been asking you.
Example: you make positive affirmations but can’t support them so a best practice is to note make them.
Otherwise, you just keep discrediting yourself by showing that all you can do is express your feelings.
Steve Leonard
Look, professor Bozo..
If or when you can provide a testable method to officially verify that magic is an integral force at work in the universe, because your entire “worldview” centers around the existence of deities that cannot exist without magic, I will most certainly stfu…
But until you can accomplish this, you should just stfu because all you’re doing is blowing hotair and embarrassing yourself…
Oh, btw, any alleged feelings I might have are totally irrelevant to any parts of this discussion, champ…
Ken Ammi
It’s fascinating that since you’re literally incapable of dealing with the issues, you seem to just say: hey, other people demand that I also demand so it must be okay for me to demand it as well.
So, again (and again and again) what premise (besides that you say so and what you say goes) do you have for demanding that I “provide a testable method to officially verify” and that “until you can accomplish this” you’ll just keep being childish?
I’m merely begging you to engage in critical, systematic, chronological thinking/argumentation.
Wayne Fiddler
Oh for [****] sakes, you keep blatantly misunderstanding burden of proof.
The Bible or whatever religious text of choice is making a claim that Nephilim existed. That is the Claim being made that I am demanding proof for.
Whatever Religious claim is being made “God exists” “Bible is True” “Nephilim are real” “there was a worldwide flood” those are all Claims that I’m demanding proof for.
This entire time I’ve wanted proof for the Positive claims you and your religion have been making for 2,000 years and have been unable to provide for 2,000 years
Ken Ammi
Please mind your manners.
It’s fascinating that you are literally incapable of comprehending your situation—even and especially when I point it out to you time and time and time again.
The place to start isn’t for you to demand proof, the very first step is for you to elucidate how and why, on your worldview, there even is any such a thing as a BoP.
How and why, on your worldview, is there a universal imperative for accidentally existing apes living in an accidental reality with accidental truth to bare the BoP?
You’ve consistently decided to avoid that inconvenient issue and are just getting increasingly emotive—which is actually, the one and only thing your worldview has for you.
Likewise, what, on your worldview, is the problem if an accidentally existing ape (supposedly) “keep[s] blatantly misunderstanding burden of proof.”
But what you don’t seem to understand is that making a positive affirmation of non-existence is just that: a positive affirmation. Since you can’t prove it then a best practice is to just stop claiming to know things you don’t know.
So, when you merely continue to assert the likes of, “That is the Claim being made that I am demanding proof for” indeed, and that’s my point: you begin with a demand, I’m just asking that you back up one step and provide a justification, a premise, for your demand. As far as I can tell, your only reply is “Because thus saith Wayne!”
Thus, “This entire time I’ve wanted proof…” is yet down the line, the delay is that you utterly refuse to take step number one: please do so.
Jason Shearin
Try an education. If a global flood occured the geological evidence for it should be on every square nanometer of the earth. None exists anywhere.
There should also be a global genetic bottleneck in every species in recent history. There is not.
So if this event happened, the entity that caused it is inherently deceptive and dishonest for erasing all evidence of the event via magic.
Ken Ammi
Friend, I’ve encountered your Atheist 101 tactic 1,001 times: you utterly ignore issues that are inconvenient to your worldview and just keep right on with your talking points as if these issues don’t prove your worldview is collapsed—that’s why you can’t reply in the first place.
So, here we go (again):
“Try an education”: what imperative is there, on your worldview, for an accidentally existing ape to “Try an education” so as to adhere to accidental truth in an existence wherein there’s no universal imperative to adhere to accidental truth?
“If a global flood occured the geological evidence…”: what imperative is there, on your worldview, for an accidentally existing ape to seek and elucidate such evidence.
“If a global flood occured the geological evidence…”: what imperative is there, on your worldview, for an accidentally existing ape to base it’s views on evidence?
“None exists anywhere”: that’s a positive affirmation you must prove.
“There should also be a global genetic bottleneck in every species in recent history”: like every living thing, including animals, insects, etc., all going back to a “common ancestor”? There is a bottleneck.
“…the entity that caused it is inherently deceptive and dishonest”: what, on your worldview, would be wrong with deception and dishonesty—or for “erasing all evidence” for that matter?
See, again, those are your very first steps: why do you refuse to take them?
Jason Shearin
Prove a global flood
Ken Ammi
Well, at this point it’s clear that you realize that you’re literally incapable of dealing with issues that are based on critical, systematic, logical thinking/arguing so you are simply ignoring issues that are inconvenient to your worldview and are just playing a game of demand, demand, demand.
Jason Shearin
Let’s try things a different way.
You prove “nephilem” and a oral flood existed. No claims, proof. No bible verses, proof. No “thr lord your god says so”, proof.
Ken Ammi
By this point I’ll assume that you realize that your worldview is such a collapsed failure that it leaves you incapable of even taking the very first step in even just having a cogent discussion which is why you demand, “Let’s try things a different way” since you can’t handle systematic critical thinking—but it’s not your fault, it’s that your worldview fails before it even begins—and so you utterly ignore everything and just circle back around to demanding proof.
Thus, I’ll follow your circle and ask that you first justify your demand for proof from your worldview.
Now, since you’re supposed to have been enlightened and have access to the real true truth then that shouldn’t be a problem for you.
Jason Shearin
Prove a global flood occured. Stop dodging, [****]O
Ken Ammi
Friend, I’ve interacted with thousands of Atheists so I know how this goes, I point something out, you realize your worldview is a collapsed failure so you’re literally incapable of replying, you get increasingly childish, and you’ll just run away.
Jason Shearin
No.
You’re a claimant.
Claimants owe evidence of claims
So, magic flood claimant, provide evidence of a magic flood.
This “atheist tactic” you speak of encountering thousands of times is not a tactic.
You just don’t live in reality. It’s time to join us in reality. Big boys prove their words. Be a big boy for a change.
Ken Ammi
You’re still just playing a game of demand, demand, demand because, surely, by this point you realize that’s all you can do since your worldview failed you since it collapsed.
See, you merely assert on your own (pseudo) authority, “Claimants owe evidence of claims” but that’s a conclusion: where’s your argument? You don’t and can’t have one which is why you always merely impotently demand, demand, demand.
Moreover, what, on your worldview, would be wrong with an accidentally existing ape not living in accidental reality which it accidentally discern in an existence wherein there’s no universal imperative for an accidentally existing ape to adhere to accidental reality?
Jason Shearin
Lying in the name of jesus christ is still lying
Ken Ammi
What makes, besides pure and literal prejudice, you merely assert that I’m lying?
What, on your worldview, is wrong with lying?
Steve Leonard
Logic and critical thinking have led me,among other things, to determine that the ability to bring forth elements of existence from total nonexistence by shouting out magic words (magic) is not an integral force at work in the universe, which leads to the existence of an eternal enity that invariably relies on magic, to be an impossibility…
Prove me wrong, padre!
Ken Ammi
I see.
Do you think it’s accidental that in the very first verse of the Bible we get an accurate most up-to-date cosmology?
In any case, you’re getting ahead of yourself since the issue is still what, on your worldview, wrong with an accidentally existing ape believing that God has, “the ability to bring forth elements of existence from total nonexistence by shouting out magic words (magic)” within an existence wherein there’s no universal imperative for an accidentally existing ape to adhere to accidental reality which it accidentally discerns.
Likewise for to where, “Logic and critical thinking have led” you since, on your worldview, logic and thinking are both accidental and there’s no universal imperative to adhere to them.
As for “prove”: what universal imperative is there, on your worldview, for an accidentally existing ape to prove anything within an existence wherein there’s no universal imperative for an accidentally existing ape to prove anything?
Steve Leonard
The bible contains NOTHING that could ever be considered accurate or up to date, padre…
That’s hilarious that any numbskull could be so hoodwinked!
Yeah…
Let’s go ahead and “create” light in chapter 3 and then finally get around to creating light sources in chapter 14…
Even a young child wouldn’t make such a glaring mistake as that!
The anonymous [expletive removed] that scrawled out genesis had the brains of a turnip!
Well, anyway, padre…
I’m completely comfortable with my logical possible probabilities and am not searching further to expand on them,and furthermore, I’m not the least bit envious of anxiety ridden [expletive removed] that are obsessively grasping at imaginary superstitious straws to explain an alleged purpose and cause for their existence…
Oh, and btw, padre…
There isn’t too many combinations that are utterly useless throughout the world as the combination of religion and philosophy!
Ken Ammi
Please mind your manners.
Just because you’ve never actually thought systematically about something doesn’t mean that it doesn’t make sense, it just means that you’re expressing very strong opinions about something you’ve never actually thought systematically about before.
I suppose you made it so that I have to be the one to inform you that there are more sources of light in the universe than our Sun.
Oh, that you’re done thinking “…am not searching further to expand…” is crystal clear: you’re clearly not interested in letting facts cause trouble to your false and failed worldview.
But you seem to keep running—very, very fast—away from something still: what, on your worldview (not your subjective feelings du jour) is wrong with, “The bible contains NOTHING that could ever be considered accurate or up to date” being a “numbskull” being “hoodwinked!” believing in “a glaring mistake” and in things written by someone with “the brains of a turnip!” or “obsessively grasping at imaginary superstitious straws,” etc.?
Steve Leonard
An arrogant schmuck has told me to mind my manners…
How quaint!
Ken Ammi
Is asserting your subjective opinion that I am arrogant a case of you projecting?
Also, what, on your worldview, is wrong with being arrogant?
Well, that did it the insta-jerks didn’t reply anymore.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out. Here is my donate/paypal page.
Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Twitter page, on my Facebook page, or any of my other social network sites all which are available here.