Zakath agreed to give Enyart rights to Battle Royale VII
Bob Enyart LiveGreetings to the brightest audience in the country. I am Bob Enyart...... discuss Bob's shows here! Bob's show is aired live on the radio and rebroadcast at: KGOV.com
There are apparently a lot of idiots like Benny Hinn, then.
How many psychologists do you know, personally? Do you know as many psychologists as you do pastors, so you can make a valid comparison...
I cannot speak for where you live, but that is not true in most states. One must be licensed to legally use the term "psychologist" or to run a counselling practice as a psychologist.
Clergy, on the other hand, need no formal training or licensure by any third party. Literally anyone who desires can call themselves "pastor" or "reverend".
Somehow you seem to have transposed the two professions...
In Louisiana, my home sweet home, one need only have a Masters of Education in "counseling." I learned this from my ex-wife, the counselor. This is not a shot at you, I just thought I would bring it up since it amuses me.
God . . .even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved. Ephesians 2:4-5 ESV
A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent. . . . John Calvin
There are apparently a lot of idiots like Benny Hinn, then.
Says you. Excuse me if I don't take your word for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zakath
How many psychologists do you know, personally? Do you know as many psychologists as you do pastors, so you can make a valid comparison...
A lot. I know more psychologists than Pastors actually (unfortunately).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zakath
I cannot speak for where you live, but that is not true in most states. One must be licensed to legally use the term "psychologist" or to run a counselling practice as a psychologist.
My Psychology Professor in college told our class how easy it is to get a license. He wasn't just speaking about my state either. He made the statement as we were talking about ethics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zakath
Clergy, on the other hand, need no formal training or licensure by any third party. Literally anyone who desires can call themselves "pastor" or "reverend".
Maybe. Most of the Pastors I have met have degrees from accredited Bible Seminary Colleges.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zakath
Somehow you seem to have transposed the two professions...
I don't think so. One pretends they have all the answers to one's psychological issues while "seeing" a psychologist of their own and the other encourages to solve their problems by trusting in God. A God who can be found through Faith and by means of the Bible.
One is paid much more than the other eventhough their profession is hardly based on any real scientific fact. The other is paid by the generosity of his church members and who can point to the Bible for all the Truth he needs.
Here's what I recall of Taoist... -
May 16th, 2005, 09:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by taoist
The refutations followed a direct request by Pastor Enyart in the course of the post-game show, which included the combined response of a number of atheists on TOL, though Bob seems to have conveniently misplaced that memory. [That thread] somehow seems to have vanished from TOL, no doubt due to some inadvertent deletion.
Fortunately, it still has a following in PDF format, or so I infer from the odd request that still comes in to my yahoo email account. -Jesse
BE: Odd, no doubt. What I recall of Taoist is summed up below. And whatever multiplied posts he hereafter may have offered, I was finished with BR VII.
The Battle Royale Center Ring still lists Post Game Show - BR VII . At the time, Flipper combined the three atheist posts from himself, Taoist, and Heusden.
Here, I'll just quote the beginning of my reply to Taoist's first argument.
Taoist: Pastor Enyart believes in a God who is (a) the supernatural Creator of the natural universe, (b) existing eternally, (c) powerful, (d) wise and knowledgeable, (e) personal, (f) loving, and (g) just. Of the good pastor’s seven attributes, the last five could describe any good mortal ruler, and are anything but unique to a divinity. The first two are impossible to ascertain by natural, mortal beings…
Enyart: Any Mortal: I will show below that apart from God’s existence, Taoist could not claim that these “last five could describe any good mortal ruler.” But first, notice the form of Taoist’s argument: In principle, I reject as irrelevant anything in a description of God that could also be descriptive of men. Imagine if we were debating whether the moon really exists or if it’s just a phantom in the sky, and I offered that the moon has mass as evidenced by its pull on the oceans, and Taoist shoots back: Well, the Earth has mass also, so I reject that part of the definition. Debating atheists is like dealing with spoiled brats. This is the kind of irrationality that we theists must put up with. And Taoist leads off his argument with this. Typically, I lead off my arguments with my second strongest and most well thought-out point (I try to save the strongest for last). If any single attribute of God is proved conclusively, then God’s exists. (I know, I know, the average atheists cannot process that last statement… but that’s not my fault.) If I showed a physics proof that God’s eternal power must exist, then I would have shown that God exists, regardless of what other “power” we can find in the universe. (I know, I know, the atheist comprehension thing…) If my definition redundantly stated (perhaps only to humor Huey), that “God exists,” well then Taoist could shoot back, “so do men! nah, nah, nah.” If I stated, “God can think,” TA: “so do men!!” “God is alive,” “so are men, three strikes and you’re out Bob!!!” The monotheism in the world teaches that God created man “in His likeness,” that is, we have personalities and power, we can embrace wisdom and knowledge, we recognize justice, and we can love. That is the belief system that Taoist has volunteered to refute. I’m discouraged at the sloppy reasoning displayed when Taoist starts off by rejecting non-unique attributes of God. For I also described God as “the supernatural Creator of the natural universe, existing eternally,” which by definition distinguishes Him from any “mortal.” Now let’s look at those five attributes that we share, albeit imperfectly, with God... -END QUOTE- (from Post Game Show - BR VII)
Why Taoist would want to remind anyone of all this is beyond me. -Bob Enyart
The Bob Enyart Live talk show airs at KGOV.com. You can call weekdays at 5 pm E.T. at 1-800-8Enyart. And you can get BR VIIDoes God Exist?, and BR XThe Open Theism Debate in manuscript form!
Slogan/motto:
For the prize, everything. Outside the prize, nothing.
Reputation:
May 16th, 2005, 09:50 PM
"I maintain my pride in the face of men, but I abandon it before God, who drew me out of nothingness to make me what I am." - The Count of Monte Cristo
BE: Odd, no doubt. What I recall of Taoist is summed up below. And whatever multiplied posts he hereafter may have offered, I was finished with BR VII.
The Battle Royale Center Ring still lists Post Game Show - BR VII . At the time, Flipper combined the three atheist posts from himself, Taoist, and Heusden.
Here, I'll just quote the beginning of my reply to Taoist's first argument.
Taoist: Pastor Enyart believes in a God who is (a) the supernatural Creator of the natural universe, (b) existing eternally, (c) powerful, (d) wise and knowledgeable, (e) personal, (f) loving, and (g) just. Of the good pastor’s seven attributes, the last five could describe any good mortal ruler, and are anything but unique to a divinity. The first two are impossible to ascertain by natural, mortal beings…
Enyart: Any Mortal: I will show below that apart from God’s existence, Taoist could not claim that these “last five could describe any good mortal ruler.” But first, notice the form of Taoist’s argument: In principle, I reject as irrelevant anything in a description of God that could also be descriptive of men. Imagine if we were debating whether the moon really exists or if it’s just a phantom in the sky, and I offered that the moon has mass as evidenced by its pull on the oceans, and Taoist shoots back: Well, the Earth has mass also, so I reject that part of the definition. Debating atheists is like dealing with spoiled brats. This is the kind of irrationality that we theists must put up with. And Taoist leads off his argument with this. Typically, I lead off my arguments with my second strongest and most well thought-out point (I try to save the strongest for last). If any single attribute of God is proved conclusively, then God’s exists. (I know, I know, the average atheists cannot process that last statement… but that’s not my fault.) If I showed a physics proof that God’s eternal power must exist, then I would have shown that God exists, regardless of what other “power” we can find in the universe. (I know, I know, the atheist comprehension thing…) If my definition redundantly stated (perhaps only to humor Huey), that “God exists,” well then Taoist could shoot back, “so do men! nah, nah, nah.” If I stated, “God can think,” TA: “so do men!!” “God is alive,” “so are men, three strikes and you’re out Bob!!!” The monotheism in the world teaches that God created man “in His likeness,” that is, we have personalities and power, we can embrace wisdom and knowledge, we recognize justice, and we can love. That is the belief system that Taoist has volunteered to refute. I’m discouraged at the sloppy reasoning displayed when Taoist starts off by rejecting non-unique attributes of God. For I also described God as “the supernatural Creator of the natural universe, existing eternally,” which by definition distinguishes Him from any “mortal.” Now let’s look at those five attributes that we share, albeit imperfectly, with God... -END QUOTE- (from Post Game Show - BR VII)
Why Taoist would want to remind anyone of all this is beyond me. -Bob Enyart
Really Bob - as a supposedly intelligent adult, you're proud of this nonsense ?
Enyart: Any Mortal: I will show below that apart from God’s existence, Taoist could not claim that these “last five could describe any good mortal ruler.” But first, notice the form of Taoist’s argument: In principle, I reject as irrelevant anything in a description of God that could also be descriptive of men. Imagine if we were debating whether the moon really exists or if it’s just a phantom in the sky, and I offered that . . .
Really Bob - as a supposedly intelligent adult, you're proud of this nonsense ?
"Somebody" anonymously gave me bad rep for this (75 points worth) with the comment "lame response", so I thought I would expand a bit before I have to go.
Bob's post is full of convoluted arguments, ad hominems and childish nonsense. My first introduction to TOL was BRVII. I found it fascinating at first, but read in dismay as Enyart's contributions deteriorated more and more towards this kind of nonsense. In short, what might have become something worthy of study for insight into "ultimate truth" turned into just another case study on a overbearing bully.
Last edited by Caille; May 17th, 2005 at 11:18 AM.
"Somebody" anonymously gave me bad rep for this (75 points worth) with the comment "lame response", so I thought I would expand a bit before I have to go.
Why Taoist would want to remind anyone of all this is beyond me. -Bob Enyart
As a means of republicizing my response to "all this" of course. A little eye-opener for you, Bob ... TOL doesn't constitute the only forum on the web any more than christianity constitutes the only belief system for humanity. And while "The Taoist and Pastor Enyart" received only a slim popularity here, deleting the thread from this forum in no way removed it from the web, where it still has a loyal and growing following.
But it's good to see you remain faithful to your first calling, Bob ... responding to your own words while rhetorically foisting them on someone else, whether it be God or the taoist. However, purveyors of absurd spiritual messages are of little concern to me. My original interest was engaged in the concern that you might want to follow-up your religious career with a swing into politics. My concerns in that area have been well assuaged though by the volume of readers still carrying copies of the original shadowgov webpages and other amusing electronic misdeeds.
While we'll no doubt keep an eye out on you, pastor, you're clearly not a meaningful threat to either reason or the republic.
What remains of continuing interest to me are anecdotal and faithful renderings of individual journeys in the search for spiritual truth, from devout christians or muslims, buddhists or hindus ... or even fellow Taoists. It's entirely possible that members of your congregation might be able to add to the collection I've been expanding for a number of years, but your duplicity assures me your own tellings are exceedingly unlikely to make the list.
And while "The Taoist and Pastor Enyart" received only a slim popularity here, deleting the thread from this forum in no way removed it from the web, where it still has a loyal and growing following.
I don't remember that thread.
Maybe nobody else does either.
Thousands of threads are deleted from TOL every year, and trust me we have NEVER deleted a thread that was worth keeping, unless of course by mistake.
Linear Mode
