Obtuse Religious Philosophy

[siouxperman]

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:
You condescend yourself with the stupid bullshit that you say.
[/quote]

Ha hahaha!

Perfect!

[/quote]

[TheBodyGuard]

[quote]siouxperman wrote:

It certainly is fun to make up arguments. Like the one where I criticized your size. Cool, you weigh more than I do. And cool if you lift more too. Also cool how you used the “you believe in religion, you’ll believe anything” line when I’m not religious. I’ve been on the opposite side of Deorum this whole time not because I’m religious but because he’s an idiot. I’ve “sided” with the religious folks because they can type complete sentences and I’m fairly certain that they’re intelligent people who just happen to have a different outlook on life than I do: and they aren’t attacking me for it. I asked a sincere question of Zeb and Brotherchris and got sincere answers. That’s a worthwhile dialogue, regardless of whether or not I believe what they do. I’ll sure as hell disagree with them about a lot of other things (politics for one) but I can also take a step back to try and see things from their point of view and get a little perspective.
[/quote]

Oh, I get it now, so you didn’t just merely reply to my statement about your ad hominems, you didn’t take a personal swipe at me either? I must be seeing things. I didn’t realize I made up “this argument”. I also don’t recall using “you believe in religion you’ll believe in anything”. But don’t let that stop you, you’re not quite on a roll yet. And what I did to you was not an “attack”. It was a counterpunch. Learn the difference.

[siouxperman]

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]siouxperman wrote:
“My head is full of fuck!”

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:
You condescend yourself with the stupid bullshit that you say.
[/quote]

Ha hahaha!

Perfect!

[/quote]
[/quote]

I guess you think you are pro-ascending yourself?

Ha ha ha.[/quote]

Nice

In retrospectively I was making an ascent at hilariousity of speech. (note, I used the English to Deorum function of Google translate to craft this)

[Cortes]

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

We can always rely on your to add something intelligent to the dialogue. Maybe YOU should be moved to GAL where in living color vids are appropriate. [/quote]

I know that I hurt your wittle feelings in the last thread, and I expect you to lash out in the sad, troglodytic way you do. That’s fine. What is particularly pathetic, though, aside from your curiously appropriate avatar, is the fact that your addled brain is too underdeveloped to discern a “dialogue” from a troll-job.

There is nothing intelligent to be added here, guy. The fact that you come down on the side of the troll, though, makes the thread even more amusing. The In Living Color skit is as much about you as it is the OP. But I guess you could feel that, hence your defensiveness.

[siouxperman]

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]siouxperman wrote:

It certainly is fun to make up arguments. Like the one where I criticized your size. Cool, you weigh more than I do. And cool if you lift more too. Also cool how you used the “you believe in religion, you’ll believe anything” line when I’m not religious. I’ve been on the opposite side of Deorum this whole time not because I’m religious but because he’s an idiot. I’ve “sided” with the religious folks because they can type complete sentences and I’m fairly certain that they’re intelligent people who just happen to have a different outlook on life than I do: and they aren’t attacking me for it. I asked a sincere question of Zeb and Brotherchris and got sincere answers. That’s a worthwhile dialogue, regardless of whether or not I believe what they do. I’ll sure as hell disagree with them about a lot of other things (politics for one) but I can also take a step back to try and see things from their point of view and get a little perspective.
[/quote]

Oh, I get it now, so you didn’t just merely reply to my statement about your ad hominems, you didn’t take a personal swipe at me either? I must be seeing things. I didn’t realize I made up “this argument”. I also don’t recall using “you believe in religion you’ll believe in anything”. But don’t let that stop you, you’re not quite on a roll yet. And what I did to you was not an “attack”. It was a counterpunch. Learn the difference. [/quote]

Here’s the reply to the ad hominems. It’s not an ad hominem if his inability to coherently express his thoughts precludes him from making any relevant statement. Lrn 2 argument. Who said I never took a swipe at you? What I didn’t do was say anything about your physique, you just acted like I did cause it made you feel like a big man to criticize me for it. Therefore, you made up arguments in your “counterpunches” (with all that hubris I’m sure you probably fancy yourself a boxer, but your punches really do need some work). You really don’t remember saying “If you can believe in the fairy tales of religion, I guess you can also believe you’re hyooooge”? Weird. You also seem to keep referencing a point in time where I said I was hyoge or something, which I don’t particularly remember doing. You also didn’t get the sarcasm of the use of “brah” in reference to myspace. Also, speaking of hubris, you stated you need no more size. So you’ve hit the pinnacle? You’re the best of the best and have no further aspirations? What the hell are you doing on this site then? You’re set. Get out there and live the hyooooge life.

[ZEB]

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

You’re exhausting and I’m not going to continue to banter with you. Make a fucking point or a rebuttal but stop playing word games and twisting mine.[/quote]

I’ve not twisted one word of your ineffectual attack on Christianity. Why would I? You’re doing a poor job without me jumping in.

First, when I referenced that “one is right” I was talking of your beliefs and that of everyone else. And you know that and you’re purposefully taking words out of context and I do not have the time or inclination to continue to rebut this nonsense.

Wrong, you have plenty of time from what I can tell. Secondly, I took nothing of what you said out of context, again why would I? It is patently foolish within it’s very context, taking it out would only help you.

Since you like logic, they can’t all be right, but they can all be wrong, since none start with an undisputed known truth. THAT is what I believe - that they cannot all be right, and that they could all very well be wrong. YOU believe that only one is right, at the expense of all the others.

I completely agree with that statement and it made perfect sense. Do more of this.

I’m assuming God had a better way? Are you fucking serious? Now you’re arguing by default that GOD IS SOMEHOW LIMITED. You might want to go back and refresh your beliefs sir. So God is limited in the means by which he can communicate with his children?

Now you’re moving to the part of your program called attack of the “straw man.” I never said God is limited and you probably know that. What I said was that God (the father) communicated to people one on one thousands of years ago and many still turned their backs on him and sinned. With that said obviously he could communicate with people directly today, he’s God.

And finally, your circular fallacy of relying on something (in dispute) to prove a disputed point is completely illogical. You cannot say to me that the OT proves God communicated directly with man.

I never said that either. Think now, what did I say? I said that God spoke to his people (according to the OT). If you are not a Christian and do not believe in the Bible then of course this is all nonsense to you, just as your argumentation skills are nonsense to me.

I did not back away from any such war, persecution, murder, censorship or any such related argument as to the history of your Church. Not one bit.

You walked away from that point by saying that “it doesn’t matter both sides were involved in war.” My rebuttal was to remind you (as I do now) that your original point was to demean Christianity with your comment as there have been more wars and far more pain caused by non-Christians. At that point you wanted no more of it. Are you now ready to prove that Christians are responsible for more suffering than non-Christians through the ages? If not you are once again walking away from that particular piece of illogic.

And yes, you have twisted my words and I shall not continue to point out how.

You’ve not even begun to point out how, therefore you cannot continue to do so. This is one more error in logic on your part.

Anyway, instead of arguing and nit picking words, why don’t you stick to the meat on the bone - or is your position so weak that you must obfuscate the argument with word play?

What are words? If you cannot use them effectively is it not my duty to point that out? You seem to be asking for a free pass as to how ineffectively you communicate. Now why would I do that? And furthermore if you are so very sure that Christianity is incorrect how can I trust you to prove this if you are incapable of carrying on a general conversation regarding religion? In short, you have to do better, much better for me to take you seriously.
[/quote]

1. No one made an “attack on Christianity”. Saying you do not believe is not an attack. That’s a strawman AND yet another distortion by you of what I wrote;[/quote]

I’m sure you will recall saying something on the order of “who cares what you think as I am aware of your Christian background.” In that same post you went on to claim that you are a “free thinker” the allusion being that your opinion matters more. And then you began your litany of logical fallacies that were really just atrocious.

2. My time will not be dedicated to arguing circles and semantics with you. When was the last time you took a position or made a point? You’re arguing MY words. When are we going to apply cold hard logic to your beliefs?;

I’m not sure that you deal in cold hard logic. Every time you try to make a point it is a rambling illogical mess. I now roll my eyes and wonder does this guy really have that much confidence in his obvious inabilities to actually want to debate further? But hubris knows no bounds I suppose. And after all this is T Nation.

3. I’m not going back, but you clearly implied God was limited because you implied a limit on his ability to communicate.

Ah…using the straw man again I see. One more logical fallacy to your credit. One last time just for you: I said that God (the father) communicated directly to his people thousands of years ago as in speaking with a voice (per the OT). But does not do that any longer. And you read that as me saying he “cannot” communicate verbally any longer? I’m hoping this is just another of your straw men ploys rather than you actually don’t understand the difference between “not” doing something and “not being able” to do something. Tell me which is it?

I can go back and cut and paste YOUR EXACT words;

Yes, I challenge you to do that. And while you’re cutting and pasting please put the date and time of the post where I allegedly said that “God cannot communicate any longer”. Please, please show us how right you are.

4. I didn’t walk away from the argument and I made no such statement “they were both in war”. I did no such thing and in fact, I REFINED the argument by stating we can judge a tree by its fruit;

Your initial foray into the argument was to demonstrate how nasty Christianity is by alluding to the fact that Christians have been behind wars, pain etc. When I responded that non-Christians are responsible for even more wars and pain so why are you not running from those people, you could no longer use that as an argument unless of course you could prove me wrong, which you could not. That set up your back peddling on the topic which now extends to this thread.

5. I don’t care where you agree with me. Ultimately we will never agree - that’s why you’re going in circles instead of making points;

My point is that you are not making sense. A man who mocks Christianity cannot even put forth a cogent argument. It’s funny yet at the same time sad. And I am really sorry to have to point that out to you. I am basically pleading with you to make sense, and you cannot. But you know all about God yada yada yada…Uh huh.

6. I’m not attempting to prove christianity incorrect, I merely stated MY belief.

No actually you did more than state your belief. You’re basically mocking Christianity and have done so almost since the time that you entered this (and other) threads. When pushed (just a tiny bit) by me you come unraveled like a roll of cheap yarn. You are unable to use logic in a general discussion about religion, yet you’ve threatened to get down to specifics per Christianity a couple of times now. You’ve been cornered and now you’re trying to find a way to change the subject. It’s all very clear and nothing new for this place. I’ve been through this nonsense with people like you for years right here on T Nation.

But I’ll be happy to bring logic to bear upon your beliefs whenever you are ready to have THAT discussion. You will not have that one though, because the white flag of faith will go up in the first page; and,

Ah, one more threat of showing how smart you are when confronting Christianity, yet you’ve failed up to this point. You cannot bring “logic to bear” on a simple broad discussion of religion. You’ve been called on several logical fallacies and have tried to run from each of them. And at one time begged to be let free with such gems as “Oh come on you know what I mean.” But suddenly like magic you’ll come alive as we further the discussion? Your pomposity must be inspiring for others of your “faith” who also have nothing to say and plenty of arrogance to say it.

7. I have zero interest in whether you take me seriously.

That’s good because I really don’t think anyone who has a modicum of reasoning ability would take you seriously. You need to sit back and ask yourself where you’re going with this. Why you began it, and most importantly how you can escape back to lighter threads. Threads where your obviously more comfortable because your silly bluster intimidates people and your inability to coherently represent your point doesn’t really matter.

Now run along.

[Deorum]

[quote]siouxperman wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]siouxperman wrote:
“My head is full of fuck!”

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:
You condescend yourself with the stupid bullshit that you say.
[/quote]

Ha hahaha!

Perfect!

[/quote]
[/quote]

I guess you think you are pro-ascending yourself?

Ha ha ha.[/quote]

Nice

In retrospectively I was making an ascent at hilariousity of speech. (note, I used the English to Deorum function of Google translate to craft this)[/quote]

Is this really as far as your understanding of our language goes? This is pathetic.

Condescend - to stoop or deign to do something

You stoop below even your own standard of intelligence with the stupid shit you are saying…

And you refuse to stop doing so…

“pro-ascending” - did you really make up a fucking word and compare it to what I said? Holy fuck you are beyond retarded. And the entire time you are saying this retarded shit you actually think you have gotten me this time. You actually think this time you will show your superior intelligence through criticizing a sentence which you did not comprehend. Then you further embarrass yourself by not letting it go… You have further condescended yourself with that bullshit. Maybe this time you will be able to understand that oh-so-obtuse sentence?

And no matter how many times I make you the child to my teacher you REFUSE to stop arguing semantics… Maybe if you stopped being a passive aggressive boy arguing over the irrelevant and actually attacked the topics under debate you would be less of a target for my “expose the weak minded for who they are” rants. And if I didn’t make you my example for the weak mind and its manifestations, then I’m quite sure you wouldn’t be hanging from my dick quite as much. Stick to topic kid, your trying to berate me is never going to garner you any victories.

Here, your in the wrong forum - englishforward.com

Go argue with them about semantics and we’ll stick to debate pertaining to actual thought.

[Deorum]

[quote]siouxperman wrote:
I’ve been on the opposite side of Deorum this whole time not because I’m religious but because he’s an idiot.
[/quote]

By the way cute thesis - no wonder your arguments are so goddamn strong and overwhelming… Don’t you have any pride? Any dignity? How do you honestly fixate the crux of your debate on another man? That is the most disgustingly telling projection of parasitic human behavior I have encountered on these forums yet.

PS. Based on your passive aggressive thought patterns let me guess, you are the catcher? It is clear by now that you must be homosexual as I have never seen a straight man so strongly fixated on another man.

PPS. Does my typing make your brain hurt too much? Does it actually make you think instead of mindlessly reading along like a robot? Maybe that is the fucking point Einstein… And whether you realize it or not this thread has been slowly conforming to my beliefs and opinions - both those on side with my philosophies and those opposed. your not winning any prizes for being the resident english teacher, why don’t you give that schtick up and go back to grading your middle school writing-level papers

PPPS. You will never be able to even fucking touch my intelligence, we are on completely different mental planes. Give up, you’re chasing the fucking moon pal.

[Deorum]

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]siouxperman wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]siouxperman wrote:
“My head is full of fuck!”

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:
You condescend yourself with the stupid bullshit that you say.
[/quote]

Ha hahaha!

Perfect!

[/quote]
[/quote]

I guess you think you are pro-ascending yourself?

Ha ha ha.[/quote]

Nice

In retrospectively I was making an ascent at hilariousity of speech. (note, I used the English to Deorum function of Google translate to craft this)[/quote]

Is this really as far as your understanding of our language goes? This is pathetic.

Condescend - to stoop or deign to do something

You stoop below even your own standard of intelligence with the stupid shit you are saying…

And you refuse to stop doing so…

“pro-ascending” - did you really make up a fucking word and compare it to what I said? Holy fuck you are beyond retarded. And the entire time you are saying this retarded shit you actually think you have gotten me this time. You actually think this time you will show your superior intelligence through criticizing a sentence which you did not comprehend. Then you further embarrass yourself by not letting it go… You have further condescended yourself with that bullshit. Maybe this time you will be able to understand that oh-so-obtuse sentence?

[/quote]

You know, it’s pretty rare that I really get a good, sincere laugh here at PWI.

But this, THIS is genuinely funny!

You are either a fairly skilled troll, or one truly dumbass (yet arrogant) motherfucker.

Just in case it’s the latter, I’ll allow for some sympathy for you, and give you hint: Does your dictionary also give sample sentences as to the usage of “condescend?”

Or in words (only) you will understand: Your using of this verb contraindication to grammarian stricture.[/quote]

You do not stop showing off your retardation…

Condescend - Proper Meaning?

I gave you a fucking link of where to argue this. And they DO give examples of usage and the ones in agreement with my usage happen to be from ivy league papers… You fucking retard. Take this bullshit to the proper forum and keep it out of my thread. By the way, which one of us here are functioning as the troll? The one trying desperately to keep a class full of kids who forgot their adderol focused on topic, or the one bitching about grammar and “proper” word usage?

Ironic that it is the weak minded who when presented with a word used outside of its conventional usage scream “IMPROPER”. The weak in mind have an extremely narrow perspective on all things - not just religion. That is why I refer to Christianity as a projection to this mental weakness. It is manifested in all walks of human interaction and I my patience for it is dying.

“I can now add Deorum next to “Japanese” on the list of foreign langages that I speak! I’m tri-lingual!!! Ha!”

Oh and by the way, you will never be able to comprehend my philosophies. You are inferior in every way. That is why I hate you. I hate you for allowing yourself to be so fucking weak.

Let us get back to fucking topic now that that is over with…

[Deorum]

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]siouxperman wrote:

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]siouxperman wrote:
“My head is full of fuck!”

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:
You condescend yourself with the stupid bullshit that you say.
[/quote]

Ha hahaha!

Perfect!

[/quote]
[/quote]

I guess you think you are pro-ascending yourself?

Ha ha ha.[/quote]

Nice

In retrospectively I was making an ascent at hilariousity of speech. (note, I used the English to Deorum function of Google translate to craft this)[/quote]

Is this really as far as your understanding of our language goes? This is pathetic.

Condescend - to stoop or deign to do something

You stoop below even your own standard of intelligence with the stupid shit you are saying…

And you refuse to stop doing so…

“pro-ascending” - did you really make up a fucking word and compare it to what I said? Holy fuck you are beyond retarded. And the entire time you are saying this retarded shit you actually think you have gotten me this time. You actually think this time you will show your superior intelligence through criticizing a sentence which you did not comprehend. Then you further embarrass yourself by not letting it go… You have further condescended yourself with that bullshit. Maybe this time you will be able to understand that oh-so-obtuse sentence?

[/quote]

You know, it’s pretty rare that I really get a good, sincere laugh here at PWI.

But this, THIS is genuinely funny!

You are either a fairly skilled troll, or one truly dumbass (yet arrogant) motherfucker.

Just in case it’s the latter, I’ll allow for some sympathy for you, and give you hint: Does your dictionary also give sample sentences as to the usage of “condescend?”

Or in words (only) you will understand: Your using of this verb contraindication to grammarian stricture.[/quote]

You do not stop showing off your retardation…

Condescend - Proper Meaning?

I gave you a fucking link of where to argue this. And they DO give examples of usage and the ones in agreement with my usage happen to be from ivy league papers… You fucking retard. Take this bullshit to the proper forum and keep it out of my thread. By the way, which one of us here are functioning as the troll? The one trying desperately to keep a class full of kids who forgot their adderol focused on topic, or the one bitching about grammar and “proper” word usage?[/quote]

From YOUR above link:

Hoa Thai, I don’t think I’ve ever heard condescend used reflexively; you can lower yourself, but I’m not sure you can condescend yourself.

Next time you might want to avoid quoting a Vietnamese person on English grammar?

Ha hah ha ha!

[/quote]

“If you cannot “condescend” yourself to respectfully discuss such issues with people of different viewpoints, then I can’t take you seriously.” Harvard Pro-Sex and Anti-Sex Crusaders Make Us Want to Ignore Them, Have Sex (IvyLeague)

OH JESUS IF THE IRONY IN THESE QUOTES WERE ANY MORE APPARENT IT WOULD SLAP YOU OVER THE FUCKING HEAD! YOU CANNOT POSSIBLY EVEN TAKE YOURSELF SERIOUS CAN YOU?!?

Let me ask you, if your god loves you so much why did he make you in the exact image of a fucking retard? That is not the loving thing to do is it?

[TheBodyGuard]

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

We can always rely on your to add something intelligent to the dialogue. Maybe YOU should be moved to GAL where in living color vids are appropriate. [/quote]

I know that I hurt your wittle feelings in the last thread, and I expect you to lash out in the sad, troglodytic way you do. That’s fine. What is particularly pathetic, though, aside from your curiously appropriate avatar, is the fact that your addled brain is too underdeveloped to discern a “dialogue” from a troll-job.

There is nothing intelligent to be added here, guy. The fact that you come down on the side of the troll, though, makes the thread even more amusing. The In Living Color skit is as much about you as it is the OP. But I guess you could feel that, hence your defensiveness.
[/quote]

Feels like you have this weird stalking thing for me to be honest. And what “man” calls another man a troglodyte? Pull down your skirt and stop showing your pussy lil man.

[TheBodyGuard]

[quote]siouxperman wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]siouxperman wrote:

It certainly is fun to make up arguments. Like the one where I criticized your size. Cool, you weigh more than I do. And cool if you lift more too. Also cool how you used the “you believe in religion, you’ll believe anything” line when I’m not religious. I’ve been on the opposite side of Deorum this whole time not because I’m religious but because he’s an idiot. I’ve “sided” with the religious folks because they can type complete sentences and I’m fairly certain that they’re intelligent people who just happen to have a different outlook on life than I do: and they aren’t attacking me for it. I asked a sincere question of Zeb and Brotherchris and got sincere answers. That’s a worthwhile dialogue, regardless of whether or not I believe what they do. I’ll sure as hell disagree with them about a lot of other things (politics for one) but I can also take a step back to try and see things from their point of view and get a little perspective.
[/quote]

Oh, I get it now, so you didn’t just merely reply to my statement about your ad hominems, you didn’t take a personal swipe at me either? I must be seeing things. I didn’t realize I made up “this argument”. I also don’t recall using “you believe in religion you’ll believe in anything”. But don’t let that stop you, you’re not quite on a roll yet. And what I did to you was not an “attack”. It was a counterpunch. Learn the difference. [/quote]

Here’s the reply to the ad hominems. It’s not an ad hominem if his inability to coherently express his thoughts precludes him from making any relevant statement. Lrn 2 argument. Who said I never took a swipe at you? What I didn’t do was say anything about your physique, you just acted like I did cause it made you feel like a big man to criticize me for it. Therefore, you made up arguments in your “counterpunches” (with all that hubris I’m sure you probably fancy yourself a boxer, but your punches really do need some work). You really don’t remember saying “If you can believe in the fairy tales of religion, I guess you can also believe you’re hyooooge”? Weird. You also seem to keep referencing a point in time where I said I was hyoge or something, which I don’t particularly remember doing. You also didn’t get the sarcasm of the use of “brah” in reference to myspace. Also, speaking of hubris, you stated you need no more size. So you’ve hit the pinnacle? You’re the best of the best and have no further aspirations? What the hell are you doing on this site then? You’re set. Get out there and live the hyooooge life.[/quote]

I’m 46 lil guy. I am bigger than you will ever be (unless you respond to and start taking higher doses of drugs) and I have been stronger than you will ever be. Weightlifting doesn’t pay my bills and any attempt to get “hyooger” would only be a detriment to my health. Never had a myspace brah so I don’t get your references. I’m not a boxer, but I’ve been known to fight. Want to go a round? You near NJ?

[TheBodyGuard]

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

You’re exhausting and I’m not going to continue to banter with you. Make a fucking point or a rebuttal but stop playing word games and twisting mine.[/quote]

I’ve not twisted one word of your ineffectual attack on Christianity. Why would I? You’re doing a poor job without me jumping in.

First, when I referenced that “one is right” I was talking of your beliefs and that of everyone else. And you know that and you’re purposefully taking words out of context and I do not have the time or inclination to continue to rebut this nonsense.

Wrong, you have plenty of time from what I can tell. Secondly, I took nothing of what you said out of context, again why would I? It is patently foolish within it’s very context, taking it out would only help you.

Since you like logic, they can’t all be right, but they can all be wrong, since none start with an undisputed known truth. THAT is what I believe - that they cannot all be right, and that they could all very well be wrong. YOU believe that only one is right, at the expense of all the others.

I completely agree with that statement and it made perfect sense. Do more of this.

I’m assuming God had a better way? Are you fucking serious? Now you’re arguing by default that GOD IS SOMEHOW LIMITED. You might want to go back and refresh your beliefs sir. So God is limited in the means by which he can communicate with his children?

Now you’re moving to the part of your program called attack of the “straw man.” I never said God is limited and you probably know that. What I said was that God (the father) communicated to people one on one thousands of years ago and many still turned their backs on him and sinned. With that said obviously he could communicate with people directly today, he’s God.

And finally, your circular fallacy of relying on something (in dispute) to prove a disputed point is completely illogical. You cannot say to me that the OT proves God communicated directly with man.

I never said that either. Think now, what did I say? I said that God spoke to his people (according to the OT). If you are not a Christian and do not believe in the Bible then of course this is all nonsense to you, just as your argumentation skills are nonsense to me.

I did not back away from any such war, persecution, murder, censorship or any such related argument as to the history of your Church. Not one bit.

You walked away from that point by saying that “it doesn’t matter both sides were involved in war.” My rebuttal was to remind you (as I do now) that your original point was to demean Christianity with your comment as there have been more wars and far more pain caused by non-Christians. At that point you wanted no more of it. Are you now ready to prove that Christians are responsible for more suffering than non-Christians through the ages? If not you are once again walking away from that particular piece of illogic.

And yes, you have twisted my words and I shall not continue to point out how.

You’ve not even begun to point out how, therefore you cannot continue to do so. This is one more error in logic on your part.

Anyway, instead of arguing and nit picking words, why don’t you stick to the meat on the bone - or is your position so weak that you must obfuscate the argument with word play?

What are words? If you cannot use them effectively is it not my duty to point that out? You seem to be asking for a free pass as to how ineffectively you communicate. Now why would I do that? And furthermore if you are so very sure that Christianity is incorrect how can I trust you to prove this if you are incapable of carrying on a general conversation regarding religion? In short, you have to do better, much better for me to take you seriously.
[/quote]

1. No one made an “attack on Christianity”. Saying you do not believe is not an attack. That’s a strawman AND yet another distortion by you of what I wrote;[/quote]

I’m sure you will recall saying something on the order of “who cares what you think as I am aware of your Christian background.” In that same post you went on to claim that you are a “free thinker” the allusion being that your opinion matters more. And then you began your litany of logical fallacies that were really just atrocious.

2. My time will not be dedicated to arguing circles and semantics with you. When was the last time you took a position or made a point? You’re arguing MY words. When are we going to apply cold hard logic to your beliefs?;

I’m not sure that you deal in cold hard logic. Every time you try to make a point it is a rambling illogical mess. I now roll my eyes and wonder does this guy really have that much confidence in his obvious inabilities to actually want to debate further? But hubris knows no bounds I suppose. And after all this is T Nation.

3. I’m not going back, but you clearly implied God was limited because you implied a limit on his ability to communicate.

Ah…using the straw man again I see. One more logical fallacy to your credit. One last time just for you: I said that God (the father) communicated directly to his people thousands of years ago as in speaking with a voice (per the OT). But does not do that any longer. And you read that as me saying he “cannot” communicate verbally any longer? I’m hoping this is just another of your straw men ploys rather than you actually don’t understand the difference between “not” doing something and “not being able” to do something. Tell me which is it?

I can go back and cut and paste YOUR EXACT words;

Yes, I challenge you to do that. And while you’re cutting and pasting please put the date and time of the post where I allegedly said that “God cannot communicate any longer”. Please, please show us how right you are.

4. I didn’t walk away from the argument and I made no such statement “they were both in war”. I did no such thing and in fact, I REFINED the argument by stating we can judge a tree by its fruit;

Your initial foray into the argument was to demonstrate how nasty Christianity is by alluding to the fact that Christians have been behind wars, pain etc. When I responded that non-Christians are responsible for even more wars and pain so why are you not running from those people, you could no longer use that as an argument unless of course you could prove me wrong, which you could not. That set up your back peddling on the topic which now extends to this thread.

5. I don’t care where you agree with me. Ultimately we will never agree - that’s why you’re going in circles instead of making points;

My point is that you are not making sense. A man who mocks Christianity cannot even put forth a cogent argument. It’s funny yet at the same time sad. And I am really sorry to have to point that out to you. I am basically pleading with you to make sense, and you cannot. But you know all about God yada yada yada…Uh huh.

6. I’m not attempting to prove christianity incorrect, I merely stated MY belief.

No actually you did more than state your belief. You’re basically mocking Christianity and have done so almost since the time that you entered this (and other) threads. When pushed (just a tiny bit) by me you come unraveled like a roll of cheap yarn. You are unable to use logic in a general discussion about religion, yet you’ve threatened to get down to specifics per Christianity a couple of times now. You’ve been cornered and now you’re trying to find a way to change the subject. It’s all very clear and nothing new for this place. I’ve been through this nonsense with people like you for years right here on T Nation.

But I’ll be happy to bring logic to bear upon your beliefs whenever you are ready to have THAT discussion. You will not have that one though, because the white flag of faith will go up in the first page; and,

Ah, one more threat of showing how smart you are when confronting Christianity, yet you’ve failed up to this point. You cannot bring “logic to bear” on a simple broad discussion of religion. You’ve been called on several logical fallacies and have tried to run from each of them. And at one time begged to be let free with such gems as “Oh come on you know what I mean.” But suddenly like magic you’ll come alive as we further the discussion? Your pomposity must be inspiring for others of your “faith” who also have nothing to say and plenty of arrogance to say it.

7. I have zero interest in whether you take me seriously.

That’s good because I really don’t think anyone who has a modicum of reasoning ability would take you seriously. You need to sit back and ask yourself where you’re going with this. Why you began it, and most importantly how you can escape back to lighter threads. Threads where your obviously more comfortable because your silly bluster intimidates people and your inability to coherently represent your point doesn’t really matter.

Now run along.
[/quote]

It occurred to me that you’re a pathetic little man to sit there and needle dick everything I write instead of just taking a counter point and expressing an idea. Don’t discuss the ideas, attack the man. You’re not winning any converts here and for all your cleverness, I don’t see a groundswell of support for your nonsense beyond the usual troll from Japan.

If you think I’m going to quote and quote and rebut every line in the type of literary jihad in which you are no engaging, you’re wrong. But I will rebut your nonsense.

If I attacked Christianity, cut and paste now or STFU. If you cannot do better to defend your beliefs other than make attacks, maybe you should find a stronger religion. Maybe you shouldn’t be so sensitive. If I state I’m a free thinker, it has nothing to do with what you believe in. I’m distinguishing myself not against Christianity inasmuch as christianity is not such measure in my world. But you keep building those straw men you claim to see. The straw men in your vision are you own. Do you notice you spend an inordinate amount of time discussing my words instead of ideas? Weak.

If you’re not sure I deal in cold hard logic, take me up on my offer and start a thread entitled “the logical argument for Christianity” and let’s all engage.

I shall take the trouble to find your awkwardly worded post about God’s communication. Instead of engaging in a semantics pissing contest, perhaps you could enlighten us all as to why God does not communicate at all anymore and why that communication has been inconsistent throughout the ages.

You’re still drawing relative conclusions about persecutions in the name of religion in a desperate attempt to defend your religion. So you attack my words, and engage in relative morality e.g., other people engaged in greater atrocities so therefore we aren’t bad. Speak of logical fallacies. I said it now at least 3 other times, I don’t care about any other group. We are presently talking about Christianity and I said it and I’ll repeat it since you’re so fucking obtuse - I shall judge the tree by the fruit. When you want to discuss the fruit of another tree, let me know and I’ll be delighted to acknowledge their atrocities too, because at least it will then be relevant to the discussion.

Cut and paste where I “mocked” christianity or just STFU. Further, I pretty much acknowledged I don’t have the answers (neither do you, you are relegated to “faith”) but I am open to answers beyond the mere dogma that rules your life.

You’re yammering on about mocking christianity. You’re mighty sensitive. Since you took so much time to endless quote and reply, go cut and paste or STFU. I have also not “changed the subject”. Again, cut and paste or STFU. Do they teach you these tactics in bible study? When are you going to actually discuss an issue? Or, are you just going to continue badgering me in a desperate attempt to avoid real discussion?

You’ve been through this nonsense with people like me on Tnation? I’m pretty sure they feel like they’ve been thru this nonsense with you before.

Again, I’m not “confronting” christianity. I’ve already stated very clearly I do not care what you believe. Read it again, and let it roll around in your mind and say it out loud so you stop being ridiculous. I could care less about “confronting” your beliefs. But I will express MY opinion as I see fit, no matter how long and tedious you want to attack me.

Lighter threads? LOL. I told you before these threads remind me of the Superhero discussion in GAL. What could be lighter than this? What could be lighter than you endlessly nit picking someone’s every word? Is that the best you have in the “defense” of your religion? Of course it is, because the end game argument for you (since you’re so bright, surely you can see a few moves ahead right?) is “faith”, not logic, not established facts - absolutely nothing that can VERIFY and PROVE what you believe except “faith”.

Now run along and play quote reply quote reply. Fetch boy

[TheBodyGuard]

Apparently we have a bunch of religious English teachers here. It’s an English thread. If we cannot defend our God, let’s attack grammar and such.