[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Ok Chris. If I said this: [quote]you insist on lying[/quote] to you, you are telling the people reading this thread that upon my my refusal to either substantiate that charge or recant that your attitude would simply be: [quote]get back to Romans 2[/quote]and[quote]stay on topic[/quote]?
Tell me that’s what you would do and we’ll go to Romans 2. A debate that I STARTED on MY Facebook page with YOU and that YOU ended because of a totally unrelated issue. You can’t have it both ways. In the above post you say that I started the debate AND that I don’t want to talk about it.
So, If I said this: [quote]you insist on lying[/quote] to you, you are telling the people reading this thread that upon my my refusal to either substantiate that charge or recant that your would simply [quote]get back to Romans 2[/quote]and[quote]stay on topic[/quote]
? Do yourself a favor and think before you answer.[/quote]
So, you’re not going to discuss Romans 2. Figures, we both know that deep down you know the Catholic Church is infallibly right, and all that invisible church bullshit is just heterdoxy crap that makes all the hippies feel groovy and shit. Discussion over, Jesus wins, heretics lose. If you want to make your own thread go ahead and make it. This thread is about Romans 2 and why the Catholic Church is right. You indirectly made it seem like I left the conversation (that I started on your page, because you fallaciously accuse the Catholic Church of universalism even though it condemns the very doctrine and not even closely teachers universalism. Instead of attacking the argument, you threw out non-sequitors) for bad reasons on my part. I explained it, I did what you asked once because I didn’t know you’d use to it to hijack this thread to talk about why you have truth on your side and why you never lie.
I’m done with this thread, so I’ll gladly oblige you now.
Tirib called http://patrickvandapool.com/ a coward. Because…Patrick wouldn’t allow Tirib to talk shit and removed his ability to comment on HIS website. Why someone that demands a level of decorum about debate I don’t know, something about respecting human beings or something. He then called Patrick a coward to me where Patrick couldn’t defend himself. Then he called Patrick a coward on http://www.almostnotcatholic.com/ to a Brent Stubbs in a comment. Tirib then on July 11th, wrote to me that “They are cowards.” So he repeatedly called my friends and acquaintances) cowards, though he claims he only called Patrick a coward, he called both of them cowards behind their back (defined as not being able to defend themselves). Which he claimed and I quote
[quote]BC writes:
[quote]Tirib writes:
I apologize for bad mouthing one of your homeboys, though I promise you it was NOT behind his back.[/quote]
Actually it was, you repeatedly called my friends cowards. Why you insist on lying about this I am not sure.[/quote]
As you can see, you said that you apologize for bad mouthing ONE of my homeboys, I’d assume you were referring to Patrick (since you admit this in this thread). You said it was not behind his back. But, you did. Instead of calling Patrick a coward to him through his website or e-mail you told me several times he was a coward (behind his back), and you put it on Brent Stubbs’ website (where he removed and even put up a warning about it and you even admitted to doing that) which is behind Patrick’s back. You then called several people cowards on July 11th. You did this in a personal message to me where no one could defend themselves but me.
So, you say, “I apologize for bad mouthing one of your homeboys, though I promise you it was NOT behind his back.”
And, I retort, “Actually it was, you repeatedly called my friends cowards. Why you insist on lying about this I am not sure.”
You say two things, you said you bad mouthed one of my homeboys, you bad mouthed several.
The other is that you did not do this behind their back, you bad mouthed them to me where they could not defend themselves…the definition of behind someone’s back.
I said that you actually repeatedly called my friends cowards you called Patrick a coward…I don’t know how many times, you then told me that I needed new Catholic friends, even saying that “They are cowards” to me (exception being Mark Shea). So…I’m not sure what I lied about in this instance?
You say you called one person, not behind their back, a coward. In fact you called multiple people a coward, behind their back. So…not sure what I am supposed to recant? You said one thing, it was not true. [/quote]
And this kind of crap is why I put him on ignore… He uses tactics, not sound reason or judgement. The problem with indulging him is uses it to do as much harm as humanly possible and dressing it up as a defense of God when in reality it’s more of an insult.
You gave him access to friends of yours and you had some expectation of that be handled respectfully? That he wouldn’t dig deep to stab you strait in the back, while looking you in the face and saying “I love you MAAAAAN!”? I call you out on that, because you knew better than to trust him with that. But my admonition is mild because because I know your heart is good and kind. I know your are following the Catholic tenant of “Seventy times seven times”. You are a good man BC and your passion for Christ is what I love most about you.
I going to tell you flat out, if you haven’t figured it out by now, that you absolutely cannot trust tirib. You must be careful how much you let him in. He will take any opportunity to hurt you or anybody else so long as it benefits himself. You have seen it, so have I, so has anyone who has dealt with him in any detail. You judge a tree by it’s fruit. That tree ain’t never going to change.