Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell, yeah, thanks for proving my point. You have this thing, this near win, and you disgrace it by cheating. This is you snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. And that is an epic fail like no other.
check the clan standings Sista! Oh yes! and reality as well! 😀
Originally posted by SuzianneIt's interesting how often you use little could-be-any-forum could-be-any-topic retorts like this to dodge the content of other people's posts. If you think it's possible for someone to successfully decide to start believing something that they simply do not believe, could you give an example of you doing this in your own life?
I think FMF calls this "a swing and a miss".
Originally posted by FMFThis would be humorous if it weren't so self-serving.
"to dodge the content of other people's posts."
I have no reason to "dodge" anything, especially the "content of other people's posts". Why do you think I am responsible for the "content" of GB's posts?
I posted this on page 15. Perhaps you missed it: "Why people on this site continually do this thing, where they hold third parties responsible somehow for not accosting the person they've decided they're going to vilify for merely holding their differing opinion, is beyond me."
I do not speak for other people, and I am not responsible for what they say, and unlike you, I don't hold others responsible for what some people say, just because I may disagree with them, and I certainly would not make it my "job" to vilify them for merely disagreeing with me.
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 117373
Originally posted by robbie carrobieDo you think telling me directly, rather than posting a response to me in a reply to someone else, will somehow upset the delicate balance of the horrid little world you inhabit?
'feel free to ignore me at anytime' - divesjeester
Originally posted by SuzianneI'm not talking about the way other people dodge the content of posts. I'm talking about the way you dodge the content of posts.
This would be humorous if it weren't so self-serving.
I have no reason to "dodge" anything, especially the "content of other people's posts". Why do you think I am responsible for the "content" of GB's posts?
I posted this on page 15. Perhaps you missed it: "Why people on this site continually do this thing, where they hold third parties responsible ...[text shortened]... them, and I certainly would not make it my "job" to vilify them for merely disagreeing with me.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
But you are a Christian, so obviously you believe that Jesus is not quite like anything or anyone else. I am not seeking "refuge" or seeking to feel "secure". I am curious as to whether you realize how heavily your ministry relies on a psychologically bogus implicit assertion: that people can somehow choose or decide to believe things that they don't believe.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If it is true what you say then it is a self defeating psychological argument as well.
How then can I just "choose" to believe you in what you say?
I can't. I can't. I can't. Don't you see ?
Self defeating argument you have there Doc.
Originally posted by sonshipI don't think you being facetious works in this matter.
If it is true what you say then it is a self defeating psychological argument as well.
How then can I just "choose" to believe you in what you say?
I can't. I can't. I can't. Don't you see ?
Self defeating argument you have there Doc.
Can you provide an example from your own life where you decided to believe something even though you didn't believe it and didn't think it was true?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
I don't think you being facetious works in this matter.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to your own philosophy I cannot simply decide to believe you have a valid point which needs any further discussion.
By your own philosophy, I can't just "decide" what you teach is true.
Want to play a game of chess ?
Originally posted by sonshipThe question is this: if you believe that what I am saying is not true, do you think you can simply decide to believe it anyway.
According to your own philosophy I cannot simply decide to believe you have a valid point which needs any further discussion.
By your own philosophy, I can't just "decide" what you teach is true.
Originally posted by sonshipSo let's get this straight. I asked: Do you genuinely think that people can "decide" to believe something that they simply do not believe? And your answer is: I remember the man who cried out "Lord, I believe, help my unbelief!".
Sometimes it is hard. But I remember the man who cried out "Lord, I believe, help my unbelief!" .[/b]
In other words, you are suggesting that the person who simply does not believe your claims about your God figure should "decide" that your God figure exists, decide to pray to Him, and decide to ask him for help with believing in Him. Is that right?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
In other words, you are suggesting that the person who simply does not believe your claims about your God figure should "decide" that your God figure exists, decide to pray to Him, and decide to ask him for help with believing in Him. Is that right?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In other words, you're saying that the person who simply does not believe your claims about your objective figure [you] should "decide" that your objective figure exists, decide to be persuaded of your objective arguments, ... etc. etc. Is that right ?
The rule applies to the preaching evangelist.
But it does not apply to the preacher of the existence of your objective character.
Sorry, I just can't "decide" that this objective truth seeking figure exists, according to your own philosophy.