Michael Jackson / Jesus Christ....

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i want evidence, so far, i am looking at a centre of a doughnut! if you want me to remain in Fabians school for exceptionally gifted theologians then you better make with the readies, substantiate your claims or at very least, refute mine, both of which amount to the same thing! or if you think i am being irreverent, give me a punishment exercise.

Okay, I quit here, you clearly don't want to have my teachings. I thought that I could give you knowledge, step by step, until you are ready to understand my grand point. By debating every miniscule detail, we are not getting anywhere, this is just an debate with retorics, where the one having the last word is the winner. Sorry, you win, but you lose what I wanted to give you.

Back to square one. You are a homophobe, and you back your homophobia with "God says so". You're a christian fundamentalist.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
Okay, I quit here, you clearly don't want to have my teachings. I thought that I could give you knowledge, step by step, until you are ready to understand my grand point. By debating every miniscule detail, we are not getting anywhere, this is just an debate with retorics, where the one having the last word is the winner. Sorry, you win, but you lose what ...[text shortened]... mophobe, and you back your homophobia with "God says so". You're a christian fundamentalist.

if you want to you can teach me about chess instead! 😀

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
if you want to you can teach me about chess instead! 😀

Still not serious...

Originally posted by FabianFnas
Still not serious...

no i am serious, if you teach me about chess, i will never question you, accept everything you have to say, will adopt your strategy and manner of thought, all in all , i would be a good disciple.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
Okay, I quit here, you clearly don't want to have my teachings. I thought that I could give you knowledge, step by step, until you are ready to understand my grand point. By debating every miniscule detail, we are not getting anywhere, this is just an debate with retorics, where the one having the last word is the winner. Sorry, you win, but you lose what ...[text shortened]... mophobe, and you back your homophobia with "God says so". You're a christian fundamentalist.

So does the church you go to have these same beliefs?

Originally posted by galveston75
So does the church you go to have these same beliefs?

i think hes in a huff because i demanded some details from him, you know like ummm, well anything really! oh well another who has limited his search for truth to unintelligent causes, bites the dust!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i think hes in a huff because i demanded some details from him, you know like ummm, well anything really! oh well another who has limited his search for truth to unintelligent causes, bites the dust!

Oh I don't know robbie, he was trying to make a point. There are valid scholarly arguments as to the exact authorship of many books in the bible. The book of Mark being an outstanding example (see "Misquoting Jesus" ). For the sake of nitpicking over minutia, you may have lost the opportunity to hear an illuminating argument. You may disagree with an argument (as you often do), but You will still learn from it.
Example: I am an avowed socialist. I often listen to Rush Limbaugh; I disagree with almost every word that comes out of his mouth, but from his ramblings I learn how to better defend my position.

Originally posted by duecer
Oh I don't know robbie, he was trying to make a point. There are valid scholarly arguments as to the exact authorship of many books in the bible. The book of Mark being an outstanding example (see "Misquoting Jesus" ). For the sake of nitpicking over minutia, you may have lost the opportunity to hear an illuminating argument. You may disagree with an argument ...[text shortened]... that comes out of his mouth, but from his ramblings I learn how to better defend my position.

what was his point then Deucer, for even now i am oblivious, he imposed his own rules and restriction, which i acquiesced to, when pressed for just a little substantiation, there was nothing, you cannot make statements and expect others to blindly accept them without substantiation.

Originally posted by duecer
Oh I don't know robbie, he was trying to make a point. There are valid scholarly arguments as to the exact authorship of many books in the bible. The book of Mark being an outstanding example (see "Misquoting Jesus" ). For the sake of nitpicking over minutia, you may have lost the opportunity to hear an illuminating argument. You may disagree with an argument ...[text shortened]... that comes out of his mouth, but from his ramblings I learn how to better defend my position.

============================
Example: I am an avowed socialist. I often listen to Rush Limbaugh; I disagree with almost every word that comes out of his mouth, but from his ramblings I learn how to better defend my position.
=======================================


Get in a time machine. Fast forward to the future a couple of thousand years. Now how would you deal with this objection to Socialism?

"Well Duecer, you see we really don't know WHAT Karl Marx really said. "

Excuse me if the founder of Socialist philosophy is more the work of someone else. Just substitute that person's name for Marx.

Now, it has been a many centries. This Johnny Come Lately professor challenges you that we have no idea of what the founders of Socialist ideas REALLY said.

How would you deal with that problem?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
what was his point then Deucer, for even now i am oblivious, he imposed his own rules and restriction, which i acquiesced to, when pressed for just a little substantiation, there was nothing, you cannot make statements and expect others to blindly accept them without substantiation.

You're kidding yourself. You may have said you were going to accept his rules, but you certainly aren't following them.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
You're kidding yourself. You may have said you were going to accept his rules, but you certainly aren't following them.

if it had continued as an interrogative discussion, then all would have been well, i would have simply stated my opinions, Fabian would have tried to ascertain whether they were valid, as soon as one party states, i have evidence to the contrary, then surely, in the interests of truth, to establish what the credential are.

for example, it would have been better to ask, who authored the book of Leviticus, Moses did, what is the basis for this assertion, the Bible states it, how do you know the Bible is reliable, it has a proven record of reliability, what record of reliability etc etc etc, in this way, truth can be established, but as for i have evidence to the contrary, and then not to produce it, well that is something quite different.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
if it had continued as an interrogative discussion, then all would have been well, i would have simply stated my opinions, Fabian would have tried to ascertain whether they were valid, as soon as one party states, i have evidence to the contrary, then surely, in the interests of truth, to establish what the credential are.

for example, it would ...[text shortened]... ve evidence to the contrary, and then not to produce it, well that is something quite different.

Deny it all you want, but you aren't following HIS rules. Most of your post here is about defining what YOU think the rules should be and how YOU think the lesson should be presented.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Deny it all you want, but you aren't following HIS rules. Most of your post here is about defining what YOU think the rules should be and how YOU think the lesson should be presented.

whatever thinkofone, its just easier to agree with you, yep your correct. how foolish of me to think that i could have a valid point, how utterly futile to think that.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
whatever thinkofone, its just easier to agree with you, yep your correct. how foolish of me to think that i could have a valid point, how utterly futile to think that.

Like usual, it's all about YOU and YOUR point. You agreed to receive a lesson, so receive it, instead of trying to give one.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Like usual, it's all about YOU and YOUR point. You agreed to receive a lesson, so receive it, instead of trying to give one.

who else's point of view am i supposed to put across, Fabians, Jaywills, Noobsters, do they not also have their own minds and evaluations even as you do ? i agreed to an interrogative discussion, i did not expect to simply passively sit with my hands under my bum, mouth open, catching flies and staring into the cosmos and wishing i was a seagull so that i could fly to America and meet some friends there, even though i do wish i was a seagull.