The Bible is a book.

Glad you think so. Of course, reality is immutable and believing something doesn't make it true.


Right. A stand in the middle. *rolls eyes*


You mean the kind of tolerance and open mind that so many Christians are showing toward nonbelievers in this country? That kind of tolerance? Maybe it's not personal to you, Wayfinder, but it is to me. I'm one of those folks G. Bush Sr called "unpatriotic".


Pablum, bud. You seem to think you're the voice of calm wisdom here, and all you're doing is flapping your arms. That's the kind of balloon that begs to be popped.


Show me where I've insulted you. I want to see it.


Cool, let's see it. Contrary to your mischaracterization of me, I'm always interested in an intelligent debate - something you have yet to provide. Instead I've seen you bounce back and forth, toss out some patently offensive terms regarding atheists and THEN accuse me of ad hominem. Trust me, I don't fear your alleged logic and "scientific arguments". Not based on the evidence you've provided so far.


There's nothing to concede. Do you honestly think people who would concede a debate point easily have opinions that are worth much? Why should I concede my basic points throughout this thread - (1) Christian apologists are being disingenious when they cry "persecution"; (2) There is a serious danger to this nation's ideals that comes from religious radicals who are NOT Muslim; (3) Most of the arguments presented here on behalf of Biblical accuracy are nonsense.


Kind of how I feel about your posts - a waste of time.


Show me where I've insulted you, Way. Maybe your skin is just too thin?

Or on the other hand, you're truly clueless about the way your posts come across to others.

You need to speak to Wayfinder about that - he made some very stereotypical remarks regarding " the anti-God/anti-religious people" who he claimed were "for the most part to be totally clueless about the Bible." In case he was talking about someone here, I corrected him regarding my own study. If he was talking about people elsewhere, which is possible, then you need to tell him the same thing. I didn't invent the scope of the discusssion, I was simply replying in kind.


"Others" meaning you. Since you haven't actually quoted an instance of me "insulting" you, Way, I'm gonna have to say I don't really care how they come across to you. You're getting my honest opinion, not a bunch of half-baked compromise.

That's just one... and no, I'm not going to waste any more time with you hunting up more. You're wasting my time and the time of others with such nonsense. And I have posted my last message to such. You can continue as you wish.

Actually, I thought Wayfinder was being very fair. His post pointed out the bias from both sides. He was clearly in the center if you read it. Often what happens, as I have seen in my vast experience on the net, is people don't read the whole post before reacting.

His point about close-mindedness was right on. I hope I do better listening to others in the future rather than assuming my massive amount of personal experience and study has made me perfect.

Sorry, Way, but I have to laugh. I make a tongue-in-cheek comment referring to your unique ability to twist my words and you take it as an insult. As I thought - thin skin, Wayfinder.


Good to know this thread has a content sheriff. I just want to know who voted for you. "Hypocrisy", know thyself.

As a note, I've muted obvious troller. Reading absolute arrogance is an absolute waste of time.

Is that why you felt it necessary to announce it both here AND in PMs, Wayfinder? All because you couldn't find an instance of me actually insulting you?

Drama much?

Oh, he sent you PMs too?

I got a flurry of those, one of which said something to the effect that if I kept challenging him, he would drop-kick me, or some such nonsense.

Just one PM. No threats of violence, just some nonsense about arrogance -- apparently because I don't easily compromise my beliefs or some such.

Fun times!

And the trolls gather. Makes you wonder why they allow "mute" in these forums when the stuff goes to email. Worthless to mute anyone. Yet another SL "feature". LOL

As for good ol' Nolan Nash, troll extraordinaire... he seems to take great joy in patrolling these boards just looking for a fight. Has had more than one person mute him... and he just doesn't learn. Pretty sad existence dude. So you have to know I'm pretty much going to ignore you from here on out. Your posts were worthless troll posts in the other thread (and were reported to LL as such) and I think we can expect more of the same.


And that's the problem in a nutshell Cindy. You actually don't seem to care how your words come across. So long as you get to voice your opinions and beliefs you apparently consider how your words affect other people as irrelevant. Which is why I don't respect your position. With that kind of viewpoint, how can you expect me to accept your research as unbiased?

Do you really care what I or anyone else believes? Perhaps only to provide further fuel for arguing. A waste of my time and yours.

Now, you asked for this (twice), so here it is. I truthfully don't think you'll see any of this, but for whatever chance there may be...



For the record, I didn't state you were insulting me specifically (although that's pretty apparent). I stated the attitude of your posts in general was insulting. You show no respect for others. Pardon me saying so, but if you don't realize these things... you are going to have some major and continual relationship problems in your life. A person who doesn't care about others is bound to pay for that attitude.


I would guess that like me, they got tired of the kind of stuff you've been posting here. They took the wise course and just stopped talking to you. Why would they want to do anything else? Cindy, no one enjoys being attacked. And that's primarily what you do: attack. And you justify it by viewing your victims are "idiots". You set yourself the task of pounding some sense into them before their "dangerous" ideas influence others. Who wants to put up with that kind of attitude? Not me.

You condemn religion for pounding their beliefs into others... but that is what you are doing here. And if someone doesn't agree with your philosophy, you consider them as a heretic. I'm sorry, but your position appears to me to be no more balanced than any religious fanatic I've ever known.

Oh boy, back from Muteland I guess!


You're wrong about me, Wayfinder, but that doesn't matter. You've taken this entirely too personally -- in the realm of internet debate, these kinds of discussions must inevitably be conducted with thick skins, which you apparently do not own. Which is why I don't respect your complaints. You apparently can dish it out, but want to whine when you get it back.


One, I don't care if you "accept" my research or not. One of the things you said that I happen to agree with is that everyone does their own study and arrives at their own conclusion. I fail to see how it could ever be any other way -- the human animal will always be subjective, never objective. To demand objectivity of everyone is just plain unreasonable. Objectivity is a product of verifiable data -- something we cannot usually attain in the realm of faith ("Belief in things not seen", as Hebrews 11:1 notes) Two, as I explained to you in an attempt to demonstrate how your preconceived stereotypes were wrong, I began my studies as a devout Christian (Methodist actually) and the more I learned, the less I believed. No lack of bias was ever claimed by me at all - simply that I don't fit your neat little box. Then, you begin to question whether my research was "unbiased", how many times I've read the Bible, etc., as if you were desperate to show that your neat little stereotype WAS valid. Why not just admit that you were wrong about me? Is that hard?


"Everyone else" being who exactly - you and Kevn? For the record I haven't had much use for Kevn's dodging and strafing, either. But at least he doesn't take it personally.


Years of study have led me to adopt strong beliefs. What is the worth of a belief if you don't hold it strongly? What I've read from you has been some kind of political attempt to scorn both sides while also allowing that both sides could be right. That would have earned you an "F" in my college philosophy class. I prefer the term, "wishy washy". You end up insulting both camps.


No, you made some kind of a general prediction a couple of pages ago so you could yell "AHA! See? I predicted you'd say that!" I'm not certain I'm right at all -- I don't claim that anything is or is not, I simply believe there is not enough evidence to invest belief in any gods, nor do I think most Christians have any idea how derivative and unoriginal their traditions are. But you never bothered to find any of that out. You've been too busy trying to figure out a way to stuff me back into that "atheist" cubbyhole of yours.

Yes, I take issue even with statements you made such as "There obviously was a Jesus Christ", all it does is reveal your indoctrination and blind acceptance of dogma. Such a thing is not obvious at all, in fact it's still an ongoing scholarly debate. Was there likely such a man? It's possible, and it's also probably unprovable, but it's also possible that Jesus is nothing more than an amalgamation of traditions passed down from Sumerian legend and the Essenes (whose "Teacher of Righteousness" is recorded to have said eerily similar things to Jesus' alleged sayings). To you, though, it's "obvious" and apparently anyone who disputes that is arrogant and insulting.

So I question faith, religion and YOU -- and yet you wish to paint me as some kind of a certitude freak? Wayfinder, that is a great example of what I mean when I take your logic to task. It's just not working.


So in other words, I didn't insult YOU specifically, but you still felt insulted enough to claim to mute me (but you didn'), send me a PM to that effect and act wounded because I have a strong opinion about some believers and EVEN, god forbid, objected to the way you characterized non-believers ("anti-God" you called them). Hey, if the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it, Way. If you're not one of the lunatic fringe, that's fine, I never said you were. I did not, however, insult YOU. Thank you for verifying that truth at last.


Correction: I didn't kiss your ass when you mischaracterized my beliefs. Why should I respect you? I can't think of any reason. In fact, there are a lot of people on this board I have a world of respect for.


I do care, but only to people whose opinion I respect. Get the point?

[remainder of off-topic meandering strawman rant snipped here to save the pixels - someone needs a debate class badly]

I don't know what thread you're talking about, and I don't really care. The last time you "reported" me, I heard nothing from LL. I am sure the result will be the same this time, You see, your idea of an "insult" is when people don't buckle under and say "Oh yes Wayfinder! You are so right!"

You are nothing more than a paper tiger my friend, you hold no special power here, get over yourself. We exchange opinions here, controlling others's opinions are not part of the fare. What is it with the control freaks around here as of late?

So, my pointing out that you also PMed me to tell me I was muted as you did with her (except you added in threats into mine), must have really gotten under your skin, eh?

Don't like being exposed as a chest-puffing obsessive? Don't act like one.

Please report this.

Hmm, rather like your long diatribe about relativism and individualism and your "prediction" that secularists are going to be the next nazis? And you wonder why Cindy is hostile. *laughs*

Do you want to know what relativism is? It's rewriting history and pretending the Constitition means something other than what the framers explicity stated, and then accusing judges who uphold the original intent of being "activists."

It's changing the national motto from a humanist slogan "E Pluribus Unum (from many, one)" to a monotheist (and let's not kid ourselves... a Christian) knee-bender and then invoking Godwin's law at the tought that anyone might want to change it back to reflect the original pluralist intent. Those Nazis!

It's acting like a champion of tolerance and at the same time casting those who diagree with your Christian indoctrinated views as arrogant villians and bigots.

It's the Christian right working feverishly to censor media and entertainment, using the pulpit as a political soapbox, attempting to ammend the constitution (and as a quick aside, I think they should try and declare gays only 3/4 of a whole person just so everyone's clear on exactly what's going on), usurping public funds to erect idols and proselytize, smearing secularists and humanists... and all the while claiming that those who attempt to resist their oppressive arrogance are persecuting them!

That, Wayfinder, is relativism.

You know, when I read the previous posts all I could do is laugh at the absurdity.

First, Cindy's post that was so sure of herself that she couldn't even see the contradictions in her own post. So eager to prove that I was wrong that you totally missed a point I was making... and answered of course with resulting irrelevancy. That's just sad.

And Nolan as usual really adds value to the conversation. LOL. What a clown. Nolan, if you ever left any message that wasn't a direct attack against someone I'd think someone stole your password. You're a troll dude, pure and simple. Get a life.

Chip, you may fully believe what you posted, but all that message said to me was basic intolerance for those of a different belief system. It was all personal opinion, proved nothing, and just was more of the same anti-religious dogma we've heard thus far. But I'll at least say this for you: you just stated the facts as you see them, rather than insulting the intelligence of others and expecting them to applaud you for it. I can live with that. However, if you thought I was joking about the potential for our society today to repeat the path of Hitler, you are much mistaken. I am dead serious. Anyone who isn't concerned with that might need to open their eyes and look around them a bit more. Government is taking over guy, one step at a time. And our society is allowing this, just like Germany allowed Hitler to do what he did. You may not agree with or believe this. Let's see what you believe 10 years from now.

But what I did find humorous Chip, was that your entire post, the entire post, was based on the idea that I'm taking the side of pre-indoctrinated Christians... despite statements and obvious evidence to the contrary. And since that point has been made several times in this forum, I have to take it that you folks are reading only what you want to read and are looking more for a fight than to earnestly discuss the issues.

As for Cindy being hostile, she apaprently enjoys it, because she hasn't stopped, no matter what. Pattern activity. No one forces her to be hostile nor does anyone force her to take an adversarial stance in her "discussions". That is the position she chose to take. Not satisfied, she then further attacks people for reacting to her consistently insulting posts. She dares me to show where she insulted anyone and then when I do... rather than recognizing that fact and having the reaonable humility to apologize-- she just continues with more of the same. That is not rational behavior. That is oppositional.

Sorry folks, go ahead and play your games. No further interest. All you've accomplished here is to take the expected path and you've accomplished zip except to convince me even further that your position is neither rational nor reasonable. No matter how much you hold to and believe your personal opinion, it's still just your personal opinion. And you can shout it as loud and as hard and insulting as you desire-- it's still just your opinion. You can quote all the books and "facts" that you want-- it's still just your opinion. The fact that some author somewhere agrees with you doesn't alter the fact that it's still just your opinion. Certainly the religious side can show all sorts of authors who agree with them as well... but of course, you would attack the validity of their authors, whereas yours are sacrosanct. Personal opinion.

It might be noted that I was just as critical of some religious concepts and systems as I was of the other side. But I didn't see any of them rise up in rage and ire because I dared voice my opinion. In fact, one of them had the humility to say, "Hmm you might be right. I'll be more aware of how I think about that in the future." The fact that you all are frothing at the mouth and the religious side isn't tells me a lot about this whole post. If you people are trying to convince others that the religious side is wrong and you're right... seems a strange way to go about it, yknow? From what I've seen, they're the ones exhibiting the controlled maturity here.

I have never, on any forum, seen people of an anti-religious belief system able to discuss anything about religion, the Bible, Christianity, life or other philosophies without eventually resorting to personally attacking their opponents. And that fact alone tells me the anti-whatever belief system isn't all that sound. It's just anti. You don't seek to build up or improve. All you want to do is tear down. Doesn't impress me any. See ya. Bye.

Irony.



Supreme irony.

I didn't attack you. When I read that you sent Cindy a PM to tell her she was being ignored (which you haven't been able to muster up the self-control to actually do) I stated that you also sent me PMs to me to tell me I was being ignored, threatening to drop-kick me or whatever. You then went off like a 8 year old about what a troll I was for simply speaking the truth, and brought up some other thread ( I still don't know which one - I haven't spoken to you in months). Do you deny the PMs you sent? If not, then what is the problem? Don't like being reminded of your adolescent behavior? Don't like it that a pattern of behavior was exposed?

And I thought *I* was on mute? Like 3 times now (speaking of patterns)? You are so full of yourself that you just can't do it though, can you? Interesting how you claim "Nolan has been muted by several people now, blah blah blah" - but you know what? They always come back and start in again, you included, thus revealing their posturing, empty threats. Funny that.

As far as your ranting about anti-religious people - I too have stated that sometimes I think some go to far - when it gets into the "you must not have completed high school" type insults. It's unnecessary. Hell, I even stood up for Kevn at one time.

You really need to get it through your head that you don't get to demand apologies for opinions. You don't get to dictate what type of opinion people can put forth here. I said this to you the first time you got on your high horse with me, and I will say it again - you have control issues. I don't know why - whether it's because your parents let you run the show as a kid, or what, but you really do need to stop trying to dictate to people here.

Judging by the progression of the posts on this forum, and most other forums dealing with religious topics I've come across, I can say only one thing:


The Bible is for war.

Although I'm sure it has been used previously in the thread, I am too lazy to check so - I will just indiscriminately call everyone a Nazi.

Deliberate Godwinning as a debate tactic. Will it work?

and Godwin's for all!

The horrid Bible scholarship throughout this thread makes me feel I must take it upon myself to kill it, Nazi.

(Phedre: She-Wolf of the SS!)

MURDERER! You're trying to KILL MY MONITOR by making me spray it LIBERALLY with my morning TEA.

Thanks for the stereotype... again. In other words you're more impressed by equivocation and pandering than with honest forthright opinion. Well sorry. Some of us don't candycoat.

Well, obviously if everyone in this thread is a Nazi, I am too. Nazis never killed computer monitors, it is true. But I am a very emotionally disturbed and schizophrenic Nazi.