Castin

List a user you would like to mate with.

It is a pretty terrible username

Gender: female

Opinion: discarded 

You mean, I shouldn't just lurk and stare at them in accusatory silence until I'm sure they're not Wylted?

I don't understand.

This is exactly what happened to me and I swear to Locic, I'm not Wylted!

Do you agree or not on that 

jesus true father would have been known if they had DNA tests back then ?

instead of this garbage about god's son .

• Mark, our first Gospel to be written, mentions nothing about a divine virgin birth. Scholars usually consider it more adoptionistic -- God adopts Jesus as his son at Jesus's baptism. My guess is the Markan community was unaware of the virgin birth narrative. Maybe it hadn't developed yet, maybe it hadn't circulated to that community.
  
• John, our last Gospel to be written, is also mum about Jesus's virgin birth. It even refers to Jesus as the "son of Joseph." The Johannine community may have been unaware of the virgin birth narrative too, or they may have just been uninterested in incorporating it. The progression sort of goes:
  
• Mark: "Jesus was special from his baptism on" --> Matthew & Luke: "Jesus was special from birth" --> John: "Jesus was special even before his birth."
  
• Matthew and Luke are the only two books in the entire New Testament which attest to the divine parthenogenesis, and their accounts conflict.
  
• Matthew, at least, seems to have based his virgin birth narrative on a misunderstanding of an Old Testament prophecy. Matthew was reading the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, which renders the Hebrew almah ("young woman") as parthenos (which is apparently more ambiguous, like "maiden" -- it could mean "young woman" or "virgin"). So Matthew, who was kind of obsessed with prophecy fulfillment, said, "Ah! The prophecy says he must be born of a virgin!" even though it doesn't say that. It wasn't even really a prophecy, by the way. Matthew just sort of took one bit of Isaiah out of context and called it a prophecy.
  
• Paul, our earliest and potentially best-informed source on Jesus, whose writings predate even the Gospels, also says nothing about the virgin birth, even though he directly addresses the issue of Jesus's birth: he says only that Jesus was "born of a woman, born under the law" -- as if Jesus was born like any other Jew. Bart Ehrman notes that Paul only needed to change one word ("born of a woman" to "born of a virgin") to incorporate the virgin birth story. He didn't. Paul claims to have met Jesus's brother James, and I actually believe him. He does not appear to have come away from this meeting with any knowledge that Jesus's birth was out of the ordinary.
  
• Jesus's original followers were Jews, who likely believed in the messiah as Jews of that time and place understood the term: a human hero, born to human parents, descended from David, and chosen by God to rule his kingdom on Earth. In Jewish scripture, the messiah was never supposed to be born of a virgin. They may have indeed called Jesus the son of God -- but this is a term we see applied elsewhere in the Old Testament with no implication that God literally fathered that person (except in the sense that God is everyone's father).
  

"I think Christianity is the ONLY true and correct religion".  #48 

But then say: 

"I don't agree with religion;#60   "I have never believed in religion. Religion ought to be abolished from my point of view".#52 (except his own  can we presume?)

 Although Paul was considered by some to have been "Gnostic".

The doctrine of Christ was not founded in the life and teachings of Yeshua, but rather, it was the invention of Paul.

Unlike the false “Gnostics” of ages past who considered themselves to be “Gnostic Christians” or “Gnostic Jews”, the True Gnostic is simply a True Gnostic.

Neither are we representative of those Gnostics which early church fathers argued against in their efforts to establish a single church orthodoxy with its attendant ecclesiastical authority.

A lot of people just saw the prominent figure for Max (Mikal) dishing it out at RM and just thought, is this how the presidency is going to be?

What's rational about this madman, he doesn't like to think

Ego so fragile he that he needs to see a shrink

Sure he's mad and not a not a man so the name is out of sync

He claims I'm abusive and he likes it, he's into some weird kinks

It's a shame he likes to pray to mods while he plays the prey

This ain't abuse it just happens to be in a zone thats gray

i paved the way for those  that say they are lost and stray

What's rational about a madman that's mad it's just a walking cliche

I don't think he's stupid. I would argue that most people are not receptive to lessons that come from a place of hostility or ridicule.

This is stupid. If your enemy puts sugar in your coffee, than your coffee tastes sweet, but if a friend even accidently poisons your coffee, you still die.

Don't think about how the message is packaged, just think of how useful it is.

That is fair and I will take that fully. I just refuse to let him go off on fully blatant rants and lies about max. Specifically because max refuses to address it since it's more of a bother than anything. So a lot of new people don't know him, see what RM is posting and assume it's true. I'm just here to troll him till he stops

They told me you are below my weight class and not to punch down on you. They are not sympathizing with your position, they are saying you are to stupid/stubborn to learn the lesson that is being taught. 

I could see how that is how you would take it without full context and I respect that, and I promise in all honesty its not taking advantage of him for amusement. The goal of this is to show him he can't just blindly insult and swing and not expect to receive shit back. For example he has went through posts and reported every thing someone posts when he disagrees with them just so moderation will hopefully eventually listen to him. He wants to be able to block you and say bad things about you without the consequences of someone calling him out or responding to him. When he does it someone it's fine because to him he sees it as a critique but when someone does it him, then they are a bully etc. I promise you if it was so one sided whiteflame or moderation would have stepped in and I ask them constantly if I'm going to far etc and they are fully aware that he dishes as much as he gets which is why they have not intervened. I know slapping on the hand publicly is probably not the best way to handle most situations like that but for him, it's the only way you drive it in his brain. 

I just don't take his bullshit victim mentality and instead of being just mean to him, usually meming him drives the point much harder because he responds poorly to it. 

Ugh. More of this shit? You make me regret casting my vote.

Thank you for saying this Castin. I haven't been on in a very long while and this is one of the reasons why.

I appreciate satire, after all I am very active on Twitter 🤪. But I don't like it when users, who are part of a clique, find a way to bully someone without breaking the CoC rules.

This happened to me in the political forum and I wouldn't wish this on anyone!

you arent voting for me luckily 

You are free to take whatever I say with a grain of salt since you assume I am "chummy" with airmax, but I am surprised you are basing so much of your vote on the opinions of others opinion on a user.

I would recommend you read both campaigns yourself and decide. Obviously I would encourage you to vote airmax's because his will be objectively better, but even then I would rather you just research yourself than judge an opinion from someone as volatile and flip floppy as RM. Airmax literally did nothing to justify him switching his vote. Him switching his vote is literally only him trying to get back at me, because I keep logically handing it to him the forums. Regardless of whether you take my side on this or not, I can guarantee you RM is using his vote for manipulative purposes and not over anything airmax actually did.

Just research both candidates yourself and form your own conclusion. You've had enough dealings with RM that you have to know somewhat what I am talking about here...

Ask Airmax to provide any evidence he has pull on Twitter that he boasts.

If Airmax had so much sway like that then the real question is this, why hasn't he used it yet?

Would you consider organizing on Twitter as well? DART needs a Twitter account for maximizing recruitment.

no.

"https://bbs.market/ZLOGIC/posts - - it's easy to reach tons of people here

I also have 35+ members on my discord channel and even more in my contacts list who would be good initiates for DebateArt.com

and 422 followers here - https://hive.blog/@logiczombie

and more here - https://blurt.blog/@logiczombie/proposal-to-end-all-moderation-problems

I recently exposed some fundamental errors in the HIVE system and my notoriety has skyrocketed there."

Growth needs to begin with a trickle of awareness, new members and activity, drive that planned development over time, and do that within reasonable metrics over specific periods. One step towards this goal requires that we dust off that ol' twitter account and get some hits going. We'll eventually also focus on SEO areas, but I want DART to actually be something people get linked to because of their interest in debate - that needs to be the focus, what brings in new quality members, and what retains those members. It's not enough just to hashtag the common abortion debate, we need to get specifically topical. If there is a trending hashtag and a breaking event we need to incentivize and encourage debates on it immediately to make DART at the forefront of that interest. To that end, we are going to begin the DART STARS DEBATE TEAM (or we can call it something else if you have a better name). This cadre of the willing are going to be tasked by the Social Media Director to start these topical debates and then we'll get the twitter account to feed on those trends.

Granted the religion forum was the wild west and went too far, and you are judging the modding practices entirely on your experience in the religion forum, which generally despised any mod interference, had a different culture than the rest of the site and was generally resistant to moderation. I don't like the religion forum culture and usually avoid that section, but it is the culture they wanted. Serious religious discussion can and should go in the philosophy forum anyway.

Are you for more moderation or less moderation?

They literally banned people here for wrong think. 

If you liked bsh1 you would like airmax. Bsh1 was a big fan of airmax on DDO as well. Trust me you qould like airmax. I encourage you to message him and ask him questions and get to know him. He is a good guy, a hard worker, and someone you will 100% like if you give him a chance. He's right up your ally.

He isn't becoming a mod, he's becoming a power-check for mods and official even hoster.