Total posts: 5,875
-->
@ludofl3x
Lol. You won't commit. But you want to summarize your counter argument while not giving me a chance to lay mine out. Nice.
I'm glad we're both happy. At least I know where my happiness comes from.
Billions of people over thousands of years convinced by a 1% case is pretty good hey? Just imagine if there was more evidence!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SirAnonymous
Its him I was referring to as being inspired. I didn't know he had a sense of humor.
He kept it hidden from me.
Know what I'd love to see you write? A conversation between a right wing ultra conservative nut job, and an ultra left liberal progressive snowflake.
Just thinking about your take on it makes me want to laugh.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
About a quarter of you guys are too dense to understand the argument, another quarter doesn't care for anything other than taking silly potshots at God, and and a quarter are not interested.
That leaves only a quarter who would be interested, and who have the mental capacity to understand the argument in the first place. I thought you were in that one quarter. Do you really think I could lay out the argument to atheists like Dee Dee or Disgusted?
You asked for the argument. You asked me to start a new thread, and then you sniff, you may reply if its interesting, and if you see fit.
You were asking me to post my argument. You. Then when I ask if you will take part, you say I should just lay it out and you may, if you see fit? Lay it out for whom? The 3/4th of atheists who think God is a four letter word?
No thanks. I'll pass.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
That's OK. But you answer as if I was talking TO you. You've done that a couple of times.I know it was a bit sharp for you,but I was speaking from my own stand point.
Although this interloping never seems to be a problem for you when you decide to interfere and budge in one other peoples conversations.
Budging in isn't the problem, it's the confused way you pretend I was talking TO you. I budge into convos, but I'm always aware that the post I'm responding to was not originally addressed to me.
It must be a theist shepherd thing, where one sheep of the flock is looking after another sheep of the same flock.
Nah, I think you just have poor reading comprehension and really did think the post was to you. You should read more slowly.
Anyway, if your would rather me NOT reply to someone's questions please say so.
What do I care? You never respond to my questions, so why would I care whether you respond to someone's else's questions? You are welcome to respond anytime, just stop pretending the post was addressed to you.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
Lol.
No thanks ludo. I decline your kind offer to start a new thread because this riveting subject shouldn't be buried on the 9th - 10th? page.
I'll keep waiting for an atheist not terrified of having the case laid out to him.
Thanks.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SirAnonymous
[blah blah blah something very important I am sure]
Lol!
You're inspiring others to funniness.
Is that a word?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
@Outplayz
@TheDredPriateRoberts
This convo is very interesting. I hope the clown doesn't derail it. I'd love to hear more of your ideas, especially outplayz' and etrnl's opinion on dredpirate's idea about sentience needing purpose in order to exist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Why is it you can use similes but God can't?
I am not.
You are not what? Is your word "sheep" not a simile?
I am stating the words of non other than god himself.
God called MoPac a sheep?? Can you cite that verse?
So when you said mopac was a sheep, you meant he was a sheep?
This is the third thread that you have blatantly broken forum rules concerning cross contamination. Let me remind you.
This is the fourth time you've dodged the question hypo.
Now I am asking you to either address the double standards...
There are no double standards in the story.
..in this silly story...
The story isn't silly. Your "assessment" is though.
or simply leave the thread.
No.
It is not a difficult choice.
Sure. But so then I can make the choice I want.
And the unanswered question remains. You called mopac a sheep, but you didn't mean a barnyard animal, the bible said you must hate your family to be a disciple, why couldn't "hate" also be different like your use of "sheep"?
Hmmm Genius?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
You do that Olaf.I'll have to look that up.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
But you seemed to be implying that you'd only be an observer in the new thread.
Wrong.
Neither the post nor the comment in it was addressed to you Einstein.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
It depends on your "case" or "argument."
OK. But as we are already debating it here, another thread with a lower chance of your participation makes little sense to me.
As with Athias, I am not going to waste time spamming someone's thread if what they're saying doesn't interest me intellectually.
Well, you're here now. But please don't spam my threads even if something interests you intellectually. Posts are preferred to spam.
So my suggestion, as you're apparently aggrieved you don't get a chance to lay it out, is lay it out and I'll be glad to look at it and respond if so inclined.
You asked and I told you, you guys never give us the chance. Don't ask a question and then call the answer a grievance.
Or, don't bother, but don't say you never get the chance to do so,
I did not say I never get the chance, I said you never give us the chance. I could make a post to no one, but if that was what I wanted I would not be on a debate site now would I?
I mean it's an internet forum where anyone can post any topic they like.
Yes, but its also a debate site where the purpose is to get others to consider and understand. Some positions cannot be expounded in a single post.
Saying you're somehow prohibited from doing so seems silly,
It is silly. A clear sign that I didn't say that. You suggested I make another thread. I asked what was wrong with this thread.
...just make the topic if it's interesting.
No thanks. You're here arguing, that shows you already find it interesting. That you cannot commit to another thread (which you recommended) with the topic in which you've already shown an interest, is telling.
Thanks.
Created:
The obsessed "brother" mentions Ethan several times again in a post to someone else.
If I tell you I don't know what I do to drive unstable people over the edge like this, you wouldn't believe me considering how often it happens to me.
I even have one genius spamming his FaceBook with Ethan said nonsense and I've never been on his Facebook, we share no mutual friends, and no one on his Facebook knows who I am.
For some reason, I get the geniuses really riled up. They begin posting in all caps and all bold. Underline everything. Then start posting about me in every post they make, even in threads I have not visited.
The next step is to start spamming via PM. One genius is already there. Dee Dee cannot be far behind. The Facebook self spammer is furthest ahead. My PM spammer is not far behind.
Then I realized it was attention they wanted. So, being a troll whisperer, I oblige them. Several of them are now choking on the attention.
Funy thing is, each one thinks he's unique and original.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Its longer.It can't be as long as when you last posted an actual thread of your own at the DEBATEART Religion forum!!!
What? No rounding this time? Lol. Some of my threads are still active today from a year ago. Your threads die early deaths.Let's see, the last one you posted in the Religion forum at DEBATEART, was on August 20, 2018! WTF
And you want to be taken seriously? NOT!
Who told you I wanted to be taken seriously? This non sequitur seems to be projection on your part Dee Dee.
I'm not the reason people see you as a clown. And no attack on me will change that general perception of you.
You are insignificant Dee Dee. Your posts are basically vacuous fluff. Empty of anything intellectually worthy.
But, as I was trained for .....posters like you, I will deal with you. It's my calling, but I greatly enjoy it too. I earned the name, troll whisperer.
Created:
-->
@rbelivb
OK, I get you. I think your argument is ad-hoc to reach a preconceived conclusion, but no matter.
I believe that these sedimented social forms are inevitably going to become increasingly untenable due to the erosion caused by the market.
The erosion of what? Social forms? Is it unknown to anyone that broad financial success in a society erodes latent
-isms?
Do you have a timeframe on when it collapses?
How do you classify yourself politically?
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
You said one year and six months. The record on the board says one year. You lied.ONE YEAR, 5 MONTHS, AND 11 DAYS at the day of my posting!
This is what I mean by unnecessary lies. What does it matter when either us made a thread? It's petty stupidity.
...and he wants to be taken seriously,
What people take seriously are intelligent posts. No one takes you seriously.
My threads have more participation than yours, by more varied people, and we debate in them, not spam the same lame rhetoric as if we're retards posting from a template.
I told you long ago that your shtick had gotten old. If people don't respect you, it is due to your behavior. Attacking others will not change that.
If you oppose Christianity, OK. But basically posting the same spam over and over, complete with the troll all caps, all bold, and underlining will get you the opposite of what you want.
Those prostitutes were supposed to chill you out. What happened? Did they reject you too? Vegas prostitutes are some of the best judges of character. Perhaps they saw through your schtick too.
Created:
Posted in:
No. Your Jesus likes prostitute hopping "true Christians!"Jesus does NOT like perpetual runaways!
Lol.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Is our genius spamming your PM too? He's also sending me childish stupidity! Can you believe a person so riled online that he harasses strangers via private messages?
Can you imagine if someone this unstable knew how to find you? Creepy.
Don't reply him, he's looking for a way to report you. Just send his mail on the Virt or Ragnar.
I really hope you've given him no information by which he can find you IRL.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Why do we need to explain it when you've already said it is clear?And just explain to those reading here what it is that you actually mean by you and ethang have to "work on me".
I haven't made it up,...
Sure you have. We didn't say we had to work on you " till you're gone". You made that part up.
..a plot by two members working together to get another member banned..
That you also made up.
My guess is your compulsion to post and your irrational hatred of Christianity will eventually get you banned. But I hope not. You're great for lolz.
But this is clearly you saying that you and your buddy ethang will have to "work on me" after your jubilation and excitement at seeing another member banned.
Yes, but not to get you banned, just to expose your ignorance on the subjects you post about. You behave similarly to the guy who got banned.
Of course you will say that now.
Of course. No one works harder than you to get you banned. No one makes posts for you, or forces you to make the posts you do. You are vulgar and dishonest all on your own. You dodge questions and play obtuse with no help from me, etrnlVw, or any mod.
And we are working on you. Your paranoia is part of evidence that we are.
Created:
I did. It's one of the reasons I didn't become a drugged out idiot ranting incoherently on the net about boogman groups.
I thanked them profusely.
Created:
Posted in:
And Moses is a god. <<<<< yes! a god<<<<<< We know this because another god said so.
So when you said mopac was a sheep, you meant he was a sheep?
Are we to think this is true because another sheep said so?
Why is it you can use similes but God can't?
Note to Gentle Reader: The genius will dodge the question because the answer embarrasses him.
Can the class say hypocrite?
I thought it could.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
No it isn't.
Sure its a lie. You say "Jesus disciples" making it seem like His 12 followers, but you're talking about others, not His 12 disciples. All your "assessments" open with similar lies.
Hardly poor are they?
Jesus didn't "surround" Himself with them, they came to Him. The disciples He chose, the ones He surrounded Himself with, were poor illiterate men. You are lying.
Indeed their businesses was fishing. They had fishing businesses.
Lol. Like the Fish Emporium? Way to stretch that lie jasper.
What does that prove!?
That, unlike you, I've read the passages.
I have few rich/ well f friends who speak the fkn same . This proves nothing. It Simpy means they spoke crude as I and many of my well off friends do.
Do you clean houses for them or walk their dogs. Non of Jesus disciples were rich. You lied. You have been busted. Don't embarrass yourself further.
...but I haven't lied.
Sure you have. You lie, and then lie again to cover your first lie.
No one bought spices by the kolo genius. The measurement of the kilo would not be invented for tens of hundreds of years later. This is what I mean when I say your posts are hilarious.
What have I lied about.
In this thread? That the disciples were rich. That Jesus "surrounded" Himself with the rich, that the women in his life were are well to do "women of substance"
All lies so that you can make the ludicrous charge about a rich man entering the kingdom.
If you have to lie to make your point hosea, how good can that point be? How can lies satisfy you?
And its so petty. You don't need to lie to make your sophomoric point. It seem like you just like lying.
That's one of the things I find fascinating about you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
If I'm in the thread, posting a link to the thread is silly no?I was asking you to address the OP of THIS thread. This is not my thread.
I may have suggested that you take part in one of my threads
Um hum, you didn't beg, you "suggested". Right.
Now let us see how long it actually is before you do post on one of my threads. 18;56 pm gmt
Would you like to know how long its been since you answered a question of mine to one of your threads?
2018 a.d.
Cluck! Cluck!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Your "moral integrity" is shining through.
Lol.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
I am a trained professional nedward.
I told you, but I guess you'll need the actual experience.
Where is your obtuse world? Why isn't it helping you anymore?
You've never met a troll whisperer have you?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Stop begging me to post to your other equally lame threads.
Your assessment of Job is exactly as if you never read it. You actually think Job was content.
I have stopped asking you questions because you run away from them. Now I toss you for lolz.
That is pretty much all you're good for.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
That truth insults you is your lack of integrity, not mine.
Truth has never insulted me. But that you think truth insults betrays your view of truth.
If you want to know my public education, then you should ask.
I don't have to. The dismal quality of your posts testify to the poverty of your education everyday.
So I think of myself as a cosmic thinker grounded in many life experiences...
How you think of yourself is not what your posts say you are.
Truth is truth irrrespective of how well my grammar presents it.
So is stupidity.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
TL;DNR
You will wait as long as I wait for answers to my questions shemp.But I still await those "five threads".
Created:
Posted in:
...he had surrounded himself with very rich and influential disciples.
This of course is untrue. The disciples of Jesus were poor men with very little influence. They were mostly Fishermen. Matthew, comparatively well off, was not rich. When Jesus met Peter, Peter alludes to the fact that he (and his fishermen cohorts) are "men of unclean lips". Meaning he spoke like guttersnipe.
As usual, our genius starts his lame "assessment" off with dishonesty and fakery.
If his position is so good, why the needless lie?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Does moral integrity involve insulting strangers online who disagree with you politically?
Is it integrity to call people derogatory names?
Every time you blather about integrity the board groans.
If you had had at least a public education, you'd write better.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
You are foolish, Job was not. Remember?Then why didn't he kill himself? And lets see your evidence for that.
No it is my assessment of the whole saga.
Yes, your whole assessment is baseless.
So you don't know then.
Or your learning disability is confusing you. Either or.
YOU just can't resist being rude can you.
I do not use vulgarity shaheeb.
The only thing you'll see is me tossing you for the fraud you are. You don't answer questions, you get tossed.
Your assessment is stupidity, proof of that is your reluctance to answer questions about it.
That is a fact. You asked for facts. Did you like that homer?
Created:
-->
@rbelivb
While conservatives may not subjectively acknowledge this association, its consequences are clearly visible in the deepening ethnic divisions caused by nationalism in practice.
This is a non sequitur. Nationalism is practised by a society, not just conservatives. And even if you are correct here, nationalism is not synonymous with ethnicity, certainly not in the way you tried to conch it.
The idea that e.g. American nationalism can be totally disconnected from ethnicity...
You are building a strawman. Your claim was about conservative policies built on ethnicities. Conservatives themselves cover the entire range of ethnicities, with ethnic people often being the most conservative.
..often functions as an empty, ideological abstraction caused by the illusion that simply because two concepts can be semantically distinguished, they must therefore function independently in reality.
You are opposing claims that have not been made. You just agreed that the two concepts are not synonymous.
Basically, you are attempting to rationalize your way to the old liberal line that Conservatives are racist white men.
Some nations are ethnic groups (see ethnic nationalism) and some are not (see civic nationalism and multiculturalism)."
America is not a single ethnic group. And neither are conservatives. You are wrong generally, and wrong even more in the specific case of America.
In none of it's history has America been an ethno-state. And a close examination of actual history shows that conservative opposition to immigration has never been based on ethnicity (code for "race" with liberals) but on other practical factors.
Your question was rigged either knowingly or unknowingly to carry a liberal bias within it, to subtly cast conservatives as being motivated by racism.
Your strawmanning makes me suspect it was knowingly.
its consequences are clearly visible in the deepening ethnic divisions caused by nationalism in practice.
Others would say, "caused by unchecked immigration in practise." Outside of liberal bias, nationalism is not necessarily evil.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
The Bible does say that it is immoral to want things that are not yours for example...
Wanting something though is different from having malicious intent.
OK. We just disagree....but I doubt most people would actually agree with that (yes I am aware that most people are Christians in our part of the world).
Created:
-->
@Stephen
The unanswered questions are still there accusing you.
You're still dodging.
I have started another new topic in the religious sub forum, YES! ANOTHER ONE!!!!
No one's surprised. You're a compulsive anti-theist poster.
A brand new start for you.
New starts don't matter for you. You'll just dodge questions as you always do.
I think we'll keep tossing you for lolz.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
I thought about that too. So that the liberal loonies would not be able to deny that their loser policies have bankrupted the country with the ruins around our ears, and then people would soundly reject them and their loony policies and start implementing sane policies.
There is one problem with that. We will be stuck with all those countless economic refugees mooching on the gravy train.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I did.I see nothing in any of my posts that would explain why you seem to think I would disagree with this statement.
And it is generally considered immoral to act upon such intentions...
Which explains my "yes" to your question about the morality of Alex's act.
...though most agree that just wanting to hurt someone is not immoral if said desire is not acted upon.
I don't believe that most people think that way. I know Christians don't. Intent alone can be immoral.
But it seems as if we actually agree on what we have been arguing about, and have run out of things to disagree about.
Cheers.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Then perhaps for those interested enough, you could produce some evidence of my "fraudulent" behavior?
Its there in your every post to me
That is not evidence.
Sure it is. That's why you dodge my questions in them like a champ.
So that is a a big fat no then and your accusations are totally baseless.
Sure, if you answer for me. But your posts remain up. My unanswered questions in them are there in black and white.
When you begin answering questions, the impression of you being a fraud will fall away. But on a debate site, you pretend you can't see questions? How are people not going to conclude you're a fraud?
...between yourself and another member here that your...
Cross thread contamination hypo.
Go back to the threads, address the questions you dodged, or get tossed for lolz. Your choice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Not Job, according to the story in the bible. Did your bogus expert tell you Job was content? See why you should stick to the actual story?I mean, what kind of person would be contented with all of their children - all ten of them! - being murdered for such a egotistical reason.
I would have wanted to die with my children.
As did Job. Really, you should read the story. It's getting difficult not to think you're clueless.
That is simply your opinion. And it is baseless too.
So is your "assessment" of Job.
Tell me, what would have happened if job would have blamed and cursed god for his unprovoked actions?
Do you have a learning disability? I keep telling you that your questions will be dismissed if you don't answer my questions, and you seem not to be able to understand that.
But I'm patient. It was part of my professional training. You will learn.
Now, before you expose even more of your ignorance, please go read the story. From a real bible this time. You'll be shocked to find that Job was not content.
Don't let your bias allow morons to successfully lie to you.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Its there in your every post to me apu. Your lies, you dodges, your vulgarism, your ignorance of the subject.Then perhaps for those interested enough, you could produce some evidence of my "fraudulent" behavior?
Your paranoia is fooling you. If you get banned, it will be because of you. Not me, not "another" member, and not the mods. The only one who can control you, is you.You have blatantly shown that between yourself and another member here that your only single intention is to "work on " me to shut me up and get me banned.
Created:
-->
@rbelivb
This is false. Nationality is not equivalent to ethnicity. The decision of conservatives on immigration are not based on ethnicity but based on nationality and legality.social policies which would further isolate distinct social groups based upon ethnicity,
If i had to pick, I would pick Increasing government spending on welfare programs because at least then I know, it would be spent on Americans.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
By claiming it is intent you are technically right but not getting to the core of the issue.
I decide what is core to my issue.
What is it about the intent that affects the morality of an action? The answer is obvious.
Intent can be malicious. It matters not to whom it is aimed. So as we will shortly see, it was obvious, but just not obvious to you.
In scenario one Alex intends to do something they believe will harm Bob. This is immoral according to you. Intent to harm = immoral. Your words not mine.
I have not disowned my words.
In scenario two Alex intends to do something they believe will not harm Bob. This is not immoral according to you. No intent to harm = not immoral. Your words not mine.
So? And not only intent, but relationship and authority too. Intent alone is not enough to determine morality.
The underlined portion of the two above segments is the only difference between the two scenarios and therefore the only possible reason for you giving a different judgement to each scenario.
Not quite correct. It is the only reason given, but not the only possible reason.
Further, you make a logical error, two errors in fact. First, Bob can be harmed without him knowing he has been harmed.
Second, and this is key, the underlined portions of your segments above refer to the exact same thing, the intent of Alex, NOT the feelings of Bob.
The core issue is the intent of Alex. The feelings of Bob do not matter to the determination of the morality of Alex's action, as evidenced by the fact that Alex's action could be immoral even if Bob feels no offense. The core issue here is the action of Alex.
I fail to see what you're arguing against.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Sorry, it is not one year ago,...
you said a year and six months. You lied. Or you have trouble counting.
I rounded it up to 6 months,...
It was supposed to be an actual date shemp, not a stat.
And you said the subject matter wasn't religious. You lied again.
Don't worry Dee Dee, the embarrassed one is the one posting when no one has posted to him, and blabbering about being embarrassed.
You really should have talked to god before you posted on that one mbulu. I hear god knows how to count.
Created:
Posted in:
Thanks to Trump putting sensible Judges on the bench, 78 nonsense verdicts from university lynch mobs have been rejected by the high courts.
If this continues, we can roll back and stop all the dumb liberal nonsense that has been afflicting our judicial system, million dollar verdicts for "too hot" coffee, lawsuits by transgenders because men want to be referred to as "she", and citizens being forced to pay for the murder of little babies.
But title 9 is dead right now. Progressive snowflakes know that the days of guaranteed rape charge wins are over. How is that not better for our country?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
...the economy is good most because of Obama.
Use to be, "Trump is going to tank the economy!" Evolve liberals, evolve!
Good times are here...
I know! I just listed the reasons why in my previous post.
Trump is going to prison.
And Hillery is going to be President. And then you wake up.
All of your are a sad lack of morality, truth and justice for all. :--(
But we can speak English.
Created:
Posted in:
Drafterman is an excellent addition. He is intelligent and level-headed. I'm glad he agreed to contribute. The mod team, already good, is now even better.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Barring the FACT that you haven't started a thread IN A YEAR AND A HALF,
Page 3 on the Religion Forum
Author: ethang5 , 1 year agoWithin a year and a half? Check.
Religious Subject? Check
Someone's Lying? Check
D'oh!
Following Stephen blindly is a sure way to public shame Dee Dee.
Created:
My parents disciplined me with a rod. The only thing ever bruised was my ego.
And I did thank my parents later.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Nice to see for once you have no problem with my assessment of this story
All your "assessments" are laughably funny. I never have a problem with them. You do though.
only that I am foolish to shoulder all the blame on god.
Well, that isn't why you're foolish.
Well let me tell, you; I cannot see anyone else to blame for the loss of life and desolation in the whole of this story.
And that's that's why, unlike Job, you're foolish.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
According to you it makes a difference.
Yes, How Alex feels makes a difference to Alex's moral act, not how Bob feels.
And in both questions you asked how Alex believes. I answered consistently and correctly. You did not ask about Bob.I asked two questions:
Clear non-sequitor.
How? You said you assumed Bob was afraid from my scenario
We are talking about morality not legality.
Yes. And still Bob's feelings and your suspicions make no difference to the morality of Alex's action.
Please respond to the above.
I just did.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Oh you offer, but you never do. I needn't belabor the point, your dodges are there in every thread for all to see.I have offered to answer all your questions on a thread of your own creation.
Why doesn't that surprise me.
Perhaps because you know I am aware that you're a fraud.
Created: