(July 14, 2013 at 4:01 am)fr0d0 Wrote: When you can provide reason, I can address it. So far you do not. I can't help finding your points incredulous if you won't support them.

We're going around in circles, and obfuscation makes it look like you might have a point.

Do I actually have to explain your own damn claim to you? Fine, okay...

So, you made the claim that christians by and large agree on the basics of the religion, and that the doctrinal differences are simply fripperies, little things not worth consideration in the bigger picture. My contention is that this is not true, and that the beliefs of certain subsets of christianity regarding the eternal souls of entire classes of people are hardly little things, and that therefore you don't all agree on the basics.

Your response to this has so far been to call me biased and to reiterate your initial claim. Do you deny that there are disagreements between christian denominations and churches with regard to the ultimate fates of a multitude of different people?

(July 14, 2013 at 4:10 am)Esquilax Wrote: Do you deny that there are disagreements between christian denominations and churches with regard to the ultimate fates of a multitude of different people?

Yes

Your examples are of evil > examples of opposition to Christianity and the Christian God. We have no reason to take your objections seriously.

(notice I didn't need to slip into ad hom mode to answer you)

(July 14, 2013 at 4:36 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Yes

Your examples are of evil > examples of opposition to Christianity and the Christian God. We have no reason to take your objections seriously.

This isn't really an argument, it's just an assertion. I guarantee you, the people practicing what you label as evil are completely convinced that what they're saying is a reflection of the words of god. Many of them can go right to the bible in order to justify this.

You, on the other hand, seem to interpret evil- in a christian sense- as far more up to date than your religion's usual. You can shake your head all you like, but you can't deny that there are explicit orders for these things to happen in parts of the bible. That is the reason you should take my objections seriously; you disagree with my perspective, but notably, just saying you disagree isn't evidence that I'm wrong.

I can go right to the bible to support my objections. Can you do the same?

I disagree because I know the biblical stance. If you have a point you should present it. But I fear you know the strength of you point relies wholly upon gross misinterpretation. If that is so, then I happily reject your point.

(July 14, 2013 at 5:28 am)fr0d0 Wrote: I disagree because I know the biblical stance. If you have a point you should present it. But I fear you know the strength of you point relies wholly upon gross misinterpretation. If that is so, then I happily reject your point.

So when the bible explicitly calls for the death of gays and witches, those were just accidental verses, huh? Do you actually have an argument here, or are you just going to resort to the same dishonest chicanery I've seen from godschild and ronedee in recent days, and just say that I don't understand the bible because I disagree with your interpretation of it?

Because, you know, unless you can actually provide evidence that yours is the correct one, what reason do any of us have to take you remotely seriously, in your quest to turn all the worst parts of your religion into happy-go-lucky fucking adventures?

(July 14, 2013 at 5:33 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(July 14, 2013 at 5:28 am)fr0d0 Wrote: I disagree because I know the biblical stance. If you have a point you should present it. But I fear you know the strength of you point relies wholly upon gross misinterpretation. If that is so, then I happily reject your point.

So when the bible explicitly calls for the death of gays and witches, those were just accidental verses, huh? Do you actually have an argument here, or are you just going to resort to the same dishonest chicanery I've seen from godschild and ronedee in recent days, and just say that I don't understand the bible because I disagree with your interpretation of it?

Because, you know, unless you can actually provide evidence that yours is the correct one, what reason do any of us have to take you remotely seriously, in your quest to turn all the worst parts of your religion into happy-go-lucky fucking adventures?

Lack of evidence has never stopped Frods, in fact apparently just asking for such is "illogical"
You just have to accept what he says as true.

I wonder though what his reaction would be if he was on trial for a crime and the prosecuting attorney told the jury not to worry about the evidence and just accept the prosecutions claim that Frodo was guilty.

"accidental" lol

Well I guess we're finished here esq. Because you refuse to address the subject, and instead wish to entertain this fantasy of yours.

The evidence in this case is overwhelming on the side of accurate study.

Now unless you have something else, we can close this discussion.


Hey Zen . You appear to be butt hurt that your illogicality is pointed out. Life must be very difficult for you, having to test physically because you cannot trust your ability to reason.

(July 14, 2013 at 5:58 am)fr0d0 Wrote: "accidental" lol

Well I guess we're finished here esq. Because you refuse to address the subject, and instead wish to entertain this fantasy of yours.

The evidence in this case is overwhelming on the side of accurate study.

Now unless you have something else, we can close this discussion.


Hey Zen . You appear to be butt hurt that your illogicality is pointed out. Life must be very difficult for you, having to test physically because you cannot trust your ability to reason.

What evidence Frods?
You've produced fuck all, as usual.

(July 14, 2013 at 5:58 am)fr0d0 Wrote: "accidental" lol

Well I guess we're finished here esq. Because you refuse to address the subject, and instead wish to entertain this fantasy of yours.

The evidence in this case is overwhelming on the side of accurate study.

Now unless you have something else, we can close this discussion.


Hey Zen . You appear to be butt hurt that your illogicality is pointed out. Life must be very difficult for you, having to test physically because you cannot trust your ability to reason.

I love it: when you have nothing to say, you just do what all theists do, and declare victory for your side by fiat. Hate to tell you, but your shit isn't as self evident as the laziest parts of your mind want you to believe.

How about this: if I'm "refusing to address the subject" then how about you let me in on what the subject you're talking about is? And I'd remind you, your bland and pointless assertions as to what's going on mean nothing without evidence to demonstrate the validity of the same.

And also, provide your evidence if it's so obvious, hmm? Just saying it's there isn't the same as showing it. This entire thread just shows the depths of dishonesty and intellectual laziness that you're willing to sink to in preservation of unjustifiable beliefs.

Incidentally, you mention your faith in your ability to reason, by which I think you mean your intuition, because reason doesn't indulge in belief of claims which you already acknowledge can have no evidence. Perhaps you should look up some of the other things that human intuition and reason have led to, before being proven wrong by physical tests? Things like a flat earth, sickness being caused by demons, a heliocentric universe... all things that were once obviously true by mere reason and intuition, until our ability to physically test things improved to the point that we can prove ourselves wrong.

We evolved as pattern seeking animals, but over-reliance on our own mental heuristics isn't always a path to truth; the information you feed into them can seem to be one way, while actually being another. What's the only way to be sure?

Oh yes, physical tests!

(July 14, 2013 at 6:03 am)Zen Badger Wrote: What evidence Frods?
You've produced fuck all, as usual.

Zen. If you understood what you were asking about you'd be dangerous. Right now... You have no clue.

---

Still no point made esq. Just insults again. Fair enough.