Question(s) for the Religious

[John V]

Then put him on ignore. There's no rule that says you have to respond to every single post by every single person. A simple acknowledgement would be common courtesy, but not obligatory. There's simply no call to make some grandstand play out of it like you tried to do.

Your bias is showing. He made a much bigger deal of it than I did - check his post where he scored my worthiness. It would have largely gone unnoticed if you hadn't butted in. If he continues with the attitude, I will put him on ignore, but silly me, I tend to give people a second chance.

[Cyberman]

I am starting to care less and less with each reply I give.

Go on, little hard-done-by martyr, have the last word. You're going to take it anyway. I wish you endless joy of it.

[fr0d0]

"John v doesn't reply

"stimbo loses

Poor hand stimbo, poor hand!

[Cyberman]

Here, let me try my right hand. Any better for you?

[John V]

I am starting to care less and less with each reply I give.

Good. You shouldn't care at all. You were most likely bored, read something I said out of context, and now are refusing to admit you're wrong out of pride and/or support for an atheist poster.

[CleanShavenJesus]

GC, why are you an atheist to all the other religions out there? You believe in the Christian God, so it should be simple for you to pick up the Bhaghavad Gita and also believe in Shiva and Rama.

Because God has proved Himself to me and He states in His word that He is the only God, so I would be wasting time looking into those others.

GC

Called it!

GC, why are you an atheist to all the other religions out there? You believe in the Christian God, so it should be simple for you to pick up the Bhaghavad Gita and also believe in Shiva and Rama.

But the Shiva and Rama haven't spoken to him!

[Cyberman]

"John v doesn't reply

"stimbo loses

Poor hand stimbo, poor hand!

I'll take my winnings now.

Never gamble with a prophet!

[Bad Writer]

...this clown isn't necessary, so I have no reason to put up with his attitude. I wasn't even talking to him at first - he butted in. Seems rather arrogant to me to butt into someone else's conversation, then say "Well, this one was close, but since you showed a bit of gumption back there, I wouldn't mind more discussion, but if you go the SW route and get all tautological on me with arguments from ignorance and the like, then I will end it." You're usually pretty decent, I would think you'd agree.

You mean we can't talk to who we want to on a forum? I'm surprised you're getting a little pissy here because I wrote something to you, you answered back, and then I wrote something in return. The arrogance is yours to think that you can play martyr just because you didn't like what I said. In fact, I'll give you another point for proving my last little bit about you wrong, that you showed some gumption back there. I take it back.

BTW, in reply to the ad hominem about me being a clown:

[Faith No More]

Fr0d0, you're going to have to start paying Ryft royalties for all the times you've used that quote.

[John V]

You mean we can't talk to who we want to on a forum? I'm surprised you're getting a little pissy here because I wrote something to you, you answered back, and then I wrote something in return.

What you wrote in return was very condescending. Why would you be surprised that I don't like that? I'll never know, because you're going on my ignore list in 3...2...1...Bye-bye!