New Levels of Low

[Mystical]

Last note: Lion--if you're going to be a whiney ass the whole time during the debate, I'd much rather save Stimbo the headache. A formal debate is a formal debate. You put your big boy pants on and you don't act like a child, like you seem to do on a regular basis out here. I for one will be following the rules of the forum. If you're illogical, I'll call it. If you're a dick, I'll leave that to be self evident.

[Lion IRC]

I will hang out till I hear back from Missluckie26 about the word count thing.

I dont mind if she wants to bump it up to give herself more elbow room, but I would hope that there be some upper limit on the word count.

3 substantive posts x 1500 words does force you to be a bit more succinct I guess and maybe she wants 3 x 3000 words or 5 x 1500

The Q&A round really shouldnt need a much higher word limit. The whole purpose of that part of the format would be to allow each side to pin the other down on a fine detail or specific point.

Eg.
*Lion IRC, please answer yes or no to the following question etc etc.
*Missluckie26, do you agree that my claim XYZ is true or can you give a source to refute it.

Having no word count limit on the opening and closing remarks seems perfectly reasonable IMHO.

There was also a query about the scope of Christianity and 'theological distinctives'. Here is the link again.
http://www.cru.org/about-us/statement-of.../index.htm
Heres a couple of others.
http://www.christianapologeticsalliance....e-believe/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicene_Christianity

Mainstream Christian churches, including all of Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and most Protestant denominations, adhere to the creed and are thus examples of "Nicene Christianity".

I think its helpful to have a datum to reference to make sure we arent talking past each other about No True Scots issues so that Lion IRC doesnt try to rope in the Scientologists and claim credit for all the great things they have done for humanity.

This isnt a debate about Christianity versus Atheism or whether Hitler was/wasnt a Christian at the time he was urging the holocaust. This isnt a debate about whether science is more useful than Christianity.

This is about the case for Christianity being a net overall benefit to human kind as against the opposing claim that it has been overall a net HARM to humanity.

---

Lion--if you're going to be a whiney ass...
You put your big boy pants on...
...don't act like a child, like you seem to do on a regular basis

Thats not good faith intent going into this debate.
Those are abusive ad homs. Count them. 1, 2, 3.

[Cyberman]

I reiterate: an insult only becomes ad hominem when it is used in lieu of an argument. Incidentally, I chose the word 'retard' as an example of the type of epithet commonly seen flying around and precisely because I personally would not use it. You'll note I also chose English and male, to illuatrate that not all ad homs need to be obvious insults.

(Edit: "becomes", not "because". Sleepy Stimbo.)

[Lion IRC]

Stimbo, do you have any guidance/suggestions regarding the word count limits?

If the topic, rules, format and scope are agreeable and if Missluckie26 is OK for the Affirmative case to make the opening post, then I can be ready to make my opening remarks by around this time tomorrow and the debate proper should be underway by Monday/Tue next week.

Do you agree with the idea that debate participants ought not be allowed to post comments relating to the debate outside the actual moderated 1-on-1 debate thread?
Eg. If there is a so-called 'peanut gallery' for spectators to discuss the ongoing debate, then me and Missluckie26 ought not be permitted to circumvent word count limits or other debate ettiquette by taking part in that discussion thread?

[Mystical]

2500 word limit seems acceptable to me, I just don't want to worry about counting my words. That's all.
Unlimited opening and closing would be fine. 1500 for the Q &A is agreeable too. Unless you ask for specifically a yes or no answer.

I'll agree to the peanut gallery rule too for you, even though people will only be voting on the merits of the posts in the debate itself. Honestly I don't have a whole bunch of time, and you're going to be taking it all up. So I wouldn't worry if I were you.

Also, Hitler was a Christian. Why would we fight over that?
Do you consider Mormons and Jehova's witness to be Christians?

Thats not good faith intent going into this debate. :Angry:
Those are abusive ad homs. Count them. 1, 2, 3.

We're not in a formal debate yet Lion. I can call you whatever the fuck I want. If you don't want to be treated like a child, stop acting like one. You're the one falsely accusing me and throwing a hissy fit.

[Lion IRC]

2500 word limit seems acceptable to me, I just don't want to worry about counting my words. That's all.

Good.

Unlimited opening and closing would be fine. 1500 for the Q &A is agreeable too. Unless you ask for specifically a yes or no answer.

Good.

I'll agree to the peanut gallery rule too....

Good.

...Also, Hitler was a Christian. Why would we fight over that?

I look forward to our debate.

We're not in a formal debate yet Lion. I can call you whatever the fuck I want. If you don't want to be treated like a child, stop acting like one. You're the one falsely accusing me and throwing a hissy fit.

More smack talk.
How about you start preparing for an intellectual discussion and get some practice time going on civil discussion and common courtesy.

[Mystical]

I don't have to be courteous to you, sir. Not when you falsely accuse me to a moderator and then whine about me breaking rules that aren't even in existence in this context. In a formal debate Ill put on my glasses on though, don't worry.

I'm not going to have an internal debate within a debate about who is and isn't considered Christian to you. Let's square that away right now.

[Cyberman]

Nobody need worry, this moderator won't be swayed either way from his duties. He can be bought, however; I recommend sexual favours, though money might work just as well.

[Mystical]

I'll let Lion get on that.

[Zen Badger]

But if you go back far enough, you run into the Christian god whose definition of "spreading the gospel to all nations" involved annihilating several them to the last man, woman, and child (unless the chosen nation needed wives).

Christianity was quite a bit in the future, the times you're alluding to was centuries into the past. So there was no gospel to be spread, the prophecies were still being written about Christ's coming.

GC

So the god back then wasn't the god you pray to now?

Is that what you're saying?