(September 21, 2009 at 2:18 am)Arcanus Wrote: I believe his point was that the incorrectness of your "cherry-picking" response is a consequence of your incorrect view about what Christianity is—which your definition, supplied later, ended up confirming. « END QUOTE
But my point was he never pointed out how my cherry-picking point was correct. He merely threw in a bare assertion saying I didn't know what Christianity is, and then when I defined it, whether correct or incorrect, he still hasn't refuted or dealt with my cherry-picking point.
So apparently his point was that the incorrectmess of my cherry-picking response, was due to my incorrect view about Christianity. Oh, really? That's nice - but it's an empty statement.
So basically I'm saying, how does this part of the above follow? :
Quote:which your definition, supplied later, ended up confirming? How does it end up confirming it?
As for your point about quoting, it's not my problem if you don't think that my post alone didn't deal with all your points. I only have one point to make - and where have you or fr0d0 refuted it?
EvF