Bald Prophets are Dangerous

[Drich]

Really? You're going to accuse me of not "identifying passages?" First of all, your posts are not "passages" as you are not writing scripture here; you're writing your own semi-christian rhetoric.

You have set me up to provide you with an example of how to properly identify and refute a passage. First highlight the failed line of reasoning or Passage (as seen above) then make an assertion: (The word passage denotes a portion or section of a written work. While the most common usage of the word will identify a verse, the use of this word is not limited to scripture.) Once your commentary is over provide any Reference material you have to support your claim: (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/passage?s=t) Or if the person is usally opposed to reference material then make a note of it and wait till it's asked for. But know when asked your obligated to provide the reference.

Secondly, every time I refute one of your ridiculous claims about Christianity, I am indeed identifying your "passage." You may be too thick to grasp this concept, but I'll try again. If you write some nonsense about some prophet killing adults and my following post calls you out on it, that is indeed me identifying your bull shit. Ergo, I have identified your "passages" many many many times. You are making up a massive lie to make a point you do not have.

Sometimes you do, but in the last three of four post you have not. Again the majority of your comments are appeals to spell check, or my general level of education. Then you make a sweeping generalization in hopes to not have to address what has been laid out for you.
Little to nothing you have contributed has anything to do with addressing the content of my messages.

did you see what I did there? I isolated a legitimate inconsistency in your base logic, identified it (appeal to probability which is a Formal fallacy) then I moved to dismiss the body of your posts by summing up the body of your work as being based in a logical fallacy. I will now lock you into this logical fallacy of your own creation by challenging you to prove that what you believe to be true about me, is indeed true. So again if you can show where any of my arguments are contextually lacking in reference or exegetical support then your sweeping generalization may actually have Merritt. If not Sport, then I'd say it is your argument that lacks intelectual integrity, and if you choose to stand behind your literally baseless accusations and sweeping generalizations, then you too can be quickly identified and labeled as lacking intelectual integrity.

I think you need to look up what a logical fallacy actually is, and then point out exactly where I used one according to the actual definition and not your own "special godly definition." Furthermore, this portion of your post looks like a copy and paste job, which would further explain why it doesn't seem to really coincide to what I wrote. It looks like you found some fancy verbose wording in another thread somewhere and clumsily forced it into your response. It doesn't even apply to what I said: contextually lacking? Get over yourself. I didn't reference some theological remark you made.

Actually I did that very thing (again giving me an opertunity to model how one properly identifies and dismisses a basless accusation) i identified 2 logical fallacies "an appeal to probability" which is a formal as orginally stated. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_probability and second you have a tendency to use sweeping generalizations.
http://www.logicalfallacies.info/presump...alisation/
It's funny how I used those two terms specifically to describe your use of logical fallacies, but you glanced right over them to tell me how I need to educate myself on the identification and use of logical fallacies. I-Ron-Knee

Did you even write that portion??

Yes i did, I write everything in my posts unless I other wise say. I even gave credit to my fortune cookie.

I'm not jabbing at your pride. I'm treating you the way you treat everyone on this site.

Actually no. Your treating me to your personal definations and understanding to how the world and more over how you want thought to be regulated on this site. Their is a stark contrast between what i do here, in providing reference material and actual data when asked, compared to your half assed attempts to simply bully someone on your word or understanding on how something works.

I'm stating what I "KNOW" to be true. You are an authority on nothing.

Which is why i provide reference material when asked. Now the same can be said of you:"You are an authority on nothing" Now when I've asked you to provide reference material several times across many threads, and all you seem to be able to produce is an angry desire to shame me into silence. again I ask you to show me what gives your arguement any legitmacy, as you are nothing, you words mean nothing unless supported by someone or an organization way smarter than you are.

You're simply some peon who had a dream. Nothing you say about god or the bible is any more legitimate than any of the other sheep. You want respect? You and I both know exactly why you're on this site. It's better to be an infamous douche bag on an Atheist site than an unknown, unwanted, UN-substantiated lunatic on a Christian Forum.

lables, and 'rewards' aside, I'm here for you cinny.

"Real christians don't get visions from god," but you already know that your brothers-in-christ look down on you don't you? Don't bother, I grow weary of your lies.

what do i have to gain from lying here? If I believe in God as i say I do, then it is to God i must give an account. So why lie? Maybe you do not know how it truly works on this side of the atheist site. Once identified as a Christian, nothing one can say or do will ever get him past the stigma of being labled as a Christian. Being 'different' makes the effort that much harder. It's like the difference between wearing the wrong team colors at one of those crazy socer games fans destroy the city win or loose, and being caught dressed as the opposing teams mascot when the fans are out for blood. There is no win, there is no mercy. Again why would I make things harder for myself unless i felt obligated for sharing what has been shared with me?

I judge you only on your content. I assure you, if you start a thread about lawn care, I won't say a fucking word.

that's a lie. In the last three posts the bulk of your efforts are centered around spelling and grammer, not content. Maybe perhaps you are trying to say if i start a lawn care thread you will not grade my spelling and grammer.. That maybe true, but it is not what is being discussed.(red herring)

You should've payed that cookie attention.