RE: MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)
December 22, 2014 at 3:03 pm
(December 22, 2014 at 2:48 pm)His_Majesty Wrote:(December 22, 2014 at 2:21 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: If your Part Three is anything like your Part Two, Part Three will be merged with this thread. If you don't bring forth new points, you don't get to have a new thread. It's that simple. I will say you'd better tread carefully on this one. You wouldn't want to get banned for spamming.
Look, I am making a CASE for the Resurrection of Jesus. I can care less whether or not anything I say is "new" to you. In fact, in part 2 I presented evidence regarding the Gospel's and the NAMES of the people in the narratives...now, that is ENTIRELY new information that has been only known for the past 10 years or so, and I guarandamntee you didn't know anything about it until I mentioned it (if you even bothered to read the damn thing)...so that is new information.
And then you talk about spamming, one part was about whether or not Jesus existed, and the other part was about the authorship of the Gospels...how the hell is that spamming when both posts are genuinely related to the general topic in question??
So how the hell can that be consider spamming? It can't be, you people just want to have a reason to do some shit, that's all. You see I am having a lively discussion regarding threads that I started, you don't care too much for me, so you had to flex your executive muscles to do some unwarranted crap and I can't even get a good reason why it happen.
You said it was because I didn't bring forth any "new" information, and Esquilax said it was to make the threads more "readable" (whatever the hell that means). So which is it?
It's bullshit.
(bold mine)
Why don't you keep telling us what's in our brains?
1. That you "can" care less whether anything you say is new to me (us?), makes what you're doing spamming.
2. You are making a case... "a" meaning "one". One case needs one thread.
3. It's both.
