Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
RE: Peanut Gallery Commentary on the Staff Log of Bannings and such like.
September 25, 2018 at 4:21 pm (This post was last modified: September 25, 2018 at 4:38 pm by Huggy Bear.)
(September 23, 2018 at 11:22 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:
(September 23, 2018 at 9:00 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: This ones so long that it's hard to provide the full context, however this is the conclusion.
There that's three for you.
No, if you go back far enough, Khemikal was disputing that you had evidence that Eve fucked the serpent. If you interpret a certain passage one way, rather than another, then it's possible that Eve may have..... but you seem to have forgotten the indisputable part. Your argument, and the evidence for it, was far from indisputable. So, no.
It is indisputable, as proven by other Jewish literature that states Eve 'copulated' with the serpent.
(August 28, 2016 at 8:24 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Earlier in the thread you quoted the Babylonian Talmud as a source, and I quote:
(August 1, 2016 at 11:49 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: Note, I'm sure if I were to write a story about such a scenario, it would threaten willing suspension of disbelief, but then there's the trial:
A jury of at least 23 judges had to cross-examine both of the witnesses, and if any of the evidence one person gave contradicted the other, even on something as minor as someone's eye color, it was thrown out.
A majority of at least 13/23 had to be in favor of conviction, but, if they have a unanimous verdict in favor of execution, well, let's just let this quote from the Talmud explain it: "If the Sanhedrin unanimously find [the accused] guilty, he is acquitted. Why? — Because we have learned by tradition that sentence must be postponed till the morrow in hope of finding new points in favour of the defence"
In the end, if a court executed two people over a span of 70 years, people were more likely to consider something wrong with the court than anything else.
More information can be found in the Talmud, specifically the Sanhedrin Tractate. This can be extremely difficult going, but it's probably worth it.
*emphasis mine*
Since you clearly acknowledge the Talmud as an acceptable source, how about this passage from the website contained in your above post.
Quote:There, one can well see the reason, since he might possibly mention to him the name of his idol; what evil, however, could be involved here? — That of infusing her with sensual lust. For R. Johanan stated: When the serpent copulated with Eve, he infused her with lust. The lust of the Israelites who stood at Mount Sinai, came to an end, the lust of the idolaters who did not stand at Mount Sinai did not come to an end.
There is no ambiguity to the word "copulate", it means sexual intercourse.
*edit*
Forgot to provide link.
Again this is indisputable.
(September 23, 2018 at 11:22 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:
(September 23, 2018 at 11:02 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Sigh...
The daughter of Midian had no idea Moses was adopted, he was a fugitive at this time, they said he was Egyptian based on his appearance....
But that was NOT Khemikals argument, his argument was implying that Christianity wasn't in Africa before the Atlantic slave trade. The point I was making was that not only did black Christians exist before the Atlantic slave trade, but we go back much further.
I see how you're completely avoiding that subject.
No, as far as I can see, his original complaint was his wondering what 15th century Africans would think of modern day apologists, which you replied to by claiming that the original Hebrews were black. I've been through that entire thread and didn't see where he either made that claim, nor implied it. If you have a specific post, link me to it.
You act like you don't see threads posted questioning why black people are Christians because Christianity is the supposed religion of their oppressors.
Quote:It doesn't make any sense to worship a god and or deity jesus that pretty much was the reason that your ancestors were enslaved and yet worship both of them like they are good.
(January 20, 2018 at 12:45 am)Khemikal Wrote: You know...I sometimes wonder what some random w. african circa 1400 would think if I handed them a time machine, and they could watch their descendants become shoddy apologists for the religion of those who would enslave and oppress their own children for the next few subsequent centuries. Sad fucking state of affairs, if you ask me.
*emphasis mine*
The above makes absolutely no sense if Christianity already existed in Africa 1500 years prior, so please stop with the dishonest tactics.
(September 23, 2018 at 11:22 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Does the passage say they recognized Moses as an Egyptian by the color of his skin? No, it does not. They might have, that doesn't make it indisputable evidence. And you missed the note that I added after your reply. If you didn't present the Exodus passage in that thread, then it's irrelevant. This isn't a question of whether you can win a debate now, but whether you won a debate then. I didn't specifically look for it, so if you did provide the Exodus passage in that thread, please link to it.
*emphasis mine*
Just going to make up rules as you go?
Khemikal never disputed it any further after I made my case, YOU"RE disputing it just now, and as such I should be able to present any evidence I like. What I did present to Khemikal was the fact the Joseph was married to an Egyptian woman, and had two children from which came the Hebrew tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh.
(January 20, 2018 at 7:15 am)Huggy74 Wrote: The tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, were descendants of sons of Joseph who was married to an Egyptian, meaning that they had Egyptian heritage.
Again, is this good enough for you?
(September 23, 2018 at 11:22 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: And going back over that thread, I spot an additional argument, where you claimed that the people in your photo of KKK cross burnings the men in question weren't Christian, for which your evidence was the "you shall know them by their fruits" passage. Far from indisputable. That brings the total of debates to ten, and you've got three so far. Still two remaining. (Or, if you show that Khem did claim there were no Christians in Africa prior to the slave trade, that would bring the total debates to eleven, out of which you'll have shown four, leaving, once again, two remaining to be demonstrated with indisputable evidence. You seem to be doing little more than treading water at this point.)
so now you're going to count every tangent of the original discussion as a separate debate? Talk about moving the goalposts.
Here were your original terms...
(September 23, 2018 at 7:00 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Sure. I'll start you off. Counting the two you've already claimed, you have to show indisputable evidence that you won at least two of the following debates, orproduce additional debates that I've missed.
RE: Peanut Gallery Commentary on the Staff Log of Bannings and such like.
September 25, 2018 at 5:59 pm
(September 25, 2018 at 4:21 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:
(September 23, 2018 at 11:22 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: No, if you go back far enough, Khemikal was disputing that you had evidence that Eve fucked the serpent. If you interpret a certain passage one way, rather than another, then it's possible that Eve may have..... but you seem to have forgotten the indisputable part. Your argument, and the evidence for it, was far from indisputable. So, no.
It is indisputable, as proven by other Jewish literature that states Eve 'copulated' with the serpent.
(August 28, 2016 at 8:24 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Earlier in the thread you quoted the Babylonian Talmud as a source, and I quote:
*emphasis mine*
Since you clearly acknowledge the Talmud as an acceptable source, how about this passage from the website contained in your above post.
There is no ambiguity to the word "copulate", it means sexual intercourse.
*edit*
Forgot to provide link.
Again this is indisputable.
(September 23, 2018 at 11:22 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: No, as far as I can see, his original complaint was his wondering what 15th century Africans would think of modern day apologists, which you replied to by claiming that the original Hebrews were black. I've been through that entire thread and didn't see where he either made that claim, nor implied it. If you have a specific post, link me to it.
You act like you don't see threads posted questioning why black people are Christians because Christianity is the supposed religion of their oppressors.
Quote:It doesn't make any sense to worship a god and or deity jesus that pretty much was the reason that your ancestors were enslaved and yet worship both of them like they are good.
(January 20, 2018 at 12:45 am)Khemikal Wrote: You know...I sometimes wonder what some random w. african circa 1400 would think if I handed them a time machine, and they could watch their descendants become shoddy apologists for the religion of those who would enslave and oppress their own children for the next few subsequent centuries. Sad fucking state of affairs, if you ask me.
*emphasis mine*
The above makes absolutely no sense if Christianity already existed in Africa 1500 years prior, so please stop with the dishonest tactics.
(September 23, 2018 at 11:22 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Does the passage say they recognized Moses as an Egyptian by the color of his skin? No, it does not. They might have, that doesn't make it indisputable evidence. And you missed the note that I added after your reply. If you didn't present the Exodus passage in that thread, then it's irrelevant. This isn't a question of whether you can win a debate now, but whether you won a debate then. I didn't specifically look for it, so if you did provide the Exodus passage in that thread, please link to it.
*emphasis mine*
Just going to make up rules as you go?
Khemikal never disputed it any further after I made my case, YOU"RE disputing it just now, and as such I should be able to present any evidence I like. What I did present to Khemikal was the fact the Joseph was married to an Egyptian woman, and had two children from which came the Hebrew tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh.
(January 20, 2018 at 7:15 am)Huggy74 Wrote: The tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, were descendants of sons of Joseph who was married to an Egyptian, meaning that they had Egyptian heritage.
Again, is this good enough for you?
(September 23, 2018 at 11:22 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: And going back over that thread, I spot an additional argument, where you claimed that the people in your photo of KKK cross burnings the men in question weren't Christian, for which your evidence was the "you shall know them by their fruits" passage. Far from indisputable. That brings the total of debates to ten, and you've got three so far. Still two remaining. (Or, if you show that Khem did claim there were no Christians in Africa prior to the slave trade, that would bring the total debates to eleven, out of which you'll have shown four, leaving, once again, two remaining to be demonstrated with indisputable evidence. You seem to be doing little more than treading water at this point.)
so now you're going to count every tangent of the original discussion as a separate debate? Talk about moving the goalposts.
Here were your original terms...
(September 23, 2018 at 7:00 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Sure. I'll start you off. Counting the two you've already claimed, you have to show indisputable evidence that you won at least two of the following debates, orproduce additional debates that I've missed.
written works, especially those considered of superior or lasting artistic merit. "a great work of literature" synonyms: written works · writings · (creative) writing · literary texts · compositions · letters · belles-lettres · printed works · published works · humanities · arts · liberal arts
books and writings published on a particular subject. "the literature on environmental epidemiology" synonyms: publications · published writings · texts · reports · studies · relevant works
Just because somebody wrote something doesn't make it...what's the magic word...indisputable.
“If you are the smartest person in the room, then you are in the wrong room.” — Confucius
RE: Peanut Gallery Commentary on the Staff Log of Bannings and such like.
September 25, 2018 at 6:46 pm (This post was last modified: September 25, 2018 at 6:51 pm by Huggy Bear.)
(September 25, 2018 at 5:59 pm)anjele Wrote:
(September 25, 2018 at 4:21 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: It is indisputable, as proven by other Jewish literature that states Eve 'copulated' with the serpent.
Again this is indisputable.
You act like you don't see threads posted questioning why black people are Christians because Christianity is the supposed religion of their oppressors.
The above makes absolutely no sense if Christianity already existed in Africa 1500 years prior, so please stop with the dishonest tactics.
*emphasis mine*
Just going to make up rules as you go?
Khemikal never disputed it any further after I made my case, YOU"RE disputing it just now, and as such I should be able to present any evidence I like. What I did present to Khemikal was the fact the Joseph was married to an Egyptian woman, and had two children from which came the Hebrew tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh.
Again, is this good enough for you?
so now you're going to count every tangent of the original discussion as a separate debate? Talk about moving the goalposts.
Here were your original terms...
*emphasis mine*
OR is a funny word isn't it?
Hey Skippy,
Literature does not equal factual.
lit·er·a·ture [ˈlidərəCHər, ˈlidərəˌCHo͝or]
NOUN
written works, especially those considered of superior or lasting artistic merit. "a great work of literature" synonyms: written works · writings · (creative) writing · literary texts · compositions · letters · belles-lettres · printed works · published works · humanities · arts · liberal arts
books and writings published on a particular subject. "the literature on environmental epidemiology" synonyms: publications · published writings · texts · reports · studies · relevant works
Just because somebody wrote something doesn't make it...what's the magic word...indisputable.
It does when the dispute is over the meaning of a word in said literature...
The fact that 'copulate' means "sexual intercourse'" IS indisputable, now kindly find somewhere to sit down.
(September 25, 2018 at 5:15 pm)mh.brewer Wrote: I rarely do this but here goes:
RE: Peanut Gallery Commentary on the Staff Log of Bannings and such like.
September 25, 2018 at 6:51 pm
(September 25, 2018 at 6:46 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:
(September 25, 2018 at 5:59 pm)anjele Wrote: Hey Skippy,
Literature does not equal factual.
lit·er·a·ture [ˈlidərəCHər, ˈlidərəˌCHo͝or]
NOUN
written works, especially those considered of superior or lasting artistic merit. "a great work of literature" synonyms: written works · writings · (creative) writing · literary texts · compositions · letters · belles-lettres · printed works · published works · humanities · arts · liberal arts
books and writings published on a particular subject. "the literature on environmental epidemiology" synonyms: publications · published writings · texts · reports · studies · relevant works
Just because somebody wrote something doesn't make it...what's the magic word...indisputable.
It does when the dispute is over the meaning of a word in said literature...
The fact that 'copulate' means "sexual intercourse'" IS indisputable, now kindly find somewhere to sit down.
Takes no time at all to find out you aren't worth dealing with.
Go argue about the racial makeup of the characters in Tolkien.
“If you are the smartest person in the room, then you are in the wrong room.” — Confucius
RE: Peanut Gallery Commentary on the Staff Log of Bannings and such like.
September 25, 2018 at 7:01 pm
(September 25, 2018 at 6:51 pm)anjele Wrote: Takes no time at all to find out you aren't worth dealing with.
Go argue about the racial makeup of the characters in Tolkien.
Well, apart from CL, lets just say our crop of theists overs here can't get 45 watts of brilliance. They give so much amno against their own religion than any atheist ever could.
