|
|
Post by Vegas on Dec 10, 2018 0:39:16 GMT
You have missed the point, as usual. Why would I ( or any person with intelligence) 1. Try to figure out something that is a fantasy and not founded in fact? 2. Take seriously those that have 'tried'. 3. Take seriously that they have ALL' tried 'and ALL claim to have succeeded, at least in part and the kicker. 4. The results of ALL their efforts are ALL different. OP, you win. Oh... Point is taken. 1) Then you need to shut the fuck up about shit that you admittedly don't care enough to know anything about... That makes you a dumbass twat. 2) That's just you being a dumb ass twat. 3) That's just kind of restating how you are a dumbass twat from 2. 4) Maybe... But, that doesn't mean that one of those people didn't figure it out correctly, ya dumbass twat. You really are just a dumb ass twat, DAT. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Dec 10, 2018 0:51:50 GMT
CoolJGS☺ LOL = Concession with no counter argument! 
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Dec 10, 2018 1:32:07 GMT
You have missed the point, as usual. Why would I ( or any person with intelligence) 1. Try to figure out something that is a fantasy and not founded in fact? 2. Take seriously those that have 'tried'. 3. Take seriously that they have ALL' tried 'and ALL claim to have succeeded, at least in part and the kicker. 4. The results of ALL their efforts are ALL different. OP, you win. Oh... Point is taken. 1) Then you need to shut the fuck up about shit that you admittedly don't care enough to know anything about... That makes you a dumbass twat. 2) That's just you being a dumb ass twat. 3) That's just kind of restating how you are a dumbass twat from 2. 4) Maybe... But, that doesn't mean that one of those people didn't figure it out correctly, ya dumbass twat. You really are just a dumb ass twat, DAT. So, aside from repetitive rude ad homs, what exactly is your point on this thread? Wait! YOU admitted that YOU didn't figure it out correctly... butt you think that THEY, or even one of them, did? How 'Christian'! .. and, another logical win for the OP. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Dec 10, 2018 3:31:20 GMT
Oh... Point is taken. 1) Then you need to shut the fuck up about shit that you admittedly don't care enough to know anything about... That makes you a dumbass twat. 2) That's just you being a dumb ass twat. 3) That's just kind of restating how you are a dumbass twat from 2. 4) Maybe... But, that doesn't mean that one of those people didn't figure it out correctly, ya dumbass twat. You really are just a dumb ass twat, DAT.
Right now, the only point is you proving how much of a dumbass twat you are. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Dec 10, 2018 4:20:25 GMT
So, aside from repetitive rude ad homs, what exactly is your point on this thread?
Right now, the only point is you proving how much of a dumbass twat you are. So, right. You don't have one... it shows. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Dec 10, 2018 4:26:20 GMT
Right now, the only point is you proving how much of a dumbass twat you are.
it shows.Dumbass twat says "what"? Edit: I know I'm just being mean.... I know it's really dumbass twat says "So, right. You don't have one... it shows." |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2018 4:51:41 GMT
Sounds like a personal problem. If you need help with it all you have to do is ask me nicely!  ….butt...buttt...butttt...how do I choose between you and @winterssuicide and @cody when you all say something different? (Vegas wimped out) Dear God, Could you please send clear instructions in your updated 'Life Manual/Bible thingiel' so that I have a better chance of having a reasonable chance of believing you? What with modern computing technology, since your last effort, it should be a 'piece of piss' easy. Thanks in advance, Goz (see? we almost share the same name)  Please do not tag me. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Dec 10, 2018 5:08:58 GMT
So, right. You don't have one...
it shows. Dumbass twat says "what"? Edit: I know I'm just being mean.... I know it's really dumbass twat says "So, right. You don't have one... it shows." Hell's bells. Even Cinemachinery and Brandon didn't get along with her. I guess it can't hurt to say Brandon's name now, what with him kicking the bucket and all.  |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Dec 10, 2018 5:19:05 GMT
Hell's bells. Even Cinemachinery and Brandon didn't get along with her. I guess it can't hurt to say Brandon's name now, what with him kicking the bucket and all. I got no problem with that.... I always thought he was kinda bein' a wieney about the name thing, anyways... We spent years calling him Brandon because that's what he called himself for years. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Dec 10, 2018 6:39:31 GMT
….butt...buttt...butttt...how do I choose between you and @winterssuicide and @cody when you all say something different? (Vegas wimped out) Dear God, Could you please send clear instructions in your updated 'Life Manual/Bible thingiel' so that I have a better chance of having a reasonable chance of believing you? What with modern computing technology, since your last effort, it should be a 'piece of piss' easy. Thanks in advance, Goz (see? we almost share the same name) Please do not tag me. Why not? This discussion was all about who knows the Bible best and I nominated you! |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Dec 10, 2018 6:44:23 GMT
Why not? This discussion was all about who knows the Bible best and I nominated you! And I'm nominating you for biggest A-hole of the 21st Century. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2018 8:00:48 GMT
Because I asked you politely. I know you miss me, but it's time for you to move on. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Dec 10, 2018 14:08:52 GMT
You have missed the point, as usual. Why would I ( or any person with intelligence) 1. Try to figure out something that is a fantasy and not founded in fact? 2. Take seriously those that have 'tried'. 3. Take seriously that they have ALL' tried 'and ALL claim to have succeeded, at least in part and the kicker. 4. The results of ALL their efforts are ALL different. OP, you win. Oh... Point is taken. 1) Then you need to shut the fuck up about shit that you admittedly don't care enough to know anything about... That makes you a dumbass twat. 2) That's just you being a dumb ass twat. 3) That's just kind of restating how you are a dumbass twat from 2. 4) Maybe... But, that doesn't mean that one of those people didn't figure it out correctly, ya dumbass twat. You really are just a dumb ass twat, DAT. How disappointing! Never thought I see you stoop to this level of ad hominem in defense of a losing position. When did you become Cody? |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Dec 10, 2018 14:11:47 GMT
Why not? This discussion was all about who knows the Bible best and I nominated you! I agree with wintersuicide here (and dare I say I’m in agreement with The Herald Erjen too). You’re running the risk of turning all those who generally agree with your positions against you by doing things to antagonize them. If people don’t want to be tagged, you should respect that. He doesn’t have to have a reason for whybhe he doesn’t want to be tagged! If you respect him, you’ll comply. If you choose not to, then you’re just being an a—hole! |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Dec 10, 2018 14:38:13 GMT
How disappointing! Never thought I see you stoop to this level of ad hominem in defense of a losing position. When did you become Cody? Well... Right now, I'm just running with a bit.... But, I'm disappointed that you think Goz is actually making a valid point. It's an admittance of willful ignorance and lethargy. It's a "I choose to be ignorant and here's my lame 'why even bother' excuse why". |
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Dec 10, 2018 16:04:01 GMT
It is the responsibility of the author to make his prose intelligible to his intended audience. The Bible doesn't seem to be an advanced manual intended solely for the high priesthood, so maybe if God updated his manual more often he could have avoided some holy wars, religious schisms, and royal excommunications. That is completely untrue. It is the responsibility of the reader to grasp the material they are reading. If it is written in your language and you are not illiterate, the Bible is not beyond understanding unless you're lazy. Are you lazy? Shakespeare isn't meant for high reading either, but it can take time to understand it fully and it is a choice to not want to delve into it. There shouldn't even be an expectation that the writer tailors a writing to individual preference. What if the person trying to read it is a kid...Or an idiot? I find that most people reject that which they don;t like to hear, so even if the Bible was written in a way that a 2 year old could grasp, it would still be largely rejected. After all, that's what it's writings said would happen. I didn't say that a reader has no responsibility to concentrate while reading, but to say that an author has no need to make an effort to communicate clearly and connect to his or her audience is ridiculous. If I buy a Toyota Camry I expect the owner's manual to be clear and well written, and if it is not it is a failure of the author of the manual, and the company that hired that writer. You're also wrong about your point about intended audience. It's again ridiculous to suggest that the author of a children's book or a car owner's manual could ignore differences in their intended audience and write in the same style and with the same vocabulary. Your final statement is an undirected barb: I could suggest that you'll always reject any criticism of the Bible because you don't want to hear it. |
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Dec 10, 2018 17:31:20 GMT
How disappointing! Never thought I see you stoop to this level of ad hominem in defense of a losing position. When did you become Cody? Well... Right now, I'm just running with a bit.... But, I'm disappointed that you think Goz is actually making a valid point. It's an admittance of willful ignorance and lethargy. It's a "I choose to be ignorant and here's my lame 'why even bother' excuse why". With all due respect, that’s exactly what I see you doing (while tacking ad hominem on top of it, thereby making your already weak argument even weaker). I don’t always agree with goz (as evidenced above), but in this case, she demonstrated several logical errors in your argument and your comeback was to simply call her dumb and not address any of them. That’s not a compelling argument, and I’ve known you long enough to know that even YOU must realize this. That’s why I don’t understand why you’re doing it. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Dec 10, 2018 17:58:11 GMT
Well... Right now, I'm just running with a bit.... But, I'm disappointed that you think Goz is actually making a valid point. It's an admittance of willful ignorance and lethargy. It's a "I choose to be ignorant and here's my lame 'why even bother' excuse why". With all due respect, that’s exactly what I see you doing (while tacking ad hominem on top of it, thereby making your already weak argument even weaker). I don’t always agree with goz (as evidenced above), but in this case, she demonstrated several logical errors in your argument and your comeback was to simply call her dumb and not address any of them. Bullshit. If this were any discussion about any other subject.. let's say "dogs"... and we were discussing dog theories and behavior... why they make circles before they lie down, what color can they see, etc.. And there was an annoying twat who only ever added "Dogs are stupid.. You're stupid... This conversation is stupid" And you asked them what their problem was.. and their response was "No sane person would try to figure out dogs.. No one can ever figure out dogs... I dont even want to know about dogs... I like cats" You'd laugh the fuck at them out of the room. And, no... "People will come up with different opinions... There's no reason to try" is not a valid reason for willfully being ignorant of a subject... And, no, it doesn't mean that someone can't come up a correct assessment ever. And if you can't see that I have addressed her arguments... then.. You, much like her, are choosing to be blind. |
|
|
|
Post by Rodney Farber on Dec 10, 2018 18:54:34 GMT
Those who say that the Bible needs to be "interpreted" are merely cherry-picking passages to support their beliefs.
It's all-or-nothing, pal. Interpreting not allowed.
Now.... This is just stupid crazy talk. 1) Who says that interpreting is not allowed?... It's the written word.. it's bound to be a factor. 2) Nobody really says that it "needs" to be interpreted... Other than some symbolic prophecies and such, most believers see it as pretty straight forward: The writer had a specific idea of how his words should be understood to mean... 3) Most argue that other people interpret something wrong.. which is always a possibility. Not all interpretations are right... Some are bound to be wrong. I mean, seriously, have you seen some of the dumbass conclusions that you have arrived at?  A preposition is a bad word to end a sentence with. O.K. Mr. Know-it-all, how does one interpret the following (with my emphasis) from the New World Translation: If your “interpretation” is to ignore ridiculous passages like the above, who gets to select which passages to ignore? You? Me? Charles Taze Russell? Suppose I choose to ignore everything after, "In the beginning"? If the writer had a specific idea how his words should be understood, then he/she should have said exactly what he meant, not beat around the bush. And who is the writer? These are supposed to be quotes from Yahweh himself. |
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Dec 10, 2018 18:57:50 GMT
goz has never had a logical argument captainbryce has never concluded a logical argument Isapop has only ever understood his own argument I guess it's admirable how strongly they stick to their guns though. If nothing else they routinely beat me on stubbornness which can be an admirable quality once they are correct about something. Another plus, I wouldn't even know what my beliefs were if not for them. 
|
|
