|
Post by gadreel on Feb 7, 2018 22:23:58 GMT
I will take that as concession that I proved my point adequately. Comments like this persuade me further from believing your "I want to learn" spiel and closer to believing you're just trying to "win" an internet argument. I learned plenty thank you, I researched what I wrote and learned from that. You have been incapable of refuting my point, and when you realised that you first tried to declare an impasse and then told me I was using an echo chamber when you realised you could not refute what I said. It is clear you realised that your stance was incorrect, you are just loathe to admit it. But as I said I learned a lot during that conversation so thank you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2018 22:37:47 GMT
Comments like this persuade me further from believing your "I want to learn" spiel and closer to believing you're just trying to "win" an internet argument. I learned plenty thank you, I researched what I wrote and learned from that. Doesn't sound like I needed to be involved. Take this into consideration for "next time." to your satisfaction Nope. I only did that when I realized you were repeating yourself and, thus, forcing me to repeat myself. It's not my stance, pal. It's Gospel, so to speak. Like what? That if you repeat yourself enough, your opponent will white flag you and you can feel confident declaring yourself an internet argument champion? Eh, whatever helps you feel better about yourself and your non-committal, ambiguous, nebulous belief system. Part of me wonders if your belief system is even authentic. It seems more like it was intentionally constructed with the characteristics it has to help you avoid absolutes, which in turn serves you well in your internet debate championing.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 7, 2018 22:43:34 GMT
I learned plenty thank you, I researched what I wrote and learned from that. Doesn't sound like I needed to be involved. Take this into consideration for "next time." to your satisfaction Nope. I only did that when I realized you were repeating yourself and, thus, forcing me to repeat myself. It's not my stance, pal. It's Gospel, so to speak. Like what? That if you repeat yourself enough, your opponent will white flag you and you can feel confident declaring yourself an internet argument champion? Eh, whatever helps you feel better about yourself and your non-committal, ambiguous, nebulous belief system. Part of me wonders if your belief system is even authentic. It seems more like it was intentionally constructed with the characteristics it has to help you avoid absolutes, which in turn serves you well in your internet debate championing. The gospel that you espouse, that must be incorrect if it allows a perfect being to change. You know very little about my belief set, but I tend not to allow logical fallacies into it, and I tend to argue against other Christians who have clearly decided that the bible is the infallable word of god, they are usually pretty easy to expose and bring a bad name to thinking Christians.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2018 22:49:48 GMT
Doesn't sound like I needed to be involved. Take this into consideration for "next time." to your satisfaction Nope. I only did that when I realized you were repeating yourself and, thus, forcing me to repeat myself. It's not my stance, pal. It's Gospel, so to speak. Like what? That if you repeat yourself enough, your opponent will white flag you and you can feel confident declaring yourself an internet argument champion? Eh, whatever helps you feel better about yourself and your non-committal, ambiguous, nebulous belief system. Part of me wonders if your belief system is even authentic. It seems more like it was intentionally constructed with the characteristics it has to help you avoid absolutes, which in turn serves you well in your internet debate championing. The gospel that you espouse, that must be incorrect if it allows a perfect being to change. You know very little about my belief set, but I tend not to allow logical fallacies into it, and I tend to argue against other Christians who have clearly decided that the bible is the infallable word of god, they are usually pretty easy to expose and bring a bad name to thinking Christians. You sound more like you are hard up for approval from atheists. As I suspected long before your most recent waste of my time, you are not interested in an exchange of ideas or learning anything from me as you stated. That was a lie. Please don't bother me anymore with your bumbling raid on the windmill of Bible belief. You can take your crusade someplace from now on.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 7, 2018 22:50:00 GMT
I learned plenty thank you, I researched what I wrote and learned from that. Doesn't sound like I needed to be involved. Take this into consideration for "next time." to your satisfaction Nope. I only did that when I realized you were repeating yourself and, thus, forcing me to repeat myself. It's not my stance, pal. It's Gospel, so to speak. Like what? That if you repeat yourself enough, your opponent will white flag you and you can feel confident declaring yourself an internet argument champion? Eh, whatever helps you feel better about yourself and your non-committal, ambiguous, nebulous belief system. Part of me wonders if your belief system is even authentic. It seems more like it was intentionally constructed with the characteristics it has to help you avoid absolutes, which in turn serves you well in your internet debate championing. Actually, sorry, the last two posts were uncalled for in tone, I am having a pretty bad work day. nevertheless you did not deserve that. I have learned from what I posted and I am unsatisfied by your response, but that is on me not you. I apologise for seemingly repeating myself, but I was not (and in fact still am not) 100% sure you were getting what I was saying and when it seemed that you were calling an impasse, I interpreted that as you understanding what I was saying and realising I was right. I apologise for that. I do have a very unorthodox Christian view, but it is less nebulous than you might think, however I am loathe to discuss it in it's entirety over the internet, most people would find it very hard to understand. anyhow, I meant it, I am sorry for any offence, and I did really enjoy having to read what I did to formalise my point.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 7, 2018 22:52:32 GMT
The gospel that you espouse, that must be incorrect if it allows a perfect being to change. You know very little about my belief set, but I tend not to allow logical fallacies into it, and I tend to argue against other Christians who have clearly decided that the bible is the infallable word of god, they are usually pretty easy to expose and bring a bad name to thinking Christians. You sound more like you are hard up for approval from atheists. As I suspected long before your most recent waste of my time, you are not interested in an exchange of ideas or learning anything from me as you stated. That was a lie. Please don't bother me anymore with your bumbling raid on the windmill of Bible belief. You can take your crusade someplace from now on. I had not seen this before I posted the above, I guess I deserve your tone a little. Be aware though that I am not crusading against bible belief, I am merely against blind acceptance of a book that was written by men. I am interested in an exchange of ideas, I just need them to be well presented, I felt that your ideas were a misinterpretation of what I was driving at. in any case I have made my point and I have said what I wanted to, I hope you have a good day.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2018 22:54:28 GMT
Doesn't sound like I needed to be involved. Take this into consideration for "next time." to your satisfaction Nope. I only did that when I realized you were repeating yourself and, thus, forcing me to repeat myself. It's not my stance, pal. It's Gospel, so to speak. Like what? That if you repeat yourself enough, your opponent will white flag you and you can feel confident declaring yourself an internet argument champion? Eh, whatever helps you feel better about yourself and your non-committal, ambiguous, nebulous belief system. Part of me wonders if your belief system is even authentic. It seems more like it was intentionally constructed with the characteristics it has to help you avoid absolutes, which in turn serves you well in your internet debate championing. Actually, sorry, the last two posts were uncalled for in tone, I am having a pretty bad work day. nevertheless you did not deserve that. I have learned from what I posted and I am unsatisfied by your response, but that is on me not you. I apologise for seemingly repeating myself, but I was not (and in fact still am not) 100% sure you were getting what I was saying and when it seemed that you were calling an impasse, I interpreted that as you understanding what I was saying and realising I was right. I apologise for that. I do have a very unorthodox Christian view, but it is less nebulous than you might think, however I am loathe to discuss it in it's entirety over the internet, most people would find it very hard to understand. anyhow, I meant it, I am sorry for any offence, and I did really enjoy having to read what I did to formalise my point. Not sure if this is yet another well-played deceit or an honest statement. 70 x 7 I suppose. 70 x 7. But you can only do this 488 more times before I give up. Apology accepted. I hope you have a better night than you did day. God Bless...for whatever it's worth.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 7, 2018 22:55:40 GMT
Actually, sorry, the last two posts were uncalled for in tone, I am having a pretty bad work day. nevertheless you did not deserve that. I have learned from what I posted and I am unsatisfied by your response, but that is on me not you. I apologise for seemingly repeating myself, but I was not (and in fact still am not) 100% sure you were getting what I was saying and when it seemed that you were calling an impasse, I interpreted that as you understanding what I was saying and realising I was right. I apologise for that. I do have a very unorthodox Christian view, but it is less nebulous than you might think, however I am loathe to discuss it in it's entirety over the internet, most people would find it very hard to understand. anyhow, I meant it, I am sorry for any offence, and I did really enjoy having to read what I did to formalise my point. Not sure if this is yet another well-played deceit or an honest statement. 70 x 7 I suppose. 70 x 7. But you can only do this 488 more times before I give up. Apology accepted. I hope you have a better night than you did day. God Bless...for whatever it's worth. Just to be clear I have presented what I think honestly and forthrightly, I have not knowingly tried to deceive you or play games.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 8, 2018 0:30:26 GMT
Not sure if this is yet another well-played deceit or an honest statement. 70 x 7 I suppose. 70 x 7. But you can only do this 488 more times before I give up. Apology accepted. I hope you have a better night than you did day. God Bless...for whatever it's worth. Just to be clear I have presented what I think honestly and forthrightly, I have not knowingly tried to deceive you or play games. AWWWWWW! May I commend BOTH of you as good guys whom I admire, who have disparate ideas to each other and to me, and have now added to the integrity of the Board by certain admissions. Though I do it myself and am on occasion and on certain subjects, a hypocrite ( as are most of us) it is really good to see some honest and forthright discussion and some admissions of being wrong/tired/drunk/in a bad mood for 50 years***bonus point to anyone who gets the reference*** and just plain ornery )
|
|