Apology

[Ratchet]

Hmm, either you genuinely believe that, which would be pathetic, or you gave up. For the former, I'd almost feel bad for you, and the latter I'd be proud.

[Tank Program]

Please be nice. This is getting a bit too personal I think, and very off-topic. If you don't have anything nice to say, consider not saying it at all. (I wouldn't bother saying that but I won't have internet for the next few days.)

[Ritsuka]

Titan I demand an apology for this thread.

[TaZ]

You're both attention whores. Sinewav, you're just as pompous as compguygene.

[compguygene]

You're both attention whores. Sinewav, you're just as pompous as compguygene.

When I am wrong and know it, I admit it. Good call Taz. 'nuff said.

[Jonathan]

(Attempt to set things back on a remotely productive track. I just don't see this going very far, even considering side effects.) Is there a name for this kind of conflict? The kind where both sides just know they're right, but fail to convince the other side. Is it an extreme manifestation of the Dunning-Kruger effect with emphasis on the subjective level, or does it deserve its own name?

[epsy]

It's the opposite of the godwin effect. Erm.

[sinewav]

When I am wrong and know it, I admit it. Good call Taz. 'nuff said.

Yeah, because I never admit when I'm wrong...

You're both attention whores. Sinewav, you're just as pompous as compguygene.

I was named in this thread several times before I spoke up, so I'm reserving the right to post as much as I want. You of course, are only posting for attention, having nothing to contribute. You define "attention whore." Well done, Tazzy Wazzy.

And I prefer the term audacious instead of pompous.


I'll leave you with another Christian paradox. The bible is God's word. If you follow the bible to the letter you are evil (green light for slavery, rape, and murder). If you then reinterpret the bible to suit your needs you are a fraud (the "true" Christians). Pick one.

[Mecca]

When I am wrong and know it, I admit it. Good call Taz. 'nuff said.

Yeah, because I never admit when I'm wrong...

You're both attention whores. Sinewav, you're just as pompous as compguygene.

I was named in this thread several times before I spoke up, so I'm reserving the right to post as much as I want. You of course, are only posting for attention, having nothing to contribute. You define "attention whore." Well done, Tazzy Wazzy.

And I prefer the term audacious instead of pompous.


I'll leave you with another Christian paradox. The bible is God's word. If you follow the bible to the letter you are evil (green light for slavery, rape, and murder). If you then reinterpret the bible to suit your needs you are a fraud (the "true" Christians). Pick one.

Dude, chill out.

The only reason ANYONE posts, is to get the attention of someone else.

Get ducked.

[sinewav]

The only reason ANYONE posts, is to get the attention of someone else.

That makes perfect sense coming from you since this embodies the majority of your posts on this forum. Some of us actually have conversations (wow, imagine that!), though admittedly this thread isn't much of a conversation except for Jonathan's contributions.

[compguygene]

I never stated that you don't admit when you are wrong sine, only that I do.

Of course, you must persist in trolling about the Christian thing, it's what you do. I would answer your paradox in a rather simple way. Jesus set the example of not being bound to the law, just bound to not committing sin as an expression of love for the Father God and fellow man. I could start a whole thread about resolving the paradoxes that you perceive, but I see no point in trying to debate with someone who has already closed their mind.

[sinewav]

Of course, you must persist in trolling about the Christian thing, it's what you do. I would answer your paradox in a rather simple way. Jesus set the example of not being bound to the law, just bound to not committing sin as an expression of love for the Father God and fellow man. I could start a whole thread about resolving the paradoxes that you perceive, but I see no point in trying to debate with someone who has already closed their mind.

#1. I'm not trolling. I don't join in these threads for the lulz (though many of the responses I get are laughable).
#2. I don't have a closed mind. You seem to forget I was a serious practicing Christian at one time and even made plans to join the ministry. I know both sides of the table (thus I know all your arguments).
#3. I think it would be great if you created a thread to resolve paradoxes. But to solve them you can't resort to "depends on faith." That isn't a resolution, it is just a feeling you have and like any intuition can be dead wrong.

Actually, there is no need to start a new thread; we can use this one. So please, describe to me what it means to not be bound by law but to be committed to leading a sin-free life. How do you determine what is "law" and how is it separated from "sin"? And where is your evidence to support this claim? Again, you can't resort to "depends on faith." Faith is just a feeling, it's the illusion of knowing.

[TaZ]

Of course, you must persist in trolling about the Christian thing, it's what you do. I would answer your paradox in a rather simple way. Jesus set the example of not being bound to the law, just bound to not committing sin as an expression of love for the Father God and fellow man. I could start a whole thread about resolving the paradoxes that you perceive, but I see no point in trying to debate with someone who has already closed their mind.

#1. I'm not trolling. I don't join in these threads for the lulz (though many of the responses I get are laughable).
#2. I don't have a closed mind. You seem to forget I was a serious practicing Christian at one time and even made plans to join the ministry. I know both sides of the table (thus I know all your arguments).
#3. I think it would be great if you created a thread to resolve paradoxes. But to solve them you can't resort to "depends on faith." That isn't a resolution, it is just a feeling you have and like any intuition can be dead wrong.

Actually, there is no need to start a new thread; we can use this one. So please, describe to me what it means to not be bound by law but to be committed to leading a sin-free life. How do you determine what is "law" and how is it separated from "sin"? And where is your evidence to support this claim? Again, you can't resort to "depends on faith." Faith is just a feeling, it's the illusion of knowing.

Sinewav, you're close minded though. Why would you want to start a thread where your word or anyone else who agrees with your word is the only right choice? Your mindset is not ready for a debate. Maybe that's something you could work on during the future. Don't get me wrong Sinewav, you're a very intelligent guy..but your stubbornness prevails throughout this whole thread.

[sinewav]

Your mindset is not ready for a debate,

LOL! On the contrary, I am eagerly awaiting some mind blowing revelation from the skygod's cheerleaders. What I'm not ready for is more of the same nonsense from the Gee-Ohh-Dee Crew. So if you've got something hot, bring it. Prove that God exists and I need him. Because if it's "something you just feel in your heart," well damn, I can already experience love and joy and wonder and compassion without any strings attached. To me, life is like your favorite desert, but it won't make you fat or sick if you eat too much. "Heaven" is already right here. Why do I need a god and all sorts of goofy rules?

Anyone?

[TaZ]

Your mindset is not ready for a debate,

LOL! On the contrary, I am eagerly awaiting some mind blowing revelation from the skygod's cheerleaders. What I'm not ready for is more of the same nonsense from the Gee-Ohh-Dee Crew.

No, you're not. Look at what you just posted. You're poking fun of Christians. Any Christian reading what you just said knows it would be almost pointless debating with you. Your comments reaffirms what I said before. You said you used to be a Christian. Are you resentful that you once were a Christian?