Total Posts:71|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Formal apology to popculturepooka

irreverent_god
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG
Logic and Reason are the precursor to Justice.
Faith and zealotry are the precursor to Folly.
ethang5
Posts: 4,117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.
annanicole
Posts: 19,790
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
ethang5
Posts: 4,117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 1:14:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."

Would that be the fault of popculturepooka, irreverent_god, or is it just the nature of these things?
annanicole
Posts: 19,790
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 1:33:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 1:14:33 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."

Would that be the fault of popculturepooka, irreverent_god, or is it just the nature of these things?

The one in the middle
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
irreverent_god
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 4:33:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Thank you.
Logic and Reason are the precursor to Justice.
Faith and zealotry are the precursor to Folly.
irreverent_god
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 4:34:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."

I don't treat everyone the way I treat you, anna... Just the ones that deserve it.
Logic and Reason are the precursor to Justice.
Faith and zealotry are the precursor to Folly.
annanicole
Posts: 19,790
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 4:45:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 4:34:48 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."

I don't treat everyone the way I treat you, anna... Just the ones that deserve it.

"Ones that deserve it" = Christians who won't agree with you on anything
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
irreverent_god
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 4:49:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 4:45:13 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:34:48 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."

I don't treat everyone the way I treat you, anna... Just the ones that deserve it.

"Ones that deserve it" = Christians who won't agree with you on anything

Ethan and I have discussed several topics. He has never addressed me as you have, and I have never addressed him as I address you. I don't recall any major point of agreement he and I have ever shared. Take your pomposity and shove it.
Logic and Reason are the precursor to Justice.
Faith and zealotry are the precursor to Folly.
annanicole
Posts: 19,790
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 4:52:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 4:49:53 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:45:13 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:34:48 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."

I don't treat everyone the way I treat you, anna... Just the ones that deserve it.

"Ones that deserve it" = Christians who won't agree with you on anything

Ethan and I have discussed several topics. He has never addressed me as you have, and I have never addressed him as I address you. I don't recall any major point of agreement he and I have ever shared. Take your pomposity and shove it.

I'd love to. I'll shove mine in the same place you need to shove yours, then we'll seal it with a butt plug, and call it a day.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
irreverent_god
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 4:56:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 4:52:28 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:49:53 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:45:13 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:34:48 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."

I don't treat everyone the way I treat you, anna... Just the ones that deserve it.

"Ones that deserve it" = Christians who won't agree with you on anything

Ethan and I have discussed several topics. He has never addressed me as you have, and I have never addressed him as I address you. I don't recall any major point of agreement he and I have ever shared. Take your pomposity and shove it.

I'd love to. I'll shove mine in the same place you need to shove yours, then we'll seal it with a butt plug, and call it a day.

I wasn't aware (nor did I need to know) that you got into that. But if you really enjoy it, knock yourself out. I'd say, "Let me know how that turns out, for you," but I really have no interest. Just be careful. We wouldn't really want you to hurt yourself...
Logic and Reason are the precursor to Justice.
Faith and zealotry are the precursor to Folly.
annanicole
Posts: 19,790
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 4:57:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 4:56:33 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:52:28 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:49:53 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:45:13 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:34:48 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."

I don't treat everyone the way I treat you, anna... Just the ones that deserve it.

"Ones that deserve it" = Christians who won't agree with you on anything

Ethan and I have discussed several topics. He has never addressed me as you have, and I have never addressed him as I address you. I don't recall any major point of agreement he and I have ever shared. Take your pomposity and shove it.

I'd love to. I'll shove mine in the same place you need to shove yours, then we'll seal it with a butt plug, and call it a day.

I wasn't aware (nor did I need to know) that you got into that. But if you really enjoy it, knock yourself out. I'd say, "Let me know how that turns out, for you," but I really have no interest. Just be careful. We wouldn't really want you to hurt yourself...

LMAO. The only way I could possibly hurt myself would be to sprain a finger trying to push it all up in you.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
irreverent_god
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 6:29:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 4:57:44 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:56:33 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:52:28 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:49:53 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:45:13 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:34:48 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."

I don't treat everyone the way I treat you, anna... Just the ones that deserve it.

"Ones that deserve it" = Christians who won't agree with you on anything

Ethan and I have discussed several topics. He has never addressed me as you have, and I have never addressed him as I address you. I don't recall any major point of agreement he and I have ever shared. Take your pomposity and shove it.

I'd love to. I'll shove mine in the same place you need to shove yours, then we'll seal it with a butt plug, and call it a day.

I wasn't aware (nor did I need to know) that you got into that. But if you really enjoy it, knock yourself out. I'd say, "Let me know how that turns out, for you," but I really have no interest. Just be careful. We wouldn't really want you to hurt yourself...

LMAO. The only way I could possibly hurt myself would be to sprain a finger trying to push it all up in you.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: You are a prime example of a classy, christian broad. Why would you, a 'gud gawd-fearin' krischin woman,' attempt to help a heterosexual male attempt a homosexual act, against his will?
You're nothing but class, anna. It's all low, but nothing but class.
Logic and Reason are the precursor to Justice.
Faith and zealotry are the precursor to Folly.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 7:26:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 4:45:13 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:34:48 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."

I don't treat everyone the way I treat you, anna... Just the ones that deserve it.

"Ones that deserve it" = Christians who won't agree with you on anything

No Anna, you're definitely a special case and more highly deserving of that sort of description than most other Christians here. You're so convinced that you're right, that you can't seem to let the evidence (or lack thereof), speak for itself.

You claim to have read some 5,000 books on the subject of Christianity, yet clearly show that you have less than a clue what many of the major detractors are offering. This shows that you'll only read books which are pro-Christian. Those who read both sides, you get a much more rounded education.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
annanicole
Posts: 19,790
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 7:37:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 7:26:06 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:45:13 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:34:48 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."

I don't treat everyone the way I treat you, anna... Just the ones that deserve it.

"Ones that deserve it" = Christians who won't agree with you on anything

No Anna, you're definitely a special case and more highly deserving of that sort of description than most other Christians here. You're so convinced that you're right, that you can't seem to let the evidence (or lack thereof), speak for itself.

You claim to have read some 5,000 books on the subject of Christianity, yet clearly show that you have less than a clue what many of the major detractors are offering. This shows that you'll only read books which are pro-Christian. Those who read both sides, you get a much more rounded education.

No, I said I HAVE ... or had ... somewhere around 5,000 books. There's no way I read them all. Well rounded? Remember, I asked you how many books you had read in support of the authenticity/veracity of Mark 16: 9-20. You sure talked about it as if you had studied up on the matter. Then you were asked six or eight questions - simple questions - six or eight times. You never bothered to answer a one! Instead, you fabricated your own "defense" of the passage, then shot it down, then proclaimed victory. If I'm a "special case" among Christians (which I do not claim to be), 'tis merely because I point things like that out.

I also asked you to give a specific source (as in book, edition, and page number) concerning this 42 year convocation of the Council of Nicea along with evidence that a number of participants were not even Christian. Thus far I haven't seen it. And I doubt that I will. Your facts are wrong ... again.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 8:43:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 7:37:55 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 7:26:06 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:45:13 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:34:48 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."

I don't treat everyone the way I treat you, anna... Just the ones that deserve it.

"Ones that deserve it" = Christians who won't agree with you on anything

No Anna, you're definitely a special case and more highly deserving of that sort of description than most other Christians here. You're so convinced that you're right, that you can't seem to let the evidence (or lack thereof), speak for itself.

You claim to have read some 5,000 books on the subject of Christianity, yet clearly show that you have less than a clue what many of the major detractors are offering. This shows that you'll only read books which are pro-Christian. Those who read both sides, you get a much more rounded education.

No, I said I HAVE ... or had ... somewhere around 5,000 books. There's no way I read them all.
At the time, I had stated that I read about 55 books, and you offered 5,000 as your number for comparison. You can claim that you didn't intend to imply that you'd read them all, but since you mentioned that you'd given at least 2,000 of them to your church, it definitely implies that you'd read them and were finished with them.

Well rounded? Remember, I asked you how many books you had read in support of the authenticity/veracity of Mark 16: 9-20. You sure talked about it as if you had studied up on the matter. Then you were asked six or eight questions - simple questions - six or eight times. You never bothered to answer a one! Instead, you fabricated your own "defense" of the passage, then shot it down, then proclaimed victory.
I offered you what I had read as reasons for doubting the authenticity. And I read the same arguments from multiple sources. I often reach a point of placing you on mental ignore because you're so pointless. If someone said that the Bible is printed on paper, you'd likely argue. If someone suggest the personal bias of the men of the Council of Nicaea played a role in which manuscripts they selected (and which they rejected), you'd likely argue. It doesn't matter what the topic is or what is presented, you argue. And once you've lost an argument, you don't stop. You'll chase people from thread to thread, bringing up arguments you've already lost, from threads on highly diverse topics. It's a bit like a dog chasing a skunk. It doesn't matter how many times you get sprayed or how much your arguments begin to stink, you keep right on chasing that big fluffy tail, and seem incapable of learning anything.

If I'm a "special case" among Christians (which I do not claim to be), 'tis merely because I point things like that out.
No, Anna; it's because you're brash, obstinate, aggressive, closed-minded, verbose, arrogant, bullheaded, adamant, inflexible, obsessive, relentless, stubborn, tenacious, obdurate, pertinacious... and wrong. I don't have a problem with any of those qualities, except that they're bundled with a devout adherence to a belief which is simply without any credibility, any evidence, or any connection to common sense. You don't even seem to notice that in order to cling to your beliefs, you'll completely uproot your normal standards of evidence and logic, invert them, and then try to make them grow.

I also asked you to give a specific source (as in book, edition, and page number) concerning this 42 year convocation of the Council of Nicea along with evidence that a number of participants were not even Christian. Thus far I haven't seen it. And I doubt that I will. Your facts are wrong ... again.
Well, Anna; I suppose I shouldn't have credited you with the ability to do simple math, or use a calculator. But the first Council of Nicaea convened in 325CE, and the Bible canon was finalized (the first time), in 367CE. Take 367, and subtract 325. What do you come up with?

I don't recall saying that any of the participants weren't Christian. I said that Constantine (who wasn't a Christian), wanted the council to produce an all-in-one God, and an accompanying religion, to relieve the infighting among Romans over religious differences. And I've given you a source TWICE. I'll give it to you yet again! "Historia Ecclesiastica, Eusebius".
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
annanicole
Posts: 19,790
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 9:10:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 8:43:38 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/11/2014 7:37:55 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 7:26:06 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:45:13 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:34:48 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."

I don't treat everyone the way I treat you, anna... Just the ones that deserve it.

"Ones that deserve it" = Christians who won't agree with you on anything

No Anna, you're definitely a special case and more highly deserving of that sort of description than most other Christians here. You're so convinced that you're right, that you can't seem to let the evidence (or lack thereof), speak for itself.

You claim to have read some 5,000 books on the subject of Christianity, yet clearly show that you have less than a clue what many of the major detractors are offering. This shows that you'll only read books which are pro-Christian. Those who read both sides, you get a much more rounded education.

No, I said I HAVE ... or had ... somewhere around 5,000 books. There's no way I read them all.
At the time, I had stated that I read about 55 books, and you offered 5,000 as your number for comparison. You can claim that you didn't intend to imply that you'd read them all, but since you mentioned that you'd given at least 2,000 of them to your church, it definitely implies that you'd read them and were finished with them.

LMAO. No, it doesn't. About 500 were bound volumes of periodicals. I knew I'd never read them because the articles are not detailed enough. Another couple hundred were old commentaries that I rarely referenced because I considered them either shallow or inaccurate. I implied nothing of the sort.

Well rounded? Remember, I asked you how many books you had read in support of the authenticity/veracity of Mark 16: 9-20. You sure talked about it as if you had studied up on the matter. Then you were asked six or eight questions - simple questions - six or eight times. You never bothered to answer a one! Instead, you fabricated your own "defense" of the passage, then shot it down, then proclaimed victory.

I offered you what I had read as reasons for doubting the authenticity. And I read the same arguments from multiple sources.

That's simply not true. You cited ONE broad argument that I've never even seen (it was hardly an "argument" anyway), and shot it down.

If I'm a "special case" among Christians (which I do not claim to be), 'tis merely because I point things like that out.

No, Anna; it's because you're brash, obstinate, aggressive, closed-minded, verbose, arrogant, bullheaded, adamant, inflexible, obsessive, relentless, stubborn, tenacious, obdurate, pertinacious... and wrong.

What do you see yourself as? All of the above - except you're RIGHT?

I don't have a problem with any of those qualities, except that they're bundled with a devout adherence to a belief which is simply without any credibility, any evidence, or any connection to common sense. You don't even seem to notice that in order to cling to your beliefs, you'll completely uproot your normal standards of evidence and logic, invert them, and then try to make them grow.

That's not true, as you have seen regarding the authorship of I Peter. Mark it down, you will not provide us with ONE solid, believable reason against Petrine authorship. Watch and see. Land's sakes, I'll admit that the fact that the first line introduces Peter as the author is not in and of itself conclusive. I never said it was. It is ancillary. From there, you'd have to take the word of people who were there, or knew people who were there, or knew people who knew people who were there.

You won't do that. You'll have to make wild assumptions about "rhetorical skills" or "writing styles" or "educational achievements", totally ignoring the possibility of a dictated letter. And WHY? Well, because you want to be able to say with a straight face, "No NT writer was an eyewitness of Jesus." That's important to you.

I also asked you to give a specific source (as in book, edition, and page number) concerning this 42 year convocation of the Council of Nicea along with evidence that a number of participants were not even Christian. Thus far I haven't seen it. And I doubt that I will. Your facts are wrong ... again.

Well, Anna; I suppose I shouldn't have credited you with the ability to do simple math, or use a calculator. But the first Council of Nicaea convened in 325CE, and the Bible canon was finalized (the first time), in 367CE. Take 367, and subtract 325. What do you come up with?

I come up with the fact that you are lost. The Council of Nicea did not decide anything pertaining to the canon. They didn't meet for that purpose. The problem here isn't one of math. And if want to make reference to 367, I assume that you are referring to the so-called Athanasian canon, but that was not the result of any council. It was just a list of books published by the bishop of Alexandra, Athanasius. It reflects no vote of non-Christians.

I don't recall saying that any of the participants weren't Christian.

Well, you did, but perhaps you left out an adjective such as "educated" or "literate".

I said that Constantine (who wasn't a Christian), wanted the council to produce an all-in-one God, and an accompanying religion, to relieve the infighting among Romans over religious differences. And I've given you a source TWICE. I'll give it to you yet again! "Historia Ecclesiastica, Eusebius".

Suffice to say that I cannot find the quote. Historica Ecclesiastica is a large volume. I assume you have it on hand, either online or in hard copy. I find NOTHING in Eusebius to support your contentions. Eusebius's Life of Constantine fails to records these "facts".
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Fatihah
Posts: 7,758
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 9:12:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Response: HAHAhaha. What kind of apology is that?You still admit to calling someone a blazing idiot. So it's okay to call someone a blazing idiot, as long as it's to the intended person?

This is the epitome of a lack of class. Another confirmation of your obvious character.

Thanks for the confirmation.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 9:20:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

I just saw this (seriously). I appreciate the apology. It takes a real, genuine person to do that. You are ok in my book.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Martley
Posts: 126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/11/2014 9:49:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Way to be IG! Not that you needed it... but you have my respect.
A Black Belt is a white belt who never quit.

The best time to do something was 20 years ago.... the second best to do something is now.
irreverent_god
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/12/2014 2:10:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 9:12:36 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Response: HAHAhaha. What kind of apology is that?You still admit to calling someone a blazing idiot. So it's okay to call someone a blazing idiot, as long as it's to the intended person?

This is the epitome of a lack of class. Another confirmation of your obvious character.

Thanks for the confirmation.

Of course I admit to it. The insult was public, the apology should be, as well. I don't expect a lower animal to understand. I made a mistake, and recognized it. Get over yourself.
Logic and Reason are the precursor to Justice.
Faith and zealotry are the precursor to Folly.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,758
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/12/2014 2:13:12 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/12/2014 2:10:13 AM, irreverent_god wrote:


Of course I admit to it. The insult was public, the apology should be, as well. I don't expect a lower animal to understand. I made a mistake, and recognized it. Get over yourself.

Response: Yes. You admit to being the epitome of one who has no class, as only an immature person would think it's okay to call someone a blazing idiot, as long as it is intended to the right person. Thanks again for displaying to the forum your true character.
irreverent_god
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/12/2014 2:17:04 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 9:20:26 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

I just saw this (seriously). I appreciate the apology. It takes a real, genuine person to do that. You are ok in my book.

Apology merited, apology issued. I'm just sorry it has ended up turning into a flame war.
Logic and Reason are the precursor to Justice.
Faith and zealotry are the precursor to Folly.
irreverent_god
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/12/2014 2:17:50 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 9:49:54 PM, Martley wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Way to be IG! Not that you needed it... but you have my respect.

Thank you.
Logic and Reason are the precursor to Justice.
Faith and zealotry are the precursor to Folly.
irreverent_god
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/12/2014 2:30:03 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/12/2014 2:13:12 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 8/12/2014 2:10:13 AM, irreverent_god wrote:


Of course I admit to it. The insult was public, the apology should be, as well. I don't expect a lower animal to understand. I made a mistake, and recognized it. Get over yourself.

Response: Yes. You admit to being the epitome of one who has no class, as only an immature person would think it's okay to call someone a blazing idiot, as long as it is intended to the right person. Thanks again for displaying to the forum your true character.

No, I admitted to having made a public error, and corrected it with equal visibility.
Is it not OK? Think of all the things you've called me (and all atheists/agnostics), then think of the definition of the word, "hypocrite." You have shown yourself to be the epitome of the typical american misconception of a typical, misogynistic muslim troll. I understand your need to bash me but, if you're going to attempt it, at least find a semblance of reason to do so.
Logic and Reason are the precursor to Justice.
Faith and zealotry are the precursor to Folly.
irreverent_god
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/12/2014 2:38:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 7:37:55 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 7:26:06 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:45:13 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:34:48 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."

I don't treat everyone the way I treat you, anna... Just the ones that deserve it.

"Ones that deserve it" = Christians who won't agree with you on anything

No Anna, you're definitely a special case and more highly deserving of that sort of description than most other Christians here. You're so convinced that you're right, that you can't seem to let the evidence (or lack thereof), speak for itself.

You claim to have read some 5,000 books on the subject of Christianity, yet clearly show that you have less than a clue what many of the major detractors are offering. This shows that you'll only read books which are pro-Christian. Those who read both sides, you get a much more rounded education.

No, I said I HAVE ... or had ... somewhere around 5,000 books. There's no way I read them all. Well rounded? Remember, I asked you how many books you had read in support of the authenticity/veracity of Mark 16: 9-20. You sure talked about it as if you had studied up on the matter. Then you were asked six or eight questions - simple questions - six or eight times. You never bothered to answer a one! Instead, you fabricated your own "defense" of the passage, then shot it down, then proclaimed victory. If I'm a "special case" among Christians (which I do not claim to be), 'tis merely because I point things like that out.

I also asked you to give a specific source (as in book, edition, and page number) concerning this 42 year convocation of the Council of Nicea along with evidence that a number of participants were not even Christian. Thus far I haven't seen it. And I doubt that I will. Your facts are wrong ... again.

This sounds like the same kind of "puffed up," grasping at straws type of backpedaling neutral did, when confronted with his lies about having an IQ of 180, and a doctorate in history... I'm glad to know that, at the very least, your incessant demands for answers to your inane questions necessitated in order to evade truths and facts are limited to just me...
Logic and Reason are the precursor to Justice.
Faith and zealotry are the precursor to Folly.
neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/12/2014 6:08:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/11/2014 4:34:48 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."

I don't treat everyone the way I treat you, anna... Just the ones that deserve it.

And threin lies the problem.

YOU get to decide who you treat like a piece of crap? So much for the reality of civility, YOU are the decider.

Perhaps you should just focus on treating all people as human beings?
neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/12/2014 6:09:14 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/12/2014 2:10:13 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 9:12:36 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Response: HAHAhaha. What kind of apology is that?You still admit to calling someone a blazing idiot. So it's okay to call someone a blazing idiot, as long as it's to the intended person?

This is the epitome of a lack of class. Another confirmation of your obvious character.

Thanks for the confirmation.

Of course I admit to it. The insult was public, the apology should be, as well. I don't expect a lower animal to understand. I made a mistake, and recognized it. Get over yourself.

blazing idiots and lower animals .... the class ....
neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/12/2014 6:22:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/12/2014 2:38:08 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 7:37:55 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 7:26:06 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:45:13 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 4:34:48 PM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:12:25 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/11/2014 1:07:17 PM, ethang5 wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Classy post.

Let them exchange four or five posts, and it'll be right back to "blazing idiot."

I don't treat everyone the way I treat you, anna... Just the ones that deserve it.

"Ones that deserve it" = Christians who won't agree with you on anything

No Anna, you're definitely a special case and more highly deserving of that sort of description than most other Christians here. You're so convinced that you're right, that you can't seem to let the evidence (or lack thereof), speak for itself.

You claim to have read some 5,000 books on the subject of Christianity, yet clearly show that you have less than a clue what many of the major detractors are offering. This shows that you'll only read books which are pro-Christian. Those who read both sides, you get a much more rounded education.

No, I said I HAVE ... or had ... somewhere around 5,000 books. There's no way I read them all. Well rounded? Remember, I asked you how many books you had read in support of the authenticity/veracity of Mark 16: 9-20. You sure talked about it as if you had studied up on the matter. Then you were asked six or eight questions - simple questions - six or eight times. You never bothered to answer a one! Instead, you fabricated your own "defense" of the passage, then shot it down, then proclaimed victory. If I'm a "special case" among Christians (which I do not claim to be), 'tis merely because I point things like that out.

I also asked you to give a specific source (as in book, edition, and page number) concerning this 42 year convocation of the Council of Nicea along with evidence that a number of participants were not even Christian. Thus far I haven't seen it. And I doubt that I will. Your facts are wrong ... again.

This sounds like the same kind of "puffed up," grasping at straws type of backpedaling neutral did, when confronted with his lies about having an IQ of 180, and a doctorate in history... I'm glad to know that, at the very least, your incessant demands for answers to your inane questions necessitated in order to evade truths and facts are limited to just me...

And so he drags a third person in!

And despite correcting the statement, that arrogant bashing idiots with pride problems who call themselevs whatever to avoid actuially making a case would be so stupid and petulate that even if a person had an IQ of 180 and a Ph.D, athtards would refuse to accept it because they are so self absorded and arrogant, persicky gobbers who must look down on others! Actual measures of asessment? Verified accomplishments?

Amazingly enough, our character assasine would allow and facilitate combat service to be denegrated, and deny that on the internet as well - because one of those 'people' who deserve it would thus be 'brave' and those people who 'deserve it' cannot have any positive qualities whatsoevere and must be dehumanized and attacked - dismissed as blazing idiots and sub-human animals (in the middle of an apology no less), while attacking three posters simultaneously.

And months after repeatedly correcting those statements, twice having proven it to the moderators for which zit licker here was warned, he continued to repeat the lie while challanging the integrity of others? Classly? That is not. Its just the dishonestly and lack of integrity the world has come to expect from atheists. These smarmy attacks are supposed to convince people?

For the record, the statement that I did make, personally, was that my IQ was in the top 1% - a statement that atheists in the dire need of internet confrontation cannot accept either. People who disagree with atheists MUST BE dehimanized and demonized - because that is all atheists got - an inante sense of superiority and the need to judge others (just by standards they will never accept themselves to be judged by).

And the questioned asked? Even if someone did have a Ph.D? On the internet, how could you ever prove as much to the self absorded mianical idiots, capable of lying at the drop of a hat while impuning everyone else's character? The answer is: you don't!

They will believe anything they wish, and evidence is ... not really relevant to these guys.

Arrogant trolls are not interested in anything that might contradict their derisive self important views - as we see above!

But that's OK, we have publicly rationalized this behavior to - those who desever it! Integrity, apparently, is a fungible thing in atheist world views ... but we already knew that too, didn't we?

Amazing, Ana predicted IG would last five posts, and that pretty much hit the nail on the head.
KafkaF
Posts: 103
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/12/2014 6:32:06 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/12/2014 6:09:14 AM, neutral wrote:
At 8/12/2014 2:10:13 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
At 8/11/2014 9:12:36 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 8/5/2014 10:11:21 AM, irreverent_god wrote:
Pooka,

Not too long ago, it was recommended that I debate you. In response to someone else, I called you a blazing idiot. That was a knee-jerk response based on the fact that I confused your user name with someone else's... I should not have posted that statement, without making sure of whom it was of which I was speaking, first.

While I still disagree with you, on a great many things, the statement was incorrect, and I apologize.

- IG

Response: HAHAhaha. What kind of apology is that?You still admit to calling someone a blazing idiot. So it's okay to call someone a blazing idiot, as long as it's to the intended person?

This is the epitome of a lack of class. Another confirmation of your obvious character.

Thanks for the confirmation.

Of course I admit to it. The insult was public, the apology should be, as well. I don't expect a lower animal to understand. I made a mistake, and recognized it. Get over yourself.

blazing idiots and lower animals .... the class ....

It's not like he's the only one who has ever insulted someone else on these forums. Countless people here have insulted someone at least once, but IG is one of the only two people I have ever seen apologize for an insult(the other being Fatihah).

So while this apology doesn't all of a sudden make all of IG's insults disappear, it certainly makes his case a bit better for at least admitting to being wrong.