Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Beastt - making a point

neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2014 3:08:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
So, several MONTHS ago Beast decided it would be a good idea to lecture a newb about the need to read books and allow them to form his opinion. The problem was Beasty listed at least a dozen or so volumes of Apologetics, and then made the stunning claim that these were the books that influenced his opinion that there was no evidence for God/Christ?

Challenged to explain this ... he was silent.

Challenged about Lee Strobel specifically, he lost his mind. We get a silly youtube video with a list of books, but what we do not get is an explanation as to how there could be 'something' that drove Lee Strobel to convert from atheism to Christianity. There should at least be an explanation, from reading the book he repeatedly throws in our faces, about why he found in unconvincing.

Yet months after making this challenge, more than enough time to read the volume he flashes in our faces, he still cannot tell what the main arguments are in the work and why its wrong. Even at times going so far as to explain that he 'forgets' it.

Thus we can conclude that he has not read it.

This has apparently wounded Beasty SO MUCH, that he has decided to repeatedly call me out as a liar ... with no evidence whatsoever that he has actually read the book ... a book everyone agrees clearly exists, but whose substance remains utterly avoided by Beasty.

So .. I hereby publicly call Beasty liar and false accuser.

And this is what the forum needs.

Dredged up animus based on sore feelings and an abusive desire to make someone accept something that is clearly not true.

All Beasty has to do .. is make an argument - and all he can do is accuse someone else of lying to cover his own dishonesty.

If you think this is a useful thread for the forum, please let me know.
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2014 3:16:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Calling someone out in this forum, in the form of a thread, is NOT going to help it become more productive
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2014 3:18:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/2/2014 3:16:05 PM, SNP1 wrote:
Calling someone out in this forum, in the form of a thread, is NOT going to help it become more productive

I suggest you make the same point to Beasty ...

http://www.debate.org...

That this discussion happened MONTHS ago and Beasty is STILL throwing it my face dishonestly? You think that helps?

Go ahead - call him out. DO standards matter or not?
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2014 3:19:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/2/2014 3:18:06 PM, neutral wrote:
At 10/2/2014 3:16:05 PM, SNP1 wrote:
Calling someone out in this forum, in the form of a thread, is NOT going to help it become more productive

I suggest you make the same point to Beasty ...

http://www.debate.org...

That this discussion happened MONTHS ago and Beasty is STILL throwing it my face dishonestly? You think that helps?

Go ahead - call him out. DO standards matter or not?

If you look, I made the same exact statement, word for word, there.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2014 3:33:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/2/2014 3:19:46 PM, SNP1 wrote:
At 10/2/2014 3:18:06 PM, neutral wrote:
At 10/2/2014 3:16:05 PM, SNP1 wrote:
Calling someone out in this forum, in the form of a thread, is NOT going to help it become more productive

I suggest you make the same point to Beasty ...

http://www.debate.org...

That this discussion happened MONTHS ago and Beasty is STILL throwing it my face dishonestly? You think that helps?

Go ahead - call him out. DO standards matter or not?

If you look, I made the same exact statement, word for word, there.

You did indeed.

So what is the problem?

That this was repeatedly thrown in my face for several days now? At what point do you respond? And when the explanation, repeatedly, is blown off - deliberately misportrayed - key facts left off, while someone violates the forum rules to call someone a liar?

I happily invite the application of standards - but this goes on, as we see here - for MONTHS at a time. Is dredged up to pursue a nakedly personal affair.

And tell me, if you make points that are relevant only to face a constant barrage of accusations like this? What is the problem?

And I will tell you SNP, when you document this ... nothing happens. You are just beginning to experience what Ana, Ethan5, Mad, Fatiha, myself, and may others have been experiencing for months.
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2014 9:03:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/2/2014 3:33:43 PM, neutral wrote:
At 10/2/2014 3:19:46 PM, SNP1 wrote:
At 10/2/2014 3:18:06 PM, neutral wrote:
At 10/2/2014 3:16:05 PM, SNP1 wrote:
Calling someone out in this forum, in the form of a thread, is NOT going to help it become more productive

I suggest you make the same point to Beasty ...

http://www.debate.org...

That this discussion happened MONTHS ago and Beasty is STILL throwing it my face dishonestly? You think that helps?

Go ahead - call him out. DO standards matter or not?

If you look, I made the same exact statement, word for word, there.

You did indeed.

So what is the problem?

That this was repeatedly thrown in my face for several days now? At what point do you respond? And when the explanation, repeatedly, is blown off - deliberately misportrayed - key facts left off, while someone violates the forum rules to call someone a liar?

I happily invite the application of standards - but this goes on, as we see here - for MONTHS at a time. Is dredged up to pursue a nakedly personal affair.

And tell me, if you make points that are relevant only to face a constant barrage of accusations like this? What is the problem?

And I will tell you SNP, when you document this ... nothing happens. You are just beginning to experience what Anna, Ethan5, Mad, Fatiha, myself, and may others have been experiencing for months.

Well, I learned about it when he stated that Mark 16: 9-20 was no part of the original manuscript. I asked ... I don't remember ... six or eight questions. Among there were:

(1) Can you explain, then, why it's in the Diatesseron? I'd like to know.
(2) Can you explain, then, why Iranaeus quoted it in around AD 175? I'd like to know.
(3) Can you explain, then exactly why you rely on two manuscripts from the 4th century, knowing full well that it is in translations and quotations from well prior to that?

You know what he "went and did"? After being asked six or eight times, he formulated his own singular "defense" of Mark 16: 9-20, then proceeded to shoot it down in a splendid manner! In other words, to this good day, he's never answered a single question! He doesn't know. He read or heard it somewhere, most likely from Dr. Ehrman (who relies almost exclusively on the Sinaitic manuscript).

Then he collected the famous "consensus" of hand-picked skeptical or agnostic or atheist scholars. And in truth, on all such conversations, that's all he does.

As an example, he has admitted (or virtually admitted) that his sole reason for dating the book of Luke well post-AD 70 is to "get out from under" any miraculous predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem. He tried to get around it by quoting (again) a consensus of skeptical scholars who move the date forward for the same reason. So it's deja vu all over again, as Yogi Berra said. Indeed, that's pretty much the only reason. It's an endless circular argument.
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
10/2/2014 10:17:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/2/2014 3:08:39 PM, neutral wrote:
So, several MONTHS ago Beast decided it would be a good idea to lecture a newb about the need to read books and allow them to form his opinion. The problem was Beasty listed at least a dozen or so volumes of Apologetics, and then made the stunning claim that these were the books that influenced his opinion that there was no evidence for God/Christ?

Challenged to explain this ... he was silent.

Challenged about Lee Strobel specifically, he lost his mind. We get a silly youtube video with a list of books, but what we do not get is an explanation as to how there could be 'something' that drove Lee Strobel to convert from atheism to Christianity. There should at least be an explanation, from reading the book he repeatedly throws in our faces, about why he found in unconvincing.

Yet months after making this challenge, more than enough time to read the volume he flashes in our faces, he still cannot tell what the main arguments are in the work and why its wrong. Even at times going so far as to explain that he 'forgets' it.

Thus we can conclude that he has not read it.

This has apparently wounded Beasty SO MUCH, that he has decided to repeatedly call me out as a liar ... with no evidence whatsoever that he has actually read the book ... a book everyone agrees clearly exists, but whose substance remains utterly avoided by Beasty.

So .. I hereby publicly call Beasty liar and false accuser.

And this is what the forum needs.

Dredged up animus based on sore feelings and an abusive desire to make someone accept something that is clearly not true.

All Beasty has to do .. is make an argument - and all he can do is accuse someone else of lying to cover his own dishonesty.

If you think this is a useful thread for the forum, please let me know.

That's a nice little story, Neutral. Did someone write it for you or did you make it up yourself? It's pure fiction. The truly interesting thing is that you expected me to condense several books down to posts and present them, to prove that I've read what I claim that I've read. And all it would really take is for you to ask me a few specific questions which don't require paragraphs and paragraphs. If I tell you the primary points of the books, you'll just claim I'm wrong, and continue insisting that I've not read the books.

I even went to the point of creating a video of my amazon book purchases - directly from the Amazon site, and posting the link for you so that you could see that I'm being honest. You never even bothered to respond.

If anyone actually cares about this droll Internet drama crap, they can go to the thread titled "I am tired of Theists denying facts" and see the exchange for themselves.
http://www.debate.org...

My first post there is #50 and things were going along well until you came along.

But on Post #71, one of the first things you claimed was that I was lying about the amount of research I've done on theism. Here you know almost nothing about me, but you claimed I'd learned a little biased information, from rationalwiki and "other atheist forums on religion". Now, let's keep in mind that you don't really know anything about me. You just know that you don't like the information I'd introduced into the discussion. But you're already accusing me of dishonesty.

On Post #74 I mention some of the books I've read to RoderickSpode and you respond in Post #76.

In Post #76 you claim that I have my authors and books messed up and you tell me "This is why educated people think you have no idea what you are talking about. GA Wells wrote, 'The Jesus Myth'". Then you repeat your assertion that I obtain my information from rationalwiki - a website that up to that time, I'd never even visited.

I responded to you in Post #79, acknowledging that anyone can claim anything on the Internet, and inviting you to test me if you disbelieve I've read the material I claimed. I followed that with a list of 55-books I've read on the topic of religion. I invited you to test me on any part of any of them - an invitation you never accepted.

So in Post #80, you accuse me of using Google. (Again, claiming that I was lying.) You told me my appeal was so poor that I didn't even properly quote the experts. I'd never claimed to be quoting anyone. Then you go on to claim that you've read "most of the books in my list". So first I'm using rationalwiki, then you insist I'm using Google. And yet, let's be honest (if you're capable), you don't KNOW anything about me or what I have or haven't read. And you can't even seem to make yourself accept that reality. You made an assertion you had no hope of supporting, and now you won't let it go because it would expose that YOU, were the one lying.

In Post #81, irreverent_god steps in and corrects you, stating that G. A. Wells did indeed write a book called "Did Jesus Exist" as I had stated, and he posts the amazon link showing you that he and I are correct, and that YOU ARE WRONG.

You respond to irreverent_god in Post #83 by calling him a "fagtard", "wanker troll", "waste of human life" and "trollboy". You also accuse him of not posting any actual points, but just insults and then you call his response "baboonery".

In Post #86 I reposted the Amazon link showing the book you claimed didn't exist.

In Post #88 I posted links to both Bart Ehrman's book, and G A Wells book, the latter of which you insisted didn't exist. And at that point I asked for an apology.

In Post #89 irreverent_god points out that you had been caught in two lies, by two different people in under an hour.

Is this ringing any bells for you?

So here we are nearly 4-months later, and you STILL haven't brought yourself to issuing the apology you owe me. And I'm tired of letting it go and receiving nothing but insults and bullcrap from you in response. So it will now be my mission here to hound you until you learn just the slightest bit of humility, and learn not to make accusations you can't support, and to not just assume everyone else is lying, simply because lying for you, is the first line of defense.

It's pretty clear that several of us here know that lying is simply second-nature for you. It's what you do. If people post information you don't like, you insult them and claim they're lying. And when they demonstrate that they're being honest, you either just call them liars again, or you vanish. And in the above accounted exchange, you vanished from the discussion. But here we are all these months later, and you're still unwilling to issue the apology you owe me, and you're still calling me a "liar". The liar here, Neutral, is you. And more and more people are starting to figure this out.

You know very little about the truth, and you care about it even less. Yet you are a Christian and that's not a terribly infrequent combination; Christians often care very little - if any - about the truth.

Apologize, Neutral.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2014 10:37:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/2/2014 3:08:39 PM, neutral wrote:

Challenged about Lee Strobel specifically, he lost his mind.
And here I am "losing my mind in Post #84 of "I am tired of Theists denying facts"
http://www.debate.org...

POST #84 " I read "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel but I didn't find that it offered any hard evidence. More than anything else, it was a plea to emotionalism. So I looked around some more and found "Mere Christianity" by C.S. Lewis. Again... essentially just pleas to emotion."

Neutral knows nothing about apologetics, little about Christianity, and even less about atheists. But more than anything else, he's ignorant about taking responsibility for himself. What he does know is lying. It's what he does whenever he's shown to be wrong. He simply denies the demonstration showing his error, denies that others know more than he does about the subject, and denies whatever he needs to deny, to assert that he's correct. And here he is demonstrating this for anyone who cares to look.

So once again, Neutral...

Who wrote "Did Jesus Exist"
http://www.amazon.com...

And who wrote "Did Jesus Exist?; The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth"?
http://www.amazon.com...

You absolutely INSISTED that I was wrong in listing both books and were completely adamant that G.A. Wells didn't write such a book. So did he? And if you admit that he did, who was wrong? Was I wrong in correctly listing the books? Or were you wrong in insisting that G. A. Wells didn't write such a book, wrong in claiming that I'd stated the book by Wells was my primary reason for doubting Jesus historicity (I made no such claim), lying in stating that I'd only read 22-books on theism, then lying by insisting that I'd claimed to have read 55-books on Jesus mythicism alone, and finally.... lying in stating that I'd claimed to have read these 55-books in a 2-week period?

Let's count them up. That's 1... 2... 3... 4... 5! Five lies all on the same isolated topic and yet... somehow, you still see yourself as the victim here, and still try to make a case for your continual string of lies.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2014 2:03:49 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/2/2014 10:37:21 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 10/2/2014 3:08:39 PM, neutral wrote:

Challenged about Lee Strobel specifically, he lost his mind.
And here I am "losing my mind in Post #84 of "I am tired of Theists denying facts"
http://www.debate.org...

POST #84 " I read "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel but I didn't find that it offered any hard evidence. More than anything else, it was a plea to emotionalism. So I looked around some more and found "Mere Christianity" by C.S. Lewis. Again... essentially just pleas to emotion."

Neutral knows nothing about apologetics, little about Christianity, and even less about atheists. But more than anything else, he's ignorant about taking responsibility for himself. What he does know is lying. It's what he does whenever he's shown to be wrong. He simply denies the demonstration showing his error, denies that others know more than he does about the subject, and denies whatever he needs to deny, to assert that he's correct. And here he is demonstrating this for anyone who cares to look.

So once again, Neutral...

Who wrote "Did Jesus Exist"
http://www.amazon.com...

And who wrote "Did Jesus Exist?; The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth"?
http://www.amazon.com...

You absolutely INSISTED that I was wrong in listing both books and were completely adamant that G.A. Wells didn't write such a book. So did he? And if you admit that he did, who was wrong? Was I wrong in correctly listing the books? Or were you wrong in insisting that G. A. Wells didn't write such a book, wrong in claiming that I'd stated the book by Wells was my primary reason for doubting Jesus historicity (I made no such claim), lying in stating that I'd only read 22-books on theism, then lying by insisting that I'd claimed to have read 55-books on Jesus mythicism alone, and finally.... lying in stating that I'd claimed to have read these 55-books in a 2-week period?

Let's count them up. That's 1... 2... 3... 4... 5! Five lies all on the same isolated topic and yet... somehow, you still see yourself as the victim here, and still try to make a case for your continual string of lies.

And its not releveant to the question posed by Lee Strobel.

You are the one who shows a youtuibe video of your 'read books' and yet are unable to actually discuss the contents of a single one.

You lied, and are calling someone else a liar over an ackowledged mistake several months ago, where you deliberately leave out:

a. That the claims originated from GA Wells.
b. That the claims come from 'The Jesus Myth' by GA Wells.
c. That GA Wells has had to retarct most of his work.

That he also wrote a subsequent novel called the 'Did Jesus Exist'? The simple fact of the matter is that the most referred to book of that title is from Bart Erhman - whom you continue to say is a scholar who supports the Jesus Myth - even thoug the book by that title lays out a comlete record that makes the case for historical Jesus completely.

Yet there you are saying the opposite ... while calling other people 'liars' buy deliberately misrepresenting the sitution.

Father of Lies.

Lee Stroebel - whenever you are ready.
neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2014 2:07:25 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/2/2014 10:17:43 PM, Beastt wrote:

You know very little about the truth, and you care about it even less. Yet you are a Christian and that's not a terribly infrequent combination; Christians often care very little - if any - about the truth.

Apologize, Neutral.

I refuse to be lectured by a lying *ss troll.

Lee Stroebel.

When you are ready to actually discuss the works of GA Wells, which you are claiming to have read but not, we can go forward.

If you insist on cheery picking quotes from FOUR MONTHS ago, then you simply prove that you ar nothing but an uppity dandy and a raging jerk.

When you apologize for the all the lies and shorts you have done with the Christ Myth, the misrepresentation of Price and and the historical record you've been caught on repeatedly ...

Don't you dare lecture me about the truth Beasty - that is a concept you know nothing about and that you do nothing but hypocritically dump on other people as if its them dodging the truth.