The Great YouTube Debate 13

Ego can’t help himself (and since he continues to call me ‘Tel’, I’ve decided I can’t be bothered typing out his full name either); he simply has to reply, using the whole works—copying and pasting, posting links, using bad grammar and spelling. Here’s his reply on the comments of the Great YouTube Debate 12.

“http://www.trueorigin.org/theobald1a.asp

This is a reply to the thigns scientific america wants to argue.. LOL.. read it if you choose.. ArrianneG.. but speciation and natural selection do not explain it.. it’s faith based and full of assumptions..

Like Tel likes to say.. think for yourself.. in your own words..

Without the help of Scientific America.. because without knowing anything a evolutionary scientist says, and this go’s for Tel also, you can’t even explain in your own words how natural selection makes a bacteria evolved to something of a non-bacteria over time.

In your own words.. i doubt you can explain how speciation can cause a bacteria to become a non-bacteria..

So in your own words, leave the articles and propoganda you have read to explain it.. without that, I’m skeptical you can explian how those to theorizations can explain it.

Just like I think for myself.. i see that the lowest layer in the fossil record is bedrock.. you will find bacteria there.. then the next layer up, you have triolobites which are multi-celluar and far advance over a bacteria, I see that there are no fossils leading up to it.. and there is nothing in the record that shows how a triolobite can even evolved to that position.. being neutral, anyone who looks at that knows it’s a leap of faith.. you have no evidence.. it’s an assumption that it can change in that direction..

So how does natural selection, or speciation change a bacteria into a multi-cellular orgainism like a triolobite. because that is what the record shows.. bacteria.. and those are not the only things in that layer of bedrock, there are some other things, but they are simple cell.. like bacteria.. not multi-cellular like triolobite.

so I await in your own words, i have read ad hoc explinations about this.. but what’s you take… and you don’t have to argue with me.. now do you?

Others Christians are shaking their heads..

LOL.. Like I’m going by your definition of a Christian.

There are anaerobic cells, and they do not need oxygen to survive

(these became plants.. really.. LOL.. how far of a strecth of the imagination is this? Show in the fossil record this happened? Lowest layer you have bacteria.. then the next layer you have very complex triolobites.. where are the plants at? show me with this very fine logic that these anaerobic cells formed into plants.. .. oh.. let me guess.. this is evolutionary propoganda read somewhere on an evolutionist website.. this isn’t something that a free thinker just thought up on their own.. LOL.. I bet free thinkers didn’t know that the geologic column in text books doesn’t match what you see at the grand cayon.. oh’ that’s ok.. make it fit.. )

And by the way.. I’m not looking for love in a blog space.. and if you commented on my front page.. when? I don’t remember you commenting on my front page LOL…

And by the way.. the fossil record is interpetation. One worldview says one thing.. the other says this.

Polystra fossils are ad hoc explained away, when they go thru several of the layers that suppose to have formed over millions of years.. but I have heard crazy ad hoc things to explain poly’s away. So what evolutionary propoganda will be repeated on this page?

When someone refutes this polystra fossils, give the link to the page you read it from word for word.. so I can see people don’t really think for themselves.

Logically when I see a fossil that go’s thru several layers (poly meaning many) thru layers that suppose to have taken millions of years.. I say, hey that falsifies forming over millions of years. But if you read evolutionary propoganda, well, it can happen.. yeah.. OK!

This guy is telling us not to repeat arguments. All right, let’s look at this:

Rule #1.. when someone is losing a debate they focus on spelling mistakes. (Actually, when you start copying and pasting, it’s a sign you’re losing a debate majorly.)

So here I go with this very well spoken blog.. LOL. NOT!

Oh.. Mohammad told people to repent.. means what that Jesus’ speaking of repentance doesn’t mean anything.. nice evasive move. (Did I say that Jesus’ teachings don’t mean anything? I most certainly did not. Of course, considering Ego’s level of English language, it’s easy for him to misinterpret things.) And give the verses in the Quran saying it.. not your comment because I don’t believe someone who improvises as they speak.

Quote the bible on repetance and what it means. Or will there be improvising on that as well.. Repentance means ‘turn away from sin and back to the laws of God’. Very simple. The laws of God are the Ten Commandments and the commandment to love one another. I don’t quote the Bible when I know the idea off the top of my head. Of course, given your very twisted understanding of Christ’s teachings, I’m sure you have a different understanding of the word ‘repentance’, don’t you, Ego?

Recite what? the commandments. that easy.. but again.. total improvising again, nothing interpeted correctly. The Ten Commandments need interpreting? Doesn’t ‘Thou shalt not kill’ mean exactly what it says. So you’re saying that the Bible actually can’t be taken literally, and that the Ten Commandments are symbolism? Yeah.. all one has to be is peaceful and they can go to heaven.. yeah.. If Heaven is a place for fanatics like you, I guess a lot of people will be seeking to avoid it, including me. Spending eternity with you and your kind would be Hell. I guess ignoring Scripture is the only important think that neo’s do. Bring the neo way of life and do the same with Scripture.. yeah.. ok.

Yeah… no answer, on my relationship because we practice the faith You practise a form of faith; doesn’t sound much like the one Christ preached., and there are no problems. my wife isn’t a slave that is what I wanted to bring out, and you can’t combate I’ve never ‘combated’ anything. something that millions of real Christians practice as obedience to the example set forth by those Jesus left in charge. You’re now speaking for the millions of Christians on earth? You really are egotistical, aren’t you?

On Mohammad.. LOL.. more improvising. Mohammad changed his position on respecting the “people of the book” Here is what the Quran says about how Mohammad felt.

“O ye who believe! Take not the Jews And the Christians For your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors To each other” (5:54) The Qur’an says a lot of things. People interpret it as a Book of Symbols. For your information, even devout Muslims obeyed Mohammed’s first command to respect the people of the book. Usama ibn Munqidh thought that the Christians were a barbaric lot, but he still had Christian friends.
Geisler, N. L., & Saleeb, A. 2002. Answering Islam : The crescent in light of the cross (2nd ed.) . Baker Books: Grand Rapids, Mich.

And Saleeb a former Muslim would know more than yourself. The Quran speaks for itself in Sura 5:54. ‘Former’ Muslim, meaning he turned against Islam and therefore would be biased against Islam.
But logically I dont’ expect free thinking people who claim that to realize that they are in error. Not quoting from the Quran and improvising is what is done best here.

More improvising without knowledge.. If people don’t want to read what I’m saying then don’t. But again, I have to repeat myself to very young minds. I know people personally that are persecuted. Here is a link for anyone to see that thru out the history of Christianity Christians are persecuted and still are today in Muslim countries, http://www.ccel.org/f/foxe/martyrs/home.html.

Muslims and Jews are persecuted too. Don’t think that Christians are special. As for martyrs like Eulogius, they wanted to die. One does not stand in a Muslim city, call Mohammed a devil-worshipper in public, do it multiple times after multiple warnings, and expect to live.

And it happens today, still in Iraq, Iran, pakistan, Lebanon which I have friends that are from there could tell you that Christians are hated.. And in the rest of the world, Muslims are discriminated against.

LOL.. the Parable.. there is more imporvision.. yet again. That’s why when someone doesn’t know what they are talking about when it comes to the Bible it shows. Actions don’t get you into heaven.. but beleif.. or faith in Christ. So the Good Samaritan won’t get to Heaven because he doesn’t believe in the right thing? So why did Jesus tell the parable? I’ll give two examples. because I have to go to youth group.

first example the thieves on the cross.. belief.. gets you into heaven.. placing your faith in Jesus..

39One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: “Aren’t you the Christ? Save yourself and us!”

40But the other criminal rebuked him. “Don’t you fear God,” he said, “since you are under the same sentence? 41We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.”

42Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.[f]”

43Jesus answered him, “I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise.”

And the classic example.. Epe. 2:8-9 8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9not by works, so that no one can boast.

LOL.. i’ll answer the rest of this improvising when I get back..”

Proving that he cannot even paraphrase, for he copies and pastes things, complete with bad formatting. Oh yes, when you run out of arguments, do quote the Bible. It’s going to win any argument. (Well, considering Ego’s level of debating skills, that might just work. The Gospels are a lot more eloquent than anything he can write.)

My Reply

Ego, here’s the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of a Christian:

Christian– based on or believing the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Nowhere does it say ‘dogmatic unconditional belief in everything written in the Bible’. Now, this definition given by the Oxford English Dictionary seems to be much broader than yours. I have spoken to a great number of Christians in my time, and I’ve met two, including you, who seem to think that the Bible must be believed unconditionally, contrary to all rational thinking and scientific evidence. Even our local bishop says that evolution makes more sense that creationism. This shows that your brand of ‘Christianity’ reflects only the attitude of a small minority of Christians in the world, and many others do not agree with you, and even despise your views. Indeed, they are shaking their heads at your dogmatic ways.

Of course, as a Christian, I place my faith in Jesus, but you believe in a whole lot of things that Jesus did not say, for example, the Bible must be taken literally word for word. He never said it, so I won’t take the Bible literally word for word.

Scientists found evidence of anaerobic single-celled organisms which photosynthesize to produce oxygen. Even you have heard of algae, I assume. In the beginning, there was little oxygen, but lots of anaerobic algae. They produced enough oxygen for aerobic organisms to evolve from anaerobic organisms. It is very simple, but perhaps I’m being much too optimistic in hoping that your fanatical irrational mind will understand this, because you are holding onto the twelfth century belief that ‘God has revealed the Truth through religion. Reason can be used to prove the Truth, but if reason contradicts religion, then reason is obsolete’. We all know what sort of wonderful people the twelfth century produced; Reynald de Chatillon, the robber baron, ’Saint’ Bernard of Clairvaux, who preached the killing of Muslims, Gerard de Ridefort, the religious fanatic who put an end to the Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem with his fanaticism, and so on and so forth. You seem rather keen on joining their ranks, and they would certainly welcome you.

As for unicellular organisms becoming multicellular, that happens when these single celled organisms join together in a mass and survive better. They are more like a ’society’, if you like, than a single organism at the moment. However, these cells evolved to rely on one another, and some evolved their own specific adaptations. These ‘masses’ of cells started to form simple multicellular organisms, like jellyfish. Miraculous, but possible; nothing is beyond God, as I said, and I believe that God initiated evolution.

Like the majority, you take the wide road in ostracizing your Muslim brothers and sisters. I would not take that path; instead, I would take the narrow path and welcome all religions. Of course, I could never welcome fanatics such as yourself; that is much too hard, and beyond my human abilities. God would have more pity for you and your misguided ways.

Christianity, as I’ve said before, is associated with the west and western oppression. Considering how badly the Muslims have been oppressed by the west in the past century or so, I’m not surprised that they harbour hostilities towards the west, and Christianity by association. I don’t approve of it, of course, but I can see the reasoning behind it.

Ego, you told me not to generalize. However, you generalize a lot more than I ever can. Did you know that there are people who don’t believe in the Bible but don’t believe in evolution either? What do you call them? They are certainly not ‘neos’. These people I speak of are the Pagans, the people who believe we are an experiment being conducted by aliens and so on and so forth. Follow your own advice and don’t generalize. There are many people who don’t believe in the Bible, and not all of them are like me.

I don’t need a link to back up my arguments. Some people do own a brain and did pass high school, you know. For fossils that can be found in a number of stratas, all you can say is that they survived for a long time because of their genetic advantages. Look at sharks; they are some of the longest surviving species around. Why? Early on, they evolved streamlined bodies which made them faster than blunt-headed armoured fish, and they could catch more prey even if they did die more easily. More food means better reproduction. They evolved the ability to replace teeth continually, meaning that they could always catch their food. They evolved tough scales for protection from other predators, which made them even better suited to survival. This is natural selection.

Of course, I could stop arguing with you, but then I would miss my daily laughs, my biology revision, and I would also cease having something to remind me why sex scenes written by hormone driven fourteen year olds aren’t really so bad after all.

 

The Great YouTube Debate 12

Ego-eimi replied to me on his own comment thread. Is the guy really too stupid to post his argument in a blog post? Possibly; he still hasn’t learned how to spell. Here’s his reply:

Tel.. LOL.. i owe you an apology.. first off, I was engaged like I have to keep explaining with others… you decided to butt in.. and I have called people neo’s because that is what is presented todayd.. is neo-darwinism.. a phliosophical faith.. so I owe no one apologies..

And i’m not going to ask you to apologize for mocking me.. and pretending to not misspell words.. you came off as someone who didn’t make those mistakes then when I find the post where you in fact made it.. then you pretend it’s not a big deal. You were hypocritical in attacking my spelling.. when you in fact did it yourself.

You choose to engage me while I was engaging others on the issues.. I didn’t ask you for it.. Just like this forum, it’s no different tag teaming comes with neo’s and you have shown yourself to be no different.. and claiming to represent a faith that you deny.. so save it.. just deal with proving the question I asked earlier about your bat problem of where they evolved from in the myth of evolution.

And let me give you a word of advice.. since you don’t use the bible as your foundation.

The bible says love is not easily angered.. love does not return evil for evil but always overcomes evil with good.

So when you admit you basically retailated.. well that speaks for itself.. not acting in love.

If i’m not acting in love.. then I will apologize.. i have no problems doing so.. but you better check yourself.. because it’s you that is denying the bible and are acting contrary to scripture and what Jesus taught.. and calling genesis a non-literal truth.. yeah.. you have bigger problems then worriying about me.. i’m not leading people away from the authority of scripture you are… and it would be better like Jesus said that you tie a millstone around your neck.

And if you think that i’m apologizing for what you think that I misstreated you.. i’m not.. because i see nothing about calling someone what they are.. if you are a neo.. u are a neo.

And if you are trying to get out of answering questions.. using this as a way out.. just leave it alone.. you don’t have to engage a conversation any longer.. your choice..

It’s harder to prove the myth of evolution then anything.. you need a tag teaming team to do it.. and if you want to follow my youtube profile page.. i’m engaging.. wy.. whom you think I was avoiding… if you want to follow that one.. your choice.. just giving you an invitation..

LOL.. Christianity was defined by Jesus.. and those He left as the only Apostles there will ever be.. the Super Apostles were the foundation of the Church and Christ was and still is the Cornerstone…

So looking at your link and them defining the Church.. sorry, the Church was already defined.

Bible clearly declares that Christ is the foundation of the Christian church, insisting that “no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 3:11).

Paul declared that in this sense the church is “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone” (Eph. 2:20). Indeed, the early church continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine [not just Peter’s]” (Acts 2:42). Even “keys of the kingdom” given to Peter (Matt. 16:19) were also given to all the apostles (cf. Matt. 18:18).

So I suggest you come with Scripture using that website showing that they defined Christianity.. i would disagree.. it was defined by Christ and the Apostles who established the church.. and denominationlism.. is the followers of Jesus’ fault.. because Jesus prayed for the Apostles that there would be unity.. and that problem started even during the Apostles time.. of division.. lack of Unity shows lack of Love…

So sorry, but your link doesn’t define Christanity or the Church.. that was during the time of Christ.

Tel.. I’ll leave you with the comment of the Apostle you love to hate.. The Apostle Paul spoke it well.. I don’t believe I cross the line when it came to first meeting you.. my mind is clear on the issue….

Paul said….”2Now it is required that those who have been given a trust must prove faithful. 3I care very little if I am judged by you or by any human court; indeed, I do not even judge myself. 4My conscience is clear, but that does not make me innocent. It is the Lord who judges me.”

I feel as he did… when people were trying to judge him being an Apostle.. you can judge that I was being rude all you want to.. calling you a neo… when that is what you hold to.. is the neo darwinian concepts of bacteria to man theology.. i have to call it like I see it.

Just like you had no problem calling me a hypocrit.. without a foundation… i have been up front presenting myself as a bible believing Christian who doesn’t beleive in the myth of eovlution… i have never changed from that… when it flat out calls the God of the Bible a liar and genesis a myth..

And here is the link to my youtube front page.. so you can’t use the same old line that i’m afraid to engage my attackers.

http://www.youtube.com/user/egoeimi3

At this very moment he is trying to think of an answer to the oxygen problem that debunks the very foundation of macro-evolution. I hope you know that evolutionist once thought the earths beginnings had very little if not any oxygen in it.. to show how that very first cell over millions of years came together.. and you get to us the most advance creatures on the earth.. but it just so happens that geology has shown oxygen has always existed which causes a huge problem for your presious bacteria and those other single celled organisms shouldn’t have existed because anything that lives in a environment that has oxygen has to have the ability to not oxyidized.. if you want futher proof, I can quote what science says about the orgins of that first living single celled organism..

So have a good one if you continue to engage.. great.. if not.. I pray that God really does show you that you can not lead people away from Him and call yourself a follower… Jesus is due 100% of your dedication no exceptions.

I posted this in reply:

As I said, I’m not ‘Tel’ to you. It’s T. Rulz. I never said I loved you, did I? I have very little patience for intolerance. As for butting in–it’s a public forum, dude. Butting in is what people do. If you can’t deal with more than one person at a time, then you shouldn’t be posting.

I offered you truce; you refused. Therefore, I will continue to ‘mock’ your spelling and your complete lack of understanding of anything rational and scientific. I pray that you do not contaminate others with your man-made religious fanaticism.

You’re the type of ‘Christian’ who makes all other Christians shake their heads and look down in embarrassment.

By the way, you think I was angry at you calling me a neo? I was referring to the ‘arrogant’ part, as well as the ‘cowardly’ part. If being a ‘neo-darwinist’ means being rational, then go ahead, call me a ‘neo’ all you want. But if you use terms like ‘arrogant’ and ‘cowardly’ with people, don’t expect them to love you.

So, I definitely will be going over to his YouTube page and posting. I’ll keep everyone updated over here as well, if you can’t be bothered going over.

Edit-I posted this on Ego-eimi’s YouTube page. If he continues to call me ‘Tel’, I might start as well start shortening his name, or tweaking it.

So, over on WordPress, you claimed that evolutionists believe that there was no oxygen on earth. That shows you know nothing about evolution and evolutionists. We know there was oxygen on earth from the very beginning, just not in great amounts. There are anaerobic cells, and they do not need oxygen to survive. These became the first plant forms which then created enough oxygen so that aerobic organisms can evolve.

Yes, I am still mocking you over on WordPress. Probably won’t stop either. http://telcontarrulz.wordpress.com/

Went to Ego-eimi’s page again. He deleted the comment above. I posted another nastier one for him.

Well, well. I see you deleted my comment. Didn’t want some little girl to look better than you because she happens to know more science? Tut tut; there is debating protocol, Ego-eimi, and deleting comments is not part of it. A man should face his adversaries head on and not slink away like a beaten dog with tail between the legs.

Still mocking you. http://telcontarrulz.wordpress.com

The Great YouTube Debate 2

In response to my flame, Egoeimi posted this:

LOL.. I like how all of u.. love to ad hom attack someones spelling.. u let me know when u become perfect in spelling.. becuase if u make one spelling error.. then that makes u a hypocrit. .and i’m willing to bet in your lifetime u have made that error. while accusing someone else of being a hypocrit as if u have never done so.. and that is the last straw.. don’t be a hypocrit.

If u want to debate your arguments about genesis.. bring it on.. but when u say leave it in the format where there was back and forth, u can’t post large amts of information to make the point clear. so that’s why i think it’s cowardly to not take up the debate.

Why I took it to PM.. u must not been around awhile.. take a look at how long I have been around.. I have been debating and being named called by the very people as u have done.. attacking my spelling for example.. shows u are equal to them.. that is the first thing they love to do rather then stick to the issues.. not knowing if I have a medical condition called dyslexia.. u rather attack like the rest.. ever think that I could have it? Nope.. just be like the rest… i’m far from a coward.. on debating my faith, science.. biblical interpetation.. that’s why I love Christian apologitics. that’s what I am..

LOL spooned fed.. what u thhink u havn’t been. being only 19! give me a break.. u are still growing up and havn’t even gotten to the point of thinking like an adult.. and don’t start the ad hom attacks.. that’ gets old.. and I don’t care if people like yourself or others thinks my debating style isn’t correct.. who asked for someones opinoin on how I make an approach…and I’m not here to persuade.. i’m here to defend my position.. and someone gets turned off.. they were already turned off to began with… I’m a Christian.. and Biblical speaking.. believe me they are already turned off LOL

ON the subject of arrogance.. LOL.. again.. dont’ be a hypocrit.. ok.. really.. everyone has some arrogance to their personality… so if u are all about thinking u are this perfect little princess that isn’t ever arrogant u are kidding yourself.. b/c u have arrogant tendences that I see in everyone.. and I don’t deny being arrogant.. there is bad arrogance and good arrogance.. Jesus displayed good aorrgance.. when He makes it clear.. if He isn’t accepted a person go’s to hell.. but I but u (who claims to be a Christian) if u are.. u don’t have a problem with that.. or do U? LOL.. so arrogance isn’t a bad thing necessarily… my young friend.

LOL Catholic.. ok.. right… Catholic’s hold the Bible as literary true.. so u are far from representing Caholiic teaching on the Authority of the Bible.. ask the Pope someday if u get a chance. and see if he would call the Genesis book symbols.. LOL.. and this country is going into a recession as the trend go’s from time to time.. LOL.. and by the way, this isn’t a Christian nation.. far from it… so don’t try to tell me.. or imply this country is like me in my thinking.. no.. this is a Atheistic in many ways, and a post-modern society when they legalize gay marriage, or abortion is ok… it’s a godless society when prayer is no longer allowed in schools.. so don’t give me that business.. LOL

And I don’t care if u don’t reply.. because u made it clear in the forum and actually is hypocritical.. u come to make some personal attacks in secret rather than debate your sad position being illterate in biblical hermentics.. which u clearly are…

So grow up a little with the name calling.. becaues if u claim to be a christian don’t ad hoc.. u can label people Jesus did… and I label people.. but u have and won’t catch me putting people down calling them ignoranrt, or supid.. or a person is a moron for their postion.. LOL there is a different in labeling someone vs putting them down for their postion and attacking their spelling of words.. which isn’t the issue.. LOL..

And by the way the condition of your country… LOL.. is more anti-Chrsit than this country..

A staunch “Christian” who doesn’t even bother to spell ‘Christ’ correctly? What is the world coming to?

The Great YouTube Debate 1

So someone took to calling me a coward on the discussion thread for this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kkiyc0joHO8  (yes egoeimi3, I mean you) and I’m not standing for it. They posted this: (I will be sporking it; I’m in bold)

That forum offers more room to respond then this forum.. Dear computer illiterate. This is a private message, not a forum. but that is a cope-out What’s a cope-out? Is that like…a cop out? and a cowards way out. No, I just want you to summarize your argument so it doesn’t take up ten pages. U obviously live to have strenght Um…what? in numbers.. And you obviously live to ignore spellcheck. which I expected.. so i’m glad u can’t carry yourself without your buddies… My buddies? That’s odd. I’m a loner. like they say “birds of a feather flock together”… And ellipses seem to have flocked together here.

And future agreement.. believe me there won’t be any.. Wow, look at the optimism. and tell your own people The Chinese? The Kiwis? The Orlando Bloom fangirls? The dreamers? The historians? What do you mean by ‘my people’? that when they say I’m arrogant it’s funny how doublestand u can be like the others.. total silence on what Math said the other day. That can mean agreement. You called me arrogant first; just returning the favour, pal.

Why did they call me a coward? I refused to wade through more illiterate crap like what this person writes. At least on YouTube’s public forums, there is a character limit. Then, they switched to private messaging (no, egoeimi3, it’s not a ‘forum’. A forum is where multiple people discuss things in public.) and that has no limit, so he can write as much crap as he wants, going around in circles and bringing up all sorts of quotes from not-so-reliable sources.

This is the flame I sent him, in response to him calling me a coward. By then, all constraint was gone, and I’ll admit I was being a total uber-bitch:

Calling me a coward is the last straw. I am not afraid of your arguments, only of your atrocious grammar and spelling, which makes you look like a dyslexic thirteen year old. As if I don’t see enough teenaged girls who can’t spell trying to write. At least on the comment threads, you are limited to five hundred characters, which limits the amount of unintelligible illiterate trash I have to decipher before I can get to your argument.

 

I must wonder why you decided to take the debate to private messaging. Were you afraid of looking like an idiot on public forums? Reasonable, considering how well you performed.

 

You have yet to learn how to effectively persuade someone that they might be wrong, nor have you learned not to push the other debater…towards the opposite point of view. And you’re thirty-five? Please, teenaged girls under the influence of hormones can argue more eloquently.  You think quoting makes you look learned? It doesn’t; it makes you look as if the only opinions you’ve got are the ones which have been spoon-fed to you.

 

I didn’t say anything about Mathenaut’s comment because I agree with it. You are arrogant; there it is. Every time I reply to someone else, you think the comment is for you, even though you probably did not receive the message in your inbox. I said ‘thanks’ to Mathenaut. You thought I was thanking you; how self-centered and arrogant is that? Why would I have *any* reason to thank you? I’m done with politeness, since you hardly showed any to me, calling me an arrogant neo right from the start, and now calling me a coward. Let’s just hope that your fellow believers aren’t like you, because that would give your cause a really bad look.

 

I’m glad I’m Catholic, because you are as backward as that of sixth century Europe. At least I won’t be tainted with the stigma of irrationality which sticks to you and your fellow sheep. If you represent the future of your country, then I’m not surprised you’re going into recession. I just pity the rest of the rational Americans who have to deal with you. God save the world from religious fanatics, and I’m not just talking about Al-Qaeda.

 

You may reply, but I won’t answer. I’ve got a novel to write, and honestly, there are better debate partners to be found. Literate ones.

I’ll give another example of how egoeimi3 writes:

Reading some of the things you said, this will be a better form.. What’s with the two random fullstops? to debate you which I surely don’t have a problem with it. because your logic is flawed.. let me quote what u said in one of your articles. Points, egoeimi3. I would hardly call something that has about a hundred words an ‘article’.

“Okay, let’s say that the world was created in seven days. Jesus said to forgive your enemies ‘not seven times, but seventy-seven times’. Does that mean I keep a tally, and stop forgiving people after I’ve done it seventy-seven times? Of course it doesn’t. What Jesus meant was that we had to keep on forgiving people over and over again. We have to forgive an infinite number of times. So if seventy-seven stands for ‘infinity’, then by logic, the seven days of creation, while they are shorter than infinity, actually means ‘a great number of days; too great to count.’”

I’m sure you know what pretexting is correct.. I thought pretexting was a bad thing? why did u pretext here using which I’m sure u know inproper interpetation and I’m sure u have heard of the art and science of interpetation.. Sorry, I have yet to learn to interpret what you are saying. being a literary writer doesn’t mean u are all of a sudden a theologian Never claimed I was. because u yourself have admitted u don’t know Aramaic, Hebrew or Greek, yet I see how easiy u are aplliing your understanding of lanugage use in your culture to the bible along with other presuppostions.. I wouldn’t dare to apply language use in my culture to anything, considering I can write about four words of Chinese. but I’m asking u to break this down properly that the “SEVEN DAYS” talked about in Genesis is the same style of writing mented in Jesus talking about ‘FORGIVENESS”. Egoeimi3, have you ever noticed that there are many styles of allegorical writing, and each writer has their own style?

Because here is the problem..

I know u are not saying that when someone mentions Jerusalam Jerusalem, unless you’re using some medieval form which I have not yet seen in the manuscripts. in the text. u won’t call that symbolic and not the real Jerusalam, Yes I would; don’t predict what I will say. so your blanket statement that the bible is a book of symbols isn’t logical.. Considering what I just said, your point is moot. u are cherry picking what is symbolic and what is not.. This point is moot too. without showing how the text u cherry pick and compare it to another is the same style of writing. Different writers have different styles of writing; get that through your head.

And u are doing this without know Aramiac, Hebrew, and or Greek.. And you do? just adding your own meanings to the words used without showing how it was understood to the culture and audience being spoken to. I have shown how the audience might have understood it. You just didn’t read those bits, I gather, or you didn’t understand them. (refer back to previous points I made on the discussion thread)

Easy example.. If I said “it’s raining cats and dogs out side” that doesn’t mean anything to a person who doesn’t know anything about the meaning I’m appliying to it. unless they know something about my culture and how we use that phrase.. and the same thing go’s for the biblical text.. u can quote Jesus, and Moses, but u have to show what the meanings are in that language not your languauge.. You know, those people who translated the Bible would have had to see to it that they did not write some sort of Pig-Latin, in other words, translate word for word, because not only would it not make literal sense, it would also not make any grammatical sense. They would make sure that the meaning was preserved, and that includes the symbolism.

That is what theologians are for.. because if that is the cause then u tell me the meaning of this. And as a free-thinking person, I have the right to doubt what theologians say.

but Esau I have hated, and I have turned his mountains into a wasteland and left his inheritance to the desert jackals.” Mal 1:3. Did it ever occur to you that perhaps the person who wrote this didn’t like Esau’s descendants and justified this discrimination by saying ‘God willed it’?

Tell me it’s context, it’s meaning, what is being said.. break it down.. show me with your masterful literary expertise what this means….

And i’m interested in seeing ;your logics work when it comes to the biblical text.. if u are that good as u put forth.. then we need to set up a natiaonl debate with Hank Hanegraff, Who? which he will debate you.. so that will be the second step, and don’t back down like everyone that i have asked in the forum to debate their equals.. u don’t even have to waste your phone mins.. if u are willing to debate on national radio.. I’m all the way in the South Pacific, dude. I can hardly debate on U.S. national radio. Not everyone lives in the U.S., you know. all u have to do is call the toll free number and get it on.. Not toll free for me. but that is secondary to what I want to hear about your explination of how u compared to two verses to make Genesis sound like it is allogorical language by using another verse as u see it.. which is not proper in a theoloigal sense because they dont’ cross reference each other… If anyone can translate this sentence and explain it to me, I’ll be very grateful. It’s a bit hard to argue with someone when you can’t even understand what they’re saying because of language problems.

I’ll be posting more as time goes on, but I need to sort out which argument was in response to what, and so on and so forth. Egoeimi, feel free to comment as much as you like, but it’s only common courtesy to write in English, and not whatever strange mix of text language and something else that you like to throw at me.