Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 09:35 am
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Quote:
Frank Apisa said: ...within 50 years of becoming Christian...it [Rome] fell.
In fact, the advent of Christianity heralded 800 years of such western-world backwardness it is still referred to as, "The Dark Ages."

1- Rome used to be a barbaric warlike state invading every country in sight, but after becoming Christian they stopped doing that..Smile


They used to dominate the planet when they were pagan...and engaging in debauchery.

After they became Christian...they did not invade and beat up other countries because they were getting the snot kicked out of them.


Quote:

2- The term 'Dark Ages' is just an urban myth. A better term would be "The Quiet Ages" because people were at last free to make advances in science and astronomy etc without the nagging fear of getting invaded..Smile


Yeah, sure. People like you have to accept something like that.

Greece and Rome showed the world the first advances in philosophy, science, medicine, law, architecture, art, theater...and so much more.

During the 800 years after Christianity took hold...damn near everything was put on hold. There were relatively few advancements in any of those things.

Wake up!
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 09:37 am
@neologist,
Neologist mate, I've told you before to say things straight out like a man so that we know what you're trying to say, instead of making wimpy powder-puff veiled remarks. I hope you're not a limp-wristed gay..Wink
neologist
 
  2  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 09:49 am
@Romeo Fabulini,
I was hoping to state my utter amazement about the idiocy of your claim without engaging in personal affront. I've already made sufficient observations about your character and reasoning ability. I've no need to repeat them, especially since you are so willing to post them yourself.
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  0  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 10:09 am
Quote:
Frank Apisa said: During the 800 years after Christianity took hold...damn near everything was put on hold. There were relatively few advancements in any of those things.

That's just another atheist urban myth mate, I'm surprised you fell for it..Smile
Heck, even a Pope was a scholar and scientist!-

"In 999, a French monk, Gerbert de Aurillac (943-1003) was crowned Pope Sylvestre II in Rome..he was a well-known scholar who introduced the system of Arabic numerals to the West.
...He was an accomplished astronomer and most significantly wrote the first user’s manual for a scientific instrument, an astrolabe."
http://www.academia.edu/3313369/There_was_nothing_dark_about_the_Dark_Ages_The_Medieval_Origins_of_Science
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 10:22 am
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Quote:
Frank Apisa said: During the 800 years after Christianity took hold...damn near everything was put on hold. There were relatively few advancements in any of those things.

That's just another atheist urban myth mate, I'm surprised you fell for it..Smile
Heck, even a Pope was a scholar and scientist!-

"In 999, a French monk, Gerbert de Aurillac (943-1003) was crowned Pope Sylvestre II in Rome..he was a well-known scholar who introduced the system of Arabic numerals to the West.
...He was an accomplished astronomer and most significantly wrote the first user’s manual for a scientific instrument, an astrolabe."
http://www.academia.edu/3313369/There_was_nothing_dark_about_the_Dark_Ages_The_Medieval_Origins_of_Science



Dream if you want to. Pretend, if you think ass-kissing is what your god wants. (That does seem to be what your god wants, by the way.)

But the bottom line is that the introduction of Christianity, while deserving of much credit in many areas, was a net loss for the world for a very long time.

All speculation, of course, but without Christianity to hold things back, we might be 500 years ahead of where we are now.
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  0  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 10:48 am
Quote:
Neologist said to me: I've already made sufficient observations about your character and reasoning ability.

Yes mate, we already know you've violated the 9th Commandment by calling me-
"Ignorant, malicious, fable-spinner, talks drivel, a deceiver, racist , liar, self-deluded"

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/ten-cs_zps69eb00e9.jpg~original

But I can understand and sympathise with your predicament!
When I began coming regularly into A2K you fatally assumed I was just another kid who'd wandered in off the street who could be bullied with your cockamamie JW beliefs, hence your tirade of schoolyard insults.
Little did you suspect that I'm a 66-yr-old debating hotshot all over internet-land and am a writer for Christian Waymarkers UK with a huge following of adoring fans..Smile
Too late, you realised your mistake but can't bring yourself to admit you were wrong, so you now stubbornly resort to huffing and pouting like a spoilt schoolyard brat.
For heavens sake man, you're over 70 years old, so grow up and follow Paul's example huh?..Wink-

"When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me"
(1 Cor 13:11)


PS- you once alleged that I was "a threat to pygmy possums" but you later said it was just a joke, so I sportingly deleted it from your list of insults.
Maybe one day you'll admit your other insults were jokes or something too, in which case I'll be happy to delete them as well, I can't be fairer than that..Smile
neologist
 
  2  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 12:01 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
Yes mate, we already know you've violated the 9th Commandment by calling me-
"Ignorant, malicious, fable-spinner, talks drivel, a deceiver, racist , liar, self-deluded"
So, you are saying those things I posted about you are false? Like this proves you are not a racist?
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
Blacks are always talking proudly about their African "roots", but there's nothing to stop them hopping on a ship and going back there.
I'm sure lots of whites would be more than happy to buy them a ticket..Wink
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
Problem is, blacks in Britain and the USA are always shouting about "black rights" and they're a pain in the ass.
I for one am so fed up of them that I won't watch any film or TV show or video that's got a black in a main part, and neither will many other people.
Hey Hollywood and TV producers, are you listening?..Wink
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
The black problem isn't as bad here in Britain because here at least they don't have guns.
We get all sorts coming here in their thousands- aborigines, fuzzy-wuzzies, pygmies, head-hunters, witch doctors, one minute they're eating each other in the jungle and the next they're having tea and muffins at the Little Puddington tearooms
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
You'd think America's blacks would be grateful to whites for rescuing them from the jungle; they gave them free passage on ships to the great Christian country of America, gave them free housing, free food, free med care, free english language lessons and good steady jobs on the plantations where they never again had to worry about being eaten by hostile tribes..Smile
Source: http://able2know.org/topic/235254-74#post-5733660
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
But I can understand and sympathise with your predicament!
When I began coming regularly into A2K you fatally assumed I was just another kid who'd wandered in off the street who could be bullied with your cockamamie JW beliefs, hence your tirade of schoolyard insults.
I did not think you were another kid.
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
Little did you suspect that I'm a 66-yr-old debating hotshot all over internet-land and am a writer for Christian Waymarkers UK with a huge following of adoring fans..
You don't seem to be doing so well lately.
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
Too late, you realised your mistake but can't bring yourself to admit you were wrong, so you now stubbornly resort to huffing and pouting like a spoilt schoolyard brat.
I readily admit my mistakes. It is you who are never wrong
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
PS- you once alleged that I was "a threat to pygmy possums" but you later said it was just a joke, so I sportingly deleted it from your list of insults.
Maybe one day you'll admit your other insults were jokes or something too, in which case I'll be happy to delete them as well, I can't be fairer than that..Smile
OK, Romeo. I take back ever having called you a malicious liar. That would imply deliberate deceit. It's obvious that deliberate does not apply in your case.
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  0  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 12:18 pm
Quote:
Romeo said to Jehovah's Witness Neologist: you've violated the 9th Commandment by calling me-
"Ignorant, malicious, fable-spinner, talks drivel, a deceiver, racist , liar, self-deluded"
Neologist replied: OK, Romeo. I take back ever having called you a malicious liar. That would imply deliberate deceit. It's obvious that deliberate does not apply in your case.

Hmm we seem to be making some progress but your play on words clouds the issue. Let me post in full what you originally said-
"I am still trying to determine whether or not your intent is malicious" (Neologist 22 Sep 013)
"I don't believe you always lie, Romeo; only when it suits you" (Neologist 19 Feb 014)


Taking them one at a time, have you decided yet whether I'm 'malicious'?
And if I am malicious, what on earth would be my motive?

Secondly, do you still think I lie "when it suits me?"
Again, what would be my motive? I belong to no church group or denomination so am not trying to drum up new members!
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 01:04 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
. . . Hmm we seem to be making some progress but your play on words clouds the issue. Let me post in full what you originally said-
"I am still trying to determine whether or not your intent is malicious" (Neologist 22 Sep 013)
Oh. So I didn't actually conclude you were malicious. Why did you accuse me of saying you were?
Romeo wrote:
"I don't believe you always lie, Romeo; only when it suits you" (Neologist 19 Feb 014)[/i]
OK, I take that back.
Romeo wrote:
Taking them one at a time, have you decided yet whether I'm 'malicious'?
No. Not yet
Romeo wrote:
And if I am malicious, what on earth would be my motive?
To draw people after yourself?
Romeo wrote:
Secondly, do you still think I lie "when it suits me?"
Hmm....Well, I did take that back.
Romeo wrote:
Again, what would be my motive? I belong to no church group or denomination so am not trying to drum up new members!
What about your long list of adoring followers?
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  0  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 05:23 pm
Quote:
Neologist said 6 months ago- "I don't believe you always lie, Romeo; only when it suits you" (Neologist 19 Feb 014)[/i]
But now says: "OK, I take that back" (Neologist 16 Aug 014)

Good for you mate, you might get off that naughty step if you keep it up..Smile

Moving on, I asked you today: "have you decided yet whether I'm 'malicious'?"
And you replied: "No. Not yet"

Well, I've been posting regularly in A2k for the past 11 months so don't you think it's about time you decided one way or the other?
Oxford Dictionary- Malicious: Characterized by malice; intending or intended to do harm:

Who exactly do you think I'm trying to harm?
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 06:19 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
. . . .
Moving on, I asked you today: "have you decided yet whether I'm 'malicious'?"
And you replied: "No. Not yet"

Well, I've been posting regularly in A2k for the past 11 months so don't you think it's about time you decided one way or the other?
Oxford Dictionary- Malicious: Characterized by malice; intending or intended to do harm:

Who exactly do you think I'm trying to harm?
Well, you malign God by claiming he would submit his creations to infinite torture as retribution for finite sin. And you mislead folks who may be searching by failing to tell them that the hope for the majority of mankind is life on a paradise earth.
So, I guess that harms your fellow man as well as God.
Whether that is by intent, I still am not sure.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 06:50 pm
@neologist,
neologist wrote:

Romeo Fabulini wrote:
. . . .
Moving on, I asked you today: "have you decided yet whether I'm 'malicious'?"
And you replied: "No. Not yet"

Well, I've been posting regularly in A2k for the past 11 months so don't you think it's about time you decided one way or the other?
Oxford Dictionary- Malicious: Characterized by malice; intending or intended to do harm:

Who exactly do you think I'm trying to harm?
Well, you malign God by claiming he would submit his creations to infinite torture as retribution for finite sin. And you mislead folks who may be searching by failing to tell them that the hope for the majority of mankind is life on a paradise earth.
So, I guess that harms your fellow man as well as God.
Whether that is by intent, I still am not sure.


If there actually is a GOD...you ALL malign that GOD by thinking it could possibly be that pathetic, barbaric, cartoon god of the Bible.
Romeo Fabulini
 
  0  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 06:52 pm
Quote:
Neologist said to me: Well, you malign God by claiming he would submit his creations to infinite torture as retribution for finite sin. And you mislead folks who may be searching by failing to tell them that the hope for the majority of mankind is life on a paradise earth.
So, I guess that harms your fellow man as well as God.
Whether that is by intent, I still am not sure.

But mate, there are over 2 billion Christians on earth, and over 99% of them fully accept the version I've been giving!
By contrast, you JW's comprise less than 1% of the world's Christians, so your teachings are therefore very much in the minority.

For example you say I "malign God", but it's he and Jesus who speak of eternal punishment!
Anyway, people bring hell on themselves. If Hitler or Saddam or Bin Laden will be in heaven, I swear I don't want to go!

As for me "misleading" people by "failing to tell them that the hope for the majority of mankind is life on a paradise earth", here again I'm simply giving the accepted 99% view which speaks of a non-material heavenly paradise.

I could therefore say it's YOU and your JW chums who are maligning God and misleading people, but i've never said that.
You however have judgementally said it about me, so I've got the moral high ground..Smile

I therefore suggest a compromise solution. Here's what you said about me-
"I am still trying to determine whether or not your intent is malicious (Neologist 22 Sep 013)

so i suggest you might like to re-phrase it by saying something like-
"I think your views are wrong, but on reflection I wouldn't go so far as to say they're malicious"
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sat 16 Aug, 2014 11:28 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
. . .But mate, there are over 2 billion Christians on earth, and over 99% of them fully accept the version I've been giving!
By contrast, you JW's comprise less than 1% of the world's Christians, so your teachings are therefore very much in the minority.
Jesus was quite clear when he told his disciples that the majority of those calling themselves christian would not be accepted.
Quote:
“Go in through the narrow gate, because broad is the gate and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are going in through it; 14 whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are finding it.(Matthew 7:13,14)
So, your argument about majorities can't be the deciding factor
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
I could therefore say it's YOU and your JW chums who are maligning God and misleading people, but i've never said that.
Well, yes. You have.
Romeo Fabulini wrote:
I therefore suggest a compromise solution. Here's what you said about me-
"I am still trying to determine whether or not your intent is malicious (Neologist 22 Sep 013)

so i suggest you might like to re-phrase it by saying something like-
"I think your views are wrong, but on reflection I wouldn't go so far as to say they're malicious"
How about. "I know your views are wrong and defame God, but perhaps you are not deliberately malicious."
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  0  
Reply Sun 17 Aug, 2014 11:19 am
Quote:
Romeo said to Neologist: Here's what you said about me-
"I am still trying to determine whether or not your intent is malicious (Neologist 22 Sep 013)
so i suggest you might like to re-phrase it .
Neologist replied: How about. "I know your views are wrong and defame God, but perhaps you are not deliberately malicious."

Nah mate, nice try but that's still too judgemental and vague.

Let's recap what we've negotiated so far-
You used to say- "Romeo is ignorant, malicious, a fable-spinner, talks drivel, a deceiver, a racist , a liar, self-deluded"
But yesterday you said about the "liar" bit- "OK, I take that back"
So in fairness I've now deleted the word "liar" and it now reads like this-
"Romeo is ignorant, malicious, a fable-spinner, talks drivel, a deceiver, a racist, self-deluded"

You see there are still plenty of slanders and false witness allegations still in there. Even Frank Apisa said about them-
"He [Neo] really should not have said that" (Frank Apisa 2 Aug 2014)

Look, all this is beginning to bore me, so if you want to let the rest of your allegations stand, it's up to you and I can keep having fun hitting you over the head with them and posting them all over internet-land in discussions about you Jehovah's Witnesses..Smile
Jesus said -"Every careless word you speak will be judged.." (Matt 12:36)
All I can suggest is that you can retract all the allegations in one fell swoop if you want to by saying something like-"Okay, delete them from your hard drive, perhaps I was a little hasty in making them".
Then I can consign them to cyberspace where they'll be lost forever and we can draw a line under the whole business..Smile
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Aug, 2014 03:55 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
By all means, please continue to post my statements about you. Each time you do, folks on a2k may be reminded to judge for themselves whether I have appraised you correctly. Keep in mind that I never have judged you malicious and do not consider your untruths to be deliberate lies. The rest seems on target, though.

You may not believe it, but I still like you. I wish the best for you and hope to meet you in person some day.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Aug, 2014 03:58 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
f there actually is a GOD...you ALL malign that GOD by thinking it could possibly be that pathetic, barbaric, cartoon god of the Bible.
I would agree with you about the god who has been in control of our world since Genesis, chapter 3. Oh, that's right, you think that god did us a favor.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Aug, 2014 04:08 pm
@neologist,
neologist wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
f there actually is a GOD...you ALL malign that GOD by thinking it could possibly be that pathetic, barbaric, cartoon god of the Bible.
I would agree with you about the god who has been in control of our world since Genesis, chapter 3. Oh, that's right, you think that god did us a favor.


I do???
Romeo Fabulini
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Aug, 2014 04:44 pm
Quote:
Neologist said to me: I never have judged you malicious

Good for you mate, I've now deleted 'liar' and 'malicious' from your list of slanders against me, keep it up and you'll make Pope..Smile
Here's the amended list below, hopefully you'll step back into the ring sometime so that we can hammer the rest out too-
Neologist said:- "Romeo is ignorant, a fable-spinner, talks drivel, a deceiver, a racist, self-deluded"

For example you call me racist, so aren't you being a bit hypocritical bearing in mind your Jehovahs Witness literature says stuff like-

"..the white race exhibits some qualities of superiority over any other.....the greater aptitude and intelligence of the Caucasian""- JW Watchtower magazine July 15th 1902

"The Colored race have been and are a race of servants. There is no servant in the world as good as a good Colored servant, and the joy that he gets from rendering faithful service is one of the purest joys there is in the world"- JW magazine The Golden Age, Jul 24 1929 p 702
http://jwsurvey.org/cedars-blog/the-racist-history-of-watchtower-literature
Romeo Fabulini
 
  1  
Reply Sun 17 Aug, 2014 05:17 pm
Quote:
Romeo said: there are over 2 billion Christians on earth, and over 99% of them fully accept the version I've been giving!
By contrast, you JW's comprise less than 1% of the world's Christians, so your teachings are therefore very much in the minority.
Neologist replied: Jesus was quite clear when he told his disciples that the majority of those calling themselves christian would not be accepted.
Quote: “Go in through the narrow gate, because broad is the gate and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are going in through it; 14 whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are finding it.(Matthew 7:13,14)
So, your argument about majorities can't be the deciding factor

You've hitched your horses to the JW wagon which is in the 1 per cent 'Non Trinitarian/ Cult' slice of this chart below, and others hitch to different wagons, but me and my fans hitch to nobody's wagon except our own, so it'll be interesting to see which wagon gets waved through the pearlies..Wink

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/Christian-pie_zps838ab708.jpg~original
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Is Jesus God?
  3. » Page 45
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 01/23/2025 at 03:06:32