Should we handle victory the way the Christian god decrees?

snood wrote:

If I may...
When you (Frank Apisa) say that you don't have enough "unambiguous evidence", isn't that the same as saying you want proof?

Well I know that some will suggest that asking for "unambiguous evidence" is the same as asking for "proof."

I think it is not...but even if I were to concede that it is...

...Implicator was not suggesting that I was ASKING for proof...

...but rather that I was supposedly OFFERING proof.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Yes, he wants proof and evidence, because at the moment there is none.

You see, C.I. - that's where I think you and I get into difficulty - I ask someone else a direct question, and you answer.

0 Replies

snood, I'm sure Frank is capable of answering questions directed at him, but as a "open" forum, I just added my .02c worth. Sorry if it upsets you, but when I post on a2k, I expect anyone and everyone to add their response whether it's directed at them individually or not.

Sorry about the "difficulty." I really like you, snood, and read all your posts on a2k when I see it.

0 Replies

Not a biggie, C.I. - I can roll with it. Just causes a bit of confusion sometimes, is all...

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

The problem with Implicator's last point, Terry...as I am sure you will see immediately...is that in effect, he is asking us to use other ancient people's considerations about the god...to set OUR standard for judgment.

No Frank, I am asking you to consider what the Bible has to say about the god you are attempting to judge. I have said it before, and will say it again - if you don't consider everything the Bible says about this god when you judge him, then you aren't judging the god of the Bible. You are judging the actions of the god found in the Bible according to a standard that is not consistent with the god found in the Bible. Or stated differently, you are choosing to accept that certain aspects of this god are true in order to make you argument, while choosing to deny that other aspects (found in the same book, the "Bible") are true. Ignoring anything the Bible says about this god (including what standard he is or is not judged upon) means you aren't judging the god "of the Bible".

Quote:

"The whole of the Bible" as I pointed out in what I think was my first response to Implicator...includes the considerations of many, many people who were in abject fear of the god...and who not only praised it for no reason other than that fear...but who asserted that the god was above judgment by humans.

I know what you pointed out, I simply don't agree that it is an accurate assessment of what the Bible says.

Quote:

It is a manufactured, highly contrived case Implicator makes.

It is a logical case, Frank. There is nothing contrived about it. I would give the same due to the god of the Koran, or any other revelation someone placed in front of me. I would give the same due to any person described in any sort of book, actually. In fact, I give the same due to you as you reveal yourself on this discussion board.

Quote:

In any case, I think it would be worthwhile if Implicator were to take the challenge I laid out in my opening remarks...and we can all judge the god based on what the Bible says about what the god does and says.

I think I will go ahead and do that here in the next day or so, as it seems that Terry and dj might be awhile before responding to my latest replies to them.

Quote:

I say the god almost in every case (I know of one exception)...when on the scene or being quoted directly...is either threatening, killing, asking others to kill or punishing. I see no instances where the god is showing any of the traits that Christians seem to think it possesses...kindness, compassion, or a love of humanity.

Maybe Implicator can show us differently.

I will respond to the entirety of your opening post.

I

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Well, ci...now we know that this person cannot even handle a question as easy as the one I asked.

Although "none of your business" as a response to your question isn't what you wanted to hear, it is still a valid answer. Stop pouting Cool

I

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Implicator wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Implicator wrote:
It is obvious you confuse proof and persuasion.

It is???

Where did I speak about "proof?"

Anytime you used the words "show" or "demonstrate", you implied it.

Oh really! And you are the judge of what I am or am not implying? What standard are you using? Are you using all of my posts to set that standard?

I am judging what you are implying by the standard of the dictionary definition of the terms "show", "demonstrate", and "prove".

Quote:

Quote:

Now, if you are stating that you aren't trying to prove that your opinion is true (but only that it is your opinion), then I can accept that. That's what I have been saying all along, actually.

I

Your question seems to reduce to:

When you said it was your opinion that...such and such....

...did you mean that it was your "opinion?"

You gotta be kidding me, right?

It only reduces to that if you choose to avoid the truth of what I said.

To demonstrate or to show is synonymous with "to prove".

I

0 Replies

Implicator, FYI posting on a public board such as a2k makes it everybody's business. If you don't like it, you know where you can go. That's why it's called a "public forum."

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Implicator, FYI posting on a public board such as a2k makes it everybody's business. If you don't like it, you know where you can go. That's why it's called a "public forum."

Posting my disagreement with Frank's approach to arguing against the god of the Bible in no way makes it anyone's business what my religious beliefs are, especially considering the fact that I am not relying on them to make my argument.

It is none of your business either, until such time as I choose to make it known.

I

0 Replies

I eagerly await Implicator dealing with my initial post.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

I eagerly await Implicator dealing with my initial post.

And I, at the same time, eagerly await the time when you "finish the job" as you claimed you were going to do once dj was done answering me.

Given that dj might be awhile, why don't you just go ahead and finish the job, Frank? I can't wait!

I

0 Replies

Implicator wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
I eagerly await Implicator dealing with my initial post.

And I, at the same time, eagerly await the time when you "finish the job" as you claimed you were going to do once dj was done answering me.

Given that dj might be awhile, why don't you just go ahead and finish the job, Frank? I can't wait!

I

Ahhh...develop some patience, Implicator. It might help you to develop a bit of logic also.

I waited patiently for you...I'll wait just as patiently for dj.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Implicator wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
I eagerly await Implicator dealing with my initial post.

And I, at the same time, eagerly await the time when you "finish the job" as you claimed you were going to do once dj was done answering me.

Given that dj might be awhile, why don't you just go ahead and finish the job, Frank? I can't wait!

I

Ahhh...develop some patience, Implicator. It might help you to develop a bit of logic also.

I waited patiently for you...I'll wait just as patiently for dj.

And here I thought that this was going to "resolve itself shortly."

I

0 Replies

Implicator wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Implicator wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
I eagerly await Implicator dealing with my initial post.

And I, at the same time, eagerly await the time when you "finish the job" as you claimed you were going to do once dj was done answering me.

Given that dj might be awhile, why don't you just go ahead and finish the job, Frank? I can't wait!

I

Ahhh...develop some patience, Implicator. It might help you to develop a bit of logic also.

I waited patiently for you...I'll wait just as patiently for dj.

And here I thought that this was going to "resolve itself shortly."

I

Perhaps you ought to stay away from thinking, Implicator...and stick with the stuff you are good at. Twisted Evil

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Implicator wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Implicator wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
I eagerly await Implicator dealing with my initial post.

And I, at the same time, eagerly await the time when you "finish the job" as you claimed you were going to do once dj was done answering me.

Given that dj might be awhile, why don't you just go ahead and finish the job, Frank? I can't wait!

I

Ahhh...develop some patience, Implicator. It might help you to develop a bit of logic also.

I waited patiently for you...I'll wait just as patiently for dj.

And here I thought that this was going to "resolve itself shortly."

I

Perhaps you ought to stay away from thinking, Implicator...and stick with the stuff you are good at.

Actually, I was quoting your very own comments to ci, Frank - I guess I shouldn't do that either, huh? Wink

BK

0 Replies

Implicator wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Implicator wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Implicator wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
I eagerly await Implicator dealing with my initial post.

And I, at the same time, eagerly await the time when you "finish the job" as you claimed you were going to do once dj was done answering me.

Given that dj might be awhile, why don't you just go ahead and finish the job, Frank? I can't wait!

I

Ahhh...develop some patience, Implicator. It might help you to develop a bit of logic also.

I waited patiently for you...I'll wait just as patiently for dj.

And here I thought that this was going to "resolve itself shortly."

I

Perhaps you ought to stay away from thinking, Implicator...and stick with the stuff you are good at.

Actually, I was quoting your very own comments to ci, Frank - I guess I shouldn't do that either, huh?

BK

You wrote: "And here I thought that this was going to "resolve itself shortly."

And I replied: "Perhaps you ought to stay away from thinking, Implicator...and stick with the stuff you are good at. "

Doesn't really matter if you were quoting or not...does it?

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Implicator wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Implicator wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
Implicator wrote:
Frank Apisa wrote:
I eagerly await Implicator dealing with my initial post.

And I, at the same time, eagerly await the time when you "finish the job" as you claimed you were going to do once dj was done answering me.

Given that dj might be awhile, why don't you just go ahead and finish the job, Frank? I can't wait!

I

Ahhh...develop some patience, Implicator. It might help you to develop a bit of logic also.

I waited patiently for you...I'll wait just as patiently for dj.

And here I thought that this was going to "resolve itself shortly."

I

Perhaps you ought to stay away from thinking, Implicator...and stick with the stuff you are good at.

Actually, I was quoting your very own comments to ci, Frank - I guess I shouldn't do that either, huh?

BK

You wrote: "And here I thought that this was going to "resolve itself shortly."

And I replied: "Perhaps you ought to stay away from thinking, Implicator...and stick with the stuff you are good at. "

Doesn't really matter if you were quoting or not...does it?

That's pathetic, Frank.

Obviously what I was "thinking" was that you were correct in your assertion. What you took issue with was obviously my "thought" that this would all be over soon. If I had said "I think Frank is extremely bright", you would not have responded with "perhaps you ought to stay away from thinking." And so it was what I was thinking that you took issue with, not the fact that I *was* thinking. And we all know what I was thinking - something you yourself asserted.

You shot yourself in the foot ... best go and stop the bleeding.

I

0 Replies

Implicator wrote:

Quote:

That's pathetic, Frank.

Obviously what I was "thinking" was that you were correct in your assertion. What you took issue with was obviously my "thought" that this would all be over soon. If I had said "I think Frank is extremely bright", you would not have responded with "perhaps you ought to stay away from thinking." And so it was what I was thinking that you took issue with, not the fact that I *was* thinking. And we all know what I was thinking - something you yourself asserted.

I said what I had to say...and you can use it for as long as you want in this silly stalling tactic.

I actually enjoy your tantrums....so please do not stop throwing them due to anything I am saying.

Quote:

You shot yourself in the foot ... best go and stop the bleeding.

I have not shot myself in the foot...or anywhere else, Implicator. So stop with the "I am declaring victory" speeches.

And at some point, you will have to stop the stalling also.

You do remember that you have a posting due that will accept the challenge I posed in my opening comments...don't you?

0 Replies

This is beginning to vaguely resemble a pissing contest.

0 Replies

Frank has a talent for inciting those. He gets in them with half a dozen people on a regular basis. What he thinks is passing for urbane and personable looks to anyone paying attention like just garden variety self absorption and aged sourness. Implicator tried for a very long time, when he first started posting, not to descend to Apisa's level, but Apisa insisted. After he muddies you and gets off the slimiest low blow (in my case he got racial), he then starts whining as if he's the wronged party - as if all those he has p*ssing contests with just don't know how to argue with someone so smart.

He tries to characterize me as someone who "can't get him from under my skin". I see it differently. I think I rightly recoil at the stench Apisa brings to this forum. I will always tell him and you other dear readers just exactly how I see his pitiable, bellybutton-gazing pap.

0 Replies

Should we handle victory the way the Christian god decrees?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know