 | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) Sure, but that's circular reasoning at its finest. I've read numerous works of modern Christian apologetics in which atheists are ridiculed for their so-called arrogant refusal to believe in a god, coupled with the further straw-man argument (...) (22 years ago, 14-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) Unless God really has revealed the one and only path to Heaven to an individual/s. Then declaring it is not arrogance at all - its simply declaring the truth. <snip> (...) Just because something is old does not mean it is false (I (...) (22 years ago, 14-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stopping topics vs. dealing with troublemakers and nonconstructive participants
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes: <snip> (...) D'oh! I forget sometimes that my e-mail program for my home account has to be started manually when I'm at work. So I didn't get Bruce's message until now. So there you are. Dave K (22 years ago, 13-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stopping topics vs. dealing with troublemakers and nonconstructive participants
|
|
(...) What is amusing is that I had just sent David a private message telling him the pattern of Scott's debating "style" and the exchange just preceeding your message was the proof of it. It's like pulling teeth. You have to go round and round in (...) (22 years ago, 13-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: stopping topics vs. dealing with troublemakers and nonconstructive participants
|
|
(...) Don't think I'd call it a troll, per se; though there were elements that were troll-ish. (...) But you could be bothered to say that you couldn't be bothered to say how ironic you find it? I can't be bothered saying how silly I think that is. (...) (22 years ago, 13-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
