evolution vs creation vs Intelligent Design

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Apr 19 2006, 01:11 AM) [snapback]241945[/snapback]</div>

What if they are wrong?
What if...what if...what if...

What if they are heading for hell???? Can you honestly say you know who is heading for hell?
I am not spreading hate towards others because they don't believe in what I believe as opposed to some here who hate and demonize others for not believing in their flavor of religion. Is this the new Christian way? I consider myself a Christian but I would hate to be put in the same bin with those Christians who only make others want to distant themselves from God rather than bring themselves closer.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Apr 19 2006, 01:11 AM) [snapback]241945[/snapback]</div>

And if you don't read somebody's posts how can you know what they are saying?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Apr 19 2006, 01:37 AM) [snapback]241976[/snapback]</div>

Religion is about control, keeping the masses in line. Therefore its hardly surprising that religion is frequently in bed with the "civic/political power". A natural coalition.

As to your views on evolutionary science. You're right we're not in your league. Why don't you go over to www.talkorigins.org. They love to be convinced of their errors by people who cut and paste creation science wisdom. Several are real evilutionary scientists and secular humanists. You'd be doing god's work.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Apr 18 2006, 11:37 PM) [snapback]241976[/snapback]</div>

Actually, I can't imagine a loving God not meteing out justice for those who are evil. Besides, having a literal hell means I don't have to torture the SOBs myself.



<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Apr 18 2006, 11:37 PM) [snapback]241976[/snapback]</div>

Your questions are too old ... too many transitional forms have been found in the fossil record now, nearly as exactly as predicted. And, evolution does not state that variations accumulate slowly. Again, you are about 20 years behind the science. Look up Stephen Jay Gould and punctuated equilibrium. THAT theory stems from the 1970s.

The real question is why these non-questions keep coming up. They have been settled, and are not an issue among scientists and theologians. They are an issue only among American conservatives, and I'm baffled by it. Since God is the author of truth, why are some trying to hide his truth under a barrage of questions meant merely to obfuscate?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(windstrings @ Apr 18 2006, 10:53 PM) [snapback]241964[/snapback]</div>

You display here your truly remarkable ignorance of science, which is not surprising. Ancient Greek scholars knew the world was round long before science was invented. And they knew to a surprising degree of accuracy how big it was.

You are working from the kindergarden version of the Columbus story, which says that he knew the Earth was round when everyone else thought they'd fall off the edge. In actual fact, only the utterly uneducated and extremely superstitious sailors, informed only by religion, believed they would fall off the edge.

All educated people in Europe knew the Earth was round, and they had a reasonably accurate knowledge of its size. The reason nobody ever tried to reach India by sailing west from Europe was that they knew the most advanced sailing ship of the day (the caravel) was incapable of sailing that far.

Columbus believed, based on erronious calculations, that the earth was only half its actual size, and that India was twice its actual size, which would have put India within reach. Had he not stumbled into America, he and his sailors would all have died.

It was not until the development of much more advanced sailing ships, years later, that circumnavigation of the globe became possible.

One of the principal methods creationists use to make their arguments, is to misrepresent science, and then tear down their own false version of it. They should be ashamed of themselves for this dishonest approach, but they do not care about honesty, as long as they can win converts. (Note, I do not call you dishonest, Windstrings. You have demonstrated, over and over, such a level of ignorance that it is clear you believe the lies of the creationists. You demonstrate an encyclopedic knowledge of the Bible, without even the ability to construct a grammatically-correct sentence to support your views. I hope this will not be taken as a flame. It is intended as a comment on your writing style. You once even commented in a post, a long time ago, that you choose to remain ignorant about the meanings and proper usages of words.)

 

:::Sigh::: OK. I'll try again. I won't answer all of your points, not because you've convinced me they are true, but just because I don't have the necessary expertise to answer all of them.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Apr 19 2006, 09:05 AM) [snapback]242019[/snapback]</div>

I don't know for sure, but one of the reasons that you don't see 2-5 cellular organisms today is because the progenitor isn't around. In other words, we didn't evolve from the current unicelluar organisms; both us and those unicellular organisms evolved from a common ancestor. I don't know why 2-5 cellular organisms don't exist; maybe it's inefficient from an evolutionary standpoint. I'm sure there's someone here far better equipped than I to answer this. The point is not that I have an answer, but that I strongly suspect there's an evolutionary biology answer that is better supported by data than just "God did it." Or maybe not. Maybe it's one of the great unanswered questions of biology. But science's inablity to describe every detail doesn't make all of science wrong.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Apr 19 2006, 09:05 AM) [snapback]242019[/snapback]</div>

This just makes no sense. For one thing, part of the deposition is going to take place when the land is under an ocean, where there's no such thing as rivers (remember: 70% of the land is covered with water). Secondly, think about how much dry land today has canyon-cutting rivers running through it. It's a tiny (tiny) fraction of the available land. This suggests that, at any time in history, there is little significant erosion going on that will disrupt the laying down of the sedimentary layers.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Apr 19 2006, 09:05 AM) [snapback]242019[/snapback]</div>

Bull. All that means is that the diversification of the new species is much faster than the process of fossils being laid down.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Apr 19 2006, 09:05 AM) [snapback]242019[/snapback]</div>

Simple answer: Tide pools. One of the current theories is that amino acids were concentrated in tide pools. If you think about it, this implies that a planet must have a sizeable moon for life to develop (at least if always develops like it does on Earth; probably not a good assumption).

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Apr 19 2006, 09:05 AM) [snapback]242019[/snapback]</div>

Just because we don't know or can't explain something yet doesn't mean that God put it there. If you ask me to guess what happened, I would guess that DNA formed from RNA. There were probably millions (at least) of different permutations where RNA "tried" to form into DNA, but the only one that survived was the one that could repair itself. I'll point out that DNA is far from perfect; there are transcription errors all the time. In fact, this genetic mutation is what we think drives evolution.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Apr 18 2006, 11:37 PM) [snapback]241976[/snapback]</div>

At least thats not his delight or will that anyone should perish.

Hell freaks people out, something most refuse to admit or embrace that there could actually be torment as a reward for living and dyeing in sin, but since you mentioned it:

(Luke 16:28 KJV) For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.


(Mark 9:45 KJV) And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
(Mark 9:46 KJV) Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
(Mark 9:47 KJV) And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:
(Mark 9:48 KJV) Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.


(Mat 25:35 KJV) For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
(Mat 25:36 KJV) Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
(Mat 25:37 KJV) Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungered, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
(Mat 25:38 KJV) When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
(Mat 25:39 KJV) Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
(Mat 25:40 KJV) And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
(Mat 25:41 KJV) Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
...note here that Hell was not prepared for men, but the devil, nevertheless men will be sent to it that take the devil as thier father.

(Mat 25:42 KJV) For I was an hungered, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
(Mat 25:43 KJV) I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
(Mat 25:44 KJV) Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungered, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
(Mat 25:45 KJV) Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
(Mat 25:46 KJV) And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.


Some believe Hell actually gets enlarged for the massive amounts of last days population going there:
(Isa 5:14 KJV) Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it.
(Isa 5:15 KJV) And the mean man shall be brought down, and the mighty man shall be humbled, and the eyes of the lofty shall be humbled:

And for those who want to say Hell is a different place than the lake of fire "like its here" etc....
(Rev 20:13 KJV) And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

(Rev 20:14 KJV) And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

It looks like those who go to hell, will end up in everlasting torment "for ever" since we are eternal beings made in the image of the creator, to possibly be forgotten forever as life goes on to new endeavors God has Forever!....



Life is Good!... Death is not!...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(RonH @ Apr 19 2006, 06:20 AM) [snapback]242023[/snapback]</div>

False religion is as you depict... but all "religions" claim to be real, otherwise they are not a religion... how can you say follow these teachings, but they are false?

Power intoxicates, But true religion is not so...

The crowd Jesus slammed the worst were the "relgious" leaders of that day..... If he were walking in the flesh, he would still be doing the same.

These are you people you are in disqust with.. not true christians

(Mat 23:27 KJV) Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
(Mat 23:28 KJV) Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
(Mat 23:29 KJV) Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
(Mat 23:30 KJV) And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
(Mat 23:31 KJV) Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
(Mat 23:32 KJV) Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
(Mat 23:33 KJV) Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hybridTHEvibe @ Apr 19 2006, 06:09 AM) [snapback]242021[/snapback]</div>

Many were offended with the teaching of Jesus... especially the pharasees who had the most to lose.

Some are attracted to light, and others run from it.

Its true, you don't want to emit hate and bitterness as that is not out of love, but true love tells it like it is and only buffers it as much as it can without diluting it.

Todays churches in an attempt to not offend "anyone", dilute the truth so far down that it does nothing... kinda like diluted weed killer.... or diluted antibiotics.... it only makes the enemy stronger.

Too many are afraid of the truth, anytime you excercise true religion, it will take faith.... faith that God will follow through and do his part as the word goes forth.

Todays churches "most of them" walk with thier natural eyes and not in the spirit, and do what seems best to them as they control and understand, rather that what the spirit tells them.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Apr 19 2006, 06:52 AM) [snapback]242034[/snapback]</div>

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Vengence is "fine"..... opps.. I mean "mine" saith the Lord!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(windstrings @ Apr 19 2006, 11:17 AM) [snapback]242096[/snapback]</div>

Ah! the "true christian" argument. How will I know when I see one. Is the guy who bombed an abortion doctor's car one? Is mother teresa one when she advises against birth control to the poor of Calcutta? If its just some internal deal between a person and god then why should I care? If a person says they're a christian then I'll judge them and religion by their deeds.

And by the way, quoting the campfire tales of bronze age goat herders is not going to convince anyone of anything.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Apr 19 2006, 07:04 AM) [snapback]242040[/snapback]</div>

No offense taken.... As i said in those posts long ago..... we are not all grammatical experts... not all of us are experts in all fields... some work on cars, some computers, some peoples bodies.... but many many, do are not good at grammar and spelling.
Some who cannot cook a hamburger, can figure out physics.

I am usually good at what interest me and therefore what I apply myself too.....

Don't mistake someone lacking in one thing to assume they lack in all things.

Too many times we think we have to portray ourselves as 'perfect" in all things to be credible in one.

I admit, there are tons and tons of things I am not proficient in, and others many around me praise me for constantly "although I know better".

I accept your critique as fact......

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(RonH @ Apr 19 2006, 12:31 PM) [snapback]242113[/snapback]</div>

I'm not going to go into that again, as I posted some answers back on page 6. Jesus and his apostles made it clear that they KNEW Christianity would be corrupted, making it difficult to tell "good" Christianity from "bad". Jesus' parable of the "wheat and the weeds" illustrated that. After the passing of the last apostle, John, apostasy really bagan getting a foothold. Within one or two centuries, pagan doctrines, like Hellfire, were fused in with Christianity. Does that mean that ALL Christianity is "bad" or has been corrupted? No, it just means that its takes a little work. There have always been sincere Bible students, many of whom died rather than accept the wrong teachings of the Churches.

Not to get into a pissing match, or get too far off the original subject, but Jesus' story of the Rich Man and Lazarus was just that, as STORY or ILLUSTRATION. If you read the context, you can see that he was trying to make a point against the Pharisees, who despised him, and found themselves "tormented" by the fact that Jesus found the common people to be much more receptive and teachable. For the account to be factual, not a parable, the following would ALL have to be true:
1) Abraham would have had to been in heaven, for Lazarus to be in his bosom. But, Jesus made it clear that NO ONE had ever gone to heaven before he died, and was raised to heavenly life. He was the "firstborn from the dead".
2) Hell would have to be within visual distance of heaven. What kind of heaven would that be, when we could watch the eternal torment of others?? I don't want to be there!
3) Just a drop of water on their tongues would have quenched their thirst? Oh, come on now! It would evaporate before it would ever get there anyway! :blink:
4) The way the account reads, we would have to *assume* that the rich man would have had to have been wicked, and Lazarus righteous, right? Well, the account never says that, it just says one was rich and one was poor. This was in a SPIRITUAL sense. Jesus was illustrating that those who used to be "rich" in a spiritual sense, the Jewish religious leaders, were now tormented by Jesus' judgement message, and the fact that those who they despised, the common folk, were now the ones being blessed and taught by Jesus.
The parable using a lot of symbolism to make the point that there was now a dramatic reversal in the way God was dealing with them. There are other passages too where the Bible uses death, or "dying as to our former course of conduct", etc, as a way to indicate a change in condition. In this case, those that used to beg for spiritual scraps from the tables were now having the spiritual needs satisfied by Jesus Christ, while the old Law Covenent was being done away with, it was "dead".

See, this is one of the BIG problems with the King James translation, as someone else pointed out. In this case, the translators chose to translate the Greek word "Gehenna" as "Hell". Gehenna, or the Valley of Hinnom as it was also known to the Jews, was a valley right outside the walls of Jerusalem that was used as a trash heap. Fires were kept burning there to dispose of their garbage, but NOTHING LIVING was ever thrown there. They knew that anything cast there was DESTROYED, not tormented. Jesus used Gehenna to picture a death from which there is no hope of a resurrection, as opposed to the Greek word "Hades", which is the common grave of mankind. The King James randomly translates Hades as "pit", "grave", or "Hell", so which is it?
Matthew 10:28 - "be in fear of him that can DESTROY both soul and body in Ge·hen′na"
Note the key word "destroy"? All future life prospects END for someone destroyed in Gehenna. There is no hope of a resurrection by God. So, what is the sentence for sin?
Rom. 6:23: “The wages sin pays is death.â€
After one’s death, is he still subject to further punishment for his sins?
Rom. 6:7: “He who has died has been acquitted from his sin.â€
So, where did the Hell doctrine really come from:
About 2,000 years before the birth of Jesus, the Sumerians and the Babylonians believed in an underworld that they called the Land of No Return. This ancient belief is reflected in the Sumerian and the Akkadian poems known as “The Epic of Gilgamesh†and the “Descent of Ishtar to the Underworld.†They describe this abode of the dead as a house of darkness, “the house which none leave who have entered it.â€
The New Encyclopædia Britannica states: “Egyptian funerary texts depict the way to the next world as beset by awful perils: fearsome monsters, lakes of fire, gates that cannot be passed except by the use of magical formulas, and a sinister ferryman whose evil intent must be thwarted by magic.â€
Then, according to Greek mythology:
"In the infernal regions it appeared before the three judges of the place . . . ; if condemned for its crimes, it had to suffer in Tartarus. . . . The Greeks even invented a Limbo, the abode of children who had died in infancy, and a Purgatory, where a certain mild chastisement purified souls.†According to The World Book Encyclopedia, souls that ended up in Tartarus “suffered eternal torment.â€
Hmmm...sound familiar? When are people going to learn that God does not need to hold eternal torment over everyone's heads to get their respect, any more than you would burn your children as punishment? God wants us to serve him out of love and trust, not deathly fear. B)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(windstrings @ Apr 19 2006, 12:29 PM) [snapback]242111[/snapback]</div>

I hope that one day you walk out of the dark side and see the light. It's very sad that you decided to run from the light. I wish you would stop emitting hate and bitterness. I truly feel sad for you.
Don't run away from the light! Listen to the spirit and stop hatred. The fruits of your hateful faith has only pushed people away from you, even on this board. You didn't extend the hand but only took it away.
Maybe one day you will wake up and see the real from the fake and would be able to project a smile to an infidel like Jesus did. Maybe one day the light will shine on you. Peace be with you child.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(priusguy04 @ Apr 19 2006, 12:22 PM) [snapback]242105[/snapback]</div>

When the Tectonics Plates were moving at a rate of 4 miles a year
it would have felt as if things were falling over the edge.

Shem’s Sons



21Shem, Japheth’s older brother, also had sons. One of his descendants was the father of all the sons of Eber.

22The sons of Shem were Elam, Asshur, Arphaxad, Lud, and Aram.

23The sons of Aram were Uz, Hul, Gether, and Meshech.

24Arphaxad was the father of Shelah, who was the father of Eber. 25Eber was the father of two sons—one named Peleg, because the earth was divided during his life, and the other was named Joktan.

26Joktan was the father of Almodad, Sheleph, Hazarmaveth, Jerah, 27Hadoram, Uzal, Diklah, 28Obal, Abimael, Sheba, 29Ophir, Havilah, and Jobab. All these people were the sons of Joktan. 30They lived in the area between Mesha and Sephar in the hill country in the East.

31These are the people from the family of Shem, arranged by families, languages, countries, and nations.

32This is the list of the families from the sons of Noah, arranged according to their nations. From these families came all the nations who spread across the earth after the flood.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SirGreen @ Apr 19 2006, 04:12 PM) [snapback]242346[/snapback]</div>

I know that one: he was one of the owners of the Pequod.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hybridTHEvibe @ Apr 19 2006, 06:09 AM) [snapback]242021[/snapback]</div>

Christians do believe they know who is heading for hell. The question you have to ask someone like me, who isn't in your face about it, is why I'm not concerned for your soul. That's the real question, I think!

It is a fair enough criticism about not reading every word in someone's posts ... it is possible I missed invective in Windstring's posts. I've skimmed them, and skip the numerous Bible verses. But I will go back and see if I can see the problems you've reported.

 

Intelligent design is simply creationism with a clever new title. The righties will never accept a separation of church and state, even though it's for their own good!

Evolution is a FACT! Deal with it. It's a theory, like gravity is a theory. It has been tested countless times and all of the evidence points to it.

Think of all the money we could save on science education if we just taught, "Because God makes it that way." No more questioning why or how. Just "God says so." All you people who don't believe in evolution should never be allowed to get a flu shot. Flu vaccines change to fight the evolving viruses.

You want to teach your religious views as science, home school your kid!

It's all part of a much bigger problem in this country. Fundamentalist religous freaks. Fight them at every chance! They are hijacking this country.

Sorry neo-cons, the bible isn't fact, it CANNOT be proven, quit taking it literally and start trying to figure out what you can learn from the stories.

EX:

Old testament-Jonah in the mouth of a fish.

Fundamentalists believe, Jonah was absolutel, it's a fact he was trapped in the mouth of a fish.
On the other hand reasonable, educated people of faith, realize that in the middle east a common idiomatic expression for adifficult situation is "being in the mouth of a fish." It is the same as in our culture, "a rock and a hard place."

Do you think 2 thousand years someone will read "rock and hard place" in a diary from the 21st century and really believe, "Wow, this guy was trapped!"

I hate the right, they are always so wrong.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hybridTHEvibe @ Apr 19 2006, 06:09 AM) [snapback]242021[/snapback]</div>

OK, I have re-read every single post in this very long thread, and I have to pat everyone on the back for a job well done. There is actually very little invective or name calling. The only one I can find is Dsunman's statement evidently directed at Windstrings that says only a "cocksure religio-fascist like yourself" would something, something, blah, blah. I'm pretty sure calling a person a "cocksure religio-fascist" is intended as an insult, and is therefore over the line.

I really don't see a problem with any of the other posts. I include non-Christian and Christian posts where strong statements about personal belief are given. There are some posts that provide the opinion that religion has done great harm, that its used to gain power over the ignorant masses, etc., but they stop short of identifying a particular individual involved in this thread as ignorant, doing great harm, etc.

Likewise, the Christians are behaving themselves, and given the very difficult position they are in ... having to defend the idea of the exclusive nature of Christianity isn't easy to do. There have been some strong reactions to that, but except for Dsunman's one brief insult, I haven't seen any real problems.

Besides, Windstring got my joke about the existance of a literal Hell meaning I didn't have to go out and torture people who have wronged me. Anyone who gets my humor can't be all bad.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hybridTHEvibe @ Apr 19 2006, 03:17 PM) [snapback]242315[/snapback]</div>

Jesus only extended smiles to those who were hungry and destitute or had a love for the truth.

The ones he struck out against were the religious crowd that wouldn't accept simple truth and used thier religious platform to mask the truth. God hates an imposter.... the the lukewarm he will not tolerate...

there is more hope of a Paul who kills christians and doesn't know better, than someone who assumes the role of a christian to twist the truth into a lie.

If you feel someone is hating you.... maybe your paranoid?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Apr 19 2006, 09:01 PM) [snapback]242486[/snapback]</div>

Yea, sorry for the numerous scriptures..... it comes from those who demand proof of the language spoken here.

But since the bible itself is not considered credible by some, its a waste of time for those folks in the natural sense... but that word is so powerful, it does a number.....

I don't blame you for not wading through them all.... I doubt you missed anything.. I try to highlight the key points anyway.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Apr 20 2006, 01:08 AM) [snapback]242515[/snapback]</div>

It's easy to pick and choose someone else's words out of context and present them as egregious slur, or an insult.

My intention was to label not to insult.

For the record, I've arrived to the conclusion that windstrings presentation of his faith being above others is
fundamentally connoting fascistic tendencies "one kin" above all other kin. He has been very gently applying demeaning quotes such as that all other who don't believe in his GOD are wearing the mask of evil etc. If one studies how fascism evolved into it's fanatical fruition one should be able to recognize my implication.

The exclusionary notion presented by him acts a in the same way as it does among islamo-fascists quoting their misguided interpretation of Qur'an, intimidating all passive Muslims with the same method of "evilizing" all those who don't obediently succumb.

I've added the adjective cocksure for overconfidence in his attitude and his belligerence toward my questions and my personal character that he was demeaning on every possible turn, implying, confusion etc. therefore diverting from all my rudimentary questions.

In addition to that he flagrantly stated in other posts that people in the Middle East are of "that kin" insinuating Ãœbermensch attitude.

He never replied to my post in which I have called him "cocksure religio-fascist", so I assumed he chose to avoid further confrontation with me. I was eager to defend my stance in case he was about to confront me, but he didn't.

Instead you have arrived and picked one of my posts out of the blue with projecting antagonism. Fine, I had no problem with that as I've responded to you. And now for whatever reason you acting as some kind judge and jury in respect of entire thread, when some other poster indicated to you that you accusing people of something without even reading the posts. I'm not clear what are the motives behind your interjection here? This should have been left out in-between myself and windstings with or without further confrontation. Are you acting on his behalf? Or perhaps you're sympathizing with his views and naturally you trying to defend his stance.

I've left the thread right after windstings decided to skip my last post, indicating no further inclination to debate with me anymore. Done deal, I got it, what's all of this? Defamation by association?

Cheers

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Apr 19 2006, 10:08 PM) [snapback]242515[/snapback]</div>

Its funny how that works!.... so many times the guilty party is the one blaming the other!

Anyway..... another thing thats funny is that the most "intolerant", are those to blame others for being intolerant.

The ones that preach tolerancy are the ones who flame out the worst against Christians?

They love dishing it out, but don't like to eat it themselves.

First of all, "tolerancy" only means that ... "everything goes".
The favorite word of a true extreme liberal.

Why aren't you "tolerant" of the child molester and the bank robber and the wife beater?.... or "are" you?

Admit it.. fact is, you are tolerant of eveyone that agrees with you.... isn't that the way your tolerancey works?

Every child is at a point where "its all about them".. I'm sure Dsunman and all of his play friends will grow up to be a fine young laddies some day!

Maybe even run for democratic president and make thier mommy proud!