20 Dec 18
@divegeester saidWhich, of course, is not in the OP, and only after I asked him directly.
Fetchmybecker says on page 2 that “his brother wrote it”. Of course Becker could be mistaken or his brother could be lying.
Not sure how everyone thinks I'm calling him a liar.
He didn't say, so I asked. End of.
@divegeester saidI must say that I'm not used to seeing you waffle like this, but yeah, I get why you would.
He does call me a religionst and I let him “get away with it” because I don’t entirely disagree with him. I use the term to sometime describe the attitudes of posters such as sonship or KellyJay because they are deeply into their “churches”. But even though I am not into corporate religion I still follow a religion, so technically FMF is correct. Either way it’s not something that bothers me.
@fmf saidHow many times have you asked Christians here why haven't they attacked another Christian for something they've said? You probably would've had a season ticket to the Coliseum to watch Christians be eaten by the lions.
I disagree. I have not advocated anything comparable to sanctimonious Christian-on-Christian holier-than-thou-ism. If you think I have, just say what it is
How about Christian-on-Christian cage matches?
Worth a giggle, right?
@suzianne saidOne of the things that's fascinating here is how many of the Christians contradict themselves, then baulk at being asked about it, or stick pridefully to whatever error or inconsistency they have evidently uttered.
How many times have you asked Christians here why haven't they attacked another Christian for something they've said? You probably would've had a season ticket to the Coliseum to watch Christians be eaten by the lions.
How about Christian-on-Christian cage matches?
Worth a giggle, right?
And then it's fascinating how they will often not have the integrity to put aside groupism and partisanship and debate and discuss stuff based on principle and belief instead, and tackle the disagreement head on. People with political ideologies are prone to this too sometimes.
Perhaps you're a bit too busy making the same scornful little content-free speeches - day in day out, over and over again, the ones that you have been making for a decade - and following me around the threads like a little puppy dog in order to do it, insisiting that you are ignoring me ~ to realize what debates and discussions are actually going on.
20 Dec 18
@fmf saidOr:
Me watching Christians "eaten by the lions"?
You, with season tickets to the coliseum, watching Christians...
And the Christians are being eaten by lions.
20 Dec 18
@philokalia saidWhat does Christians being eaten by lions have to do with anything?
Or:
You, with season tickets to the coliseum, watching Christians...
And the Christians are being eaten by lions.
20 Dec 18
@fmf saidWhat would it not have to do with something?
What does Christians being eaten by lions have to do with anything?
How would it be irrelevant?
It sounds pretty important.
Are you suggesting that this is unimportant?
20 Dec 18
@philokalia saidBoth you and Suzianne have mentioned Christians being eaten by lions. What are you on about?
What would it not have to do with something?
How would it be irrelevant?
It sounds pretty important.
Are you suggesting that this is unimportant?
20 Dec 18
@philokalia saidNo, I did not say that. I asked you "What does Christians being eaten by lions have to do with anything?" Both you and Suzianne have mentioned it.
You just said Christians being eaten by lions has nothing to do with anything.
20 Dec 18
@fmf saidNo, you clearly said:
No, I did not say that. I asked you "What does Christians being eaten by lions have to do with anything?" Both you and Suzianne have mentioned it.
"What does Christians being eaten by lions have to do with anything?
Meaning...
You think it is irrelevant.
That is what you meant.
You meant exactly that cruelty has nothing to do with anything.
If you care to justify that, be my guest. But, it's plain to see, the statement is absurd.
20 Dec 18
@philokalia saidYes. That's why I asked you why you think it's relevant. I don't. If you do, why not say why?
You think it is irrelevant.
20 Dec 18
@philokalia saidWhat "cruelty"?
You meant exactly that cruelty has nothing to do with anything.