On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 13:31:40 -0600, Midwinter
<midwinter_m@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>Christopher A.Lee <calee@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> said :
>
>>>All right - it's time for you to do some work for a change. You're
>>>always
>>
>> Hypocrite.
>
>Well, I'll leave others to judge whose been doing the demanding and who's
>been doing the answering in this thread.
>
>>>demanding this and that and picking holes in the answers people give
>>>you. Let's see you put in a bit of effort for once.
>>
>> Condescending nastiness from somebody who hasn't been bothered to read
>> what has been posted several times.
>
>You should recognise condescending nastiness, Chris - it's your standard
>approach, as a rule ("learn to read for comprehension" ring any bells
>with you?). Don't you consider yourself intellectually superior to us
>poor deluded religious nuts? And haven't you made damn sure I know it
>over the conversations we've had?
Here's a clue: you haven't been reading for comprehension and are
demanding I defend yur straw man.
And not for the first time.
But reacting negatively gives yu an excuse to keep ignoring what you
have been told, doesn't it?
>
>
>>>Why do YOU believe that you're able to claim so firmly that a man -
>>>not a god - called Jesus *could not have existed* at about the
>>>relevant time, in the relevant place?
>>
>> Where do I do that, liar?
>
>Well, if you don't believe that, then oddly enough you and I don't
>disagree on anything.
>
>Obviously, since you've spent so much time objecting to my reasoning that
>it might have been possible for such a man to have existed, naturally I
>assumed that implied that you thought it wasn't.
Perhaps you should have been more careful then.
>Weird how things turn out, isn't it?
>
>> Please learn to read for comprehension.
>
>Oh listen - are those bells I hear?
I'm not the one who keeps turning "in the absence of evidence there is
no reason to believe something" into the straw man "certainty
something doesn't exist".
Or assuming that this is somehow equivalent and opposite to believing
something in the absence of evidence.
|
