(I) I was actually referring to Becker as a top Christian poster, and suggesting that his ignoring of my own question and deflecting away from them is just another log in the fire.
I do not actually think that I am laying compliments on anyone by saying that they are a top Christian poster here. This literally just refers to any high volume Christian poster.
(II) The opposite of the constant assertions backed only by appeals to authority is the constant dismissal of reasoned arguments simply because it doesn't offer ironclad proof.
If you think it is silly to bring out long, reasoned arguments, but it is intelligent to point out what we already knew -- that this isn't definitive proof -- then you are not getting a clear picture.
@philokalia saidI can't be bothered to talk to dj2becker anymore. I had long discussions with him in 2016 and 2017 and to a far lesser extent in 2018. I think I finally stopped altogether when he trolled divegeester in public about the suicide of his birth mother and the refused to apologize "in case divegeester was lying about the suicide".
I was actually referring to Becker as a top Christian poster, and suggesting that his ignoring of my own question and deflecting away from them is just another log in the fire.
I can't be bothered anymore. Never have I written so many thoughtful posts that were simply ignored only for the same questions to be asked again. Make of it what you will. Yes, it's part of the dialogue or culture of this community. Yes my unwillingness to engage him is part of the dialogue.
@philokalia saidWhat "reasoned arguments"? Your go-to logical fallacy is 'appeal to authority'.
The opposite of the constant assertions backed only by appeals to authority is the constant dismissal of reasoned arguments simply because it doesn't offer ironclad proof.
@philokalia saidYou laid effusive compliments on Romans1009 so he was your 'top Christian poster' in 2018. He used to make highly sexualized insulting remarks about my wife and children. Your take on that: he was just mirroring my forum posting. Is this you being "deep"?
I do not actually think that I am laying compliments on anyone by saying that they are a top Christian poster here.
@philokalia said"Long, reasoned arguments" about what, for example?
If you think it is silly to bring out long, reasoned arguments, but it is intelligent to point out what we already knew -- that this isn't definitive proof -- then you are not getting a clear picture.
I did not see everything that Romans did. And one thing I do know: you latch onto small details for years & blow them out of proportion. You do this with me regularly -- to what extent are your characterizations perfectly accurate? No idea.
But I do know what I saw: Romans single-handedly trolling the pants off of both of you & Dive, and I found it to be funny in the sense that the threads were utterly defined by you interrogating anyone you didn't like.
... And remember the time I opened up and said I had a drinking problem? Shortly after that, you insulted me with it; you insulted me with it just a couple days ago, too.
If I were to pull an FMF on this one, I would have to say that you took the greatest challenge in my life that nearly ended my relationship and resulted in long-term health complications, and you made fun of me for it.
That's dramatic -- why? Because this is an internet forum, and LOL , of course people are oging to be rude on the internet & troll you.
But why do you get to be the permanent victim?
@fmf saidI would say a good example of some of the deeper arguments we have had have been in the Losing my religion thread where we hve talked about suffering.
"Long, reasoned arguments" about what, for example?
Not incredibly deep, heed you, but there is one.
We also had some good stuff going on concernign substitionary atonement in a thread you posted but you did not reply there, either.
@philokalia saidNo I didn't. I wished you good luck with it.
And remember the time I opened up and said I had a drinking problem? Shortly after that, you insulted me with it; you insulted me with it just a couple days ago, too.
@philokalia saidI'd say Romans1009's main target with his relentless personal insults was Ghost of a Duke. The paedophilia stuff and the child alcoholism stuff and the stuff sbout urination and about my children being the product of rape, you finding all that "funny" notwithstanding, didn't achieve much except make Romans1009 seem like a creep. And you too, of course.
But I do know what I saw: Romans single-handedly trolling the pants off of both of you & Dive, and I found it to be funny in the sense that the threads were utterly defined by you interrogating anyone you didn't like.
@philokalia saidI've never made "fun" of any of the alcoholics on this website. This came up because you were defending caesar salad's creepy attempt to use alcoholism to make "fun" of someone ~ a post he had the good sense to remove a day later. I've never made "fun" of your alcoholism. You are making this up.
If I were to pull an FMF on this one, I would have to say that you took the greatest challenge in my life that nearly ended my relationship and resulted in long-term health complications, and you made fun of me for it.
@fmf saidNo, no, no, you posted at me some disgusting question like "do you ever get drunk before you post here...? Alcohol on the breath, after throwing back a few drinks..." etc.
I've never made "fun" of any of the alcoholics on this website. This came up because you were defending caesar salad's creepy attempt to use alcoholism to make "fun" of someone ~ a post he had the good sense to remove a day later. I've never made "fun" of your alcoholism. You are making this up.
I distinctly remember it.
I wouldn't be surprised if you deleted it, and God knows I'm not going to spend my morning digging for a post that occurred over a year ago.
Nome of that is important, either.
This all just shores up my point: forum drama is stupid.
Like it or not, people are going to talk garbage on the internet because words don't really matter as much as you think they do here.
Maybe it's a generation thing.
@philokalia saidI would call them a cult.
There is a lot of evidence about the life of Joseph Smith which shows him to be a chronic liar and conman. Some of this is acknowledged by Mormons as being his life before the incidents, I believe, but there is a lot of troubling stuff that starts to unfold. the deeper the dive you take.
I heard about an Orthodox Church in Utah that had a 100+ members in a rela ...[text shortened]... ce is unconscionable to me. But that sounds virtue signal-y in a very easy way so I will stop there.
A cult to me is anything that elevates itself above God, whether it be a church, a charismatic leader, or pretty much anything else.
@eladar saidSorry if someone else already asked this or even answered it, but......who was it that gave this man his own reality to rule as God?
I was asked about Mormons so I thought this thread was in order. Here is the first..
The nature of God the Father.
Biblical point of view God has always been and anything created was created by God with Jesus.
Mormon belief is that God the Father was once a man like us who lived such a perfect life he was given his own reality to rule as God. He called his wife from his previous life got her pregnant and she gave birth to all souls, including Jesus' and Satan.
@galveston75
I do not think Mormons really worry aboit the regression. Immediately? Most likely our God the father.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidRajk has told me as well as all JW's that we are going to hell because we don't believe as he does.
He has also stated that he doesn't care if people go to hell, which seems a tad incongruous with the whole 'love thy neighbour' thing.
I don't believe as he does but I would never tell him or any one here they are going to hell or heaven or where ever because that is not for me to judge.
But he seems to have some say in it that I'm not aware of.
So all here better be careful or he will zap you!!!!