retrospective trolling

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Fine if you think that Christ alluding to Satan being a man slayer from the beginning negates the Christian admonishment not to keep account of the injury then what can I say but . . . .ARE YOU SERIOUS?

You're the one bringing "Christian principles" into this silly point you are trying to make and now you are saying that Christ's "retrospective" accusation to Satan is him not being Christ like, is that it?

Originally posted by divegeester
You're the one bringing "Christian principles" into this silly point you are trying to make and now you are saying that Christ's "retrospective" accusation to Satan is him nor being Christ like, is that it?

Christ retrospective accusation???? are you seriously accusing Jesus of retro-trollin,
bwahaha, oh man you couldn't make it up.

Originally posted by biffo konker
' I realise that all people are free moral agents with recourse to the faculty of conscience and are responsible for their own actions. I condemn no one but leave judgement up to God.'

But a quick google search -redhotpawn+robbie carrobie+homosexual - got 2860 hits.
This doesn't fit with what you said above.

I am sorry but I don't understand what you are trying to conclude by the use of that data?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
oh dear you realise that this post of yours is a reflection not of me but of you and your inability not only to think rationally but to engage in civil debate, i have provided a plethora of reason and this is all your spirituality could manage, i would say that it indicative of someone absolutely devoid of both substance and reason, people who read y ...[text shortened]... r for you to make an appearance, throw a few insults around and leave, we know, its what you do.

Given your inability to engage in civil discourse, I am not obliged to 'turn the other cheek' with you, and that certainly doesn't excuse your end of the behavior, which is creating the "horse's ass" moments in the first place, or are you claiming that it does?

And oh, btw, "truth trumps propriety". So "suck it up, buttercup".

Seriously, just give up the "forum combat". People who engage in it just become despised because of it. You can turn over a new leaf, unless, of course, you're obligated to your present course of action, and given some of the things you have said in the past, you just may have painted yourself into a corner yet again and have no choice but to flail ahead at full steam. Too bad.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Given your inability to engage in civil discourse, I am not obliged to 'turn the other cheek' with you, and that certainly doesn't excuse your end of the behavior, which is creating the "horse's ass" moments in the first place, or are you claiming that it does?

And oh, btw, "truth trumps propriety". So "suck it up, buttercup".

Seriously, just give up ...[text shortened]... yourself into a corner yet again and have no choice but to flail ahead at full steam. Too bad.

Look you have a reputation for simply bringing into a thread, throwing a few insults around then leaving, you have no recourse to check anyone's behaviour but your own, do you understand? Good. All you had to do was make a comment about two questions that i had asked, its not much to ask? and instead we are all dumber for your contribution. Don't lecture me about anything ever again, I am fed up of your self righteous twaddle, do you understand? Good.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Christ retrospective accusation???? are you seriously accusing Jesus of retro-trollin,
bwahaha, oh man you couldn't make it up.

"Retro-trolling" is your term, I'm pointing out to you that making it a spiritual matter is as pointless as it is off target. You've been well and truly spnaked in this thread, I'd leave if I were you, while your pants are still up!

Originally posted by divegeester
"Retro-trolling" is your term, I'm pointing out to you that making it a spiritual matter is as pointless as it is off target. You've been well and truly spnaked in this thread, I'd leave if I were you, while your pants are still up!

Dude you think Jesus was retro-trollin when he said Satan was a manslayer from the beginning, its hilarious, get outta here man, I can never take you seriously again and here you are talkin about giving people a spanking, bwahahah, does it get any better, awe man thanks for the memories, let the good times roll.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
you were not asked if you care about them you were asked to reference them.

This is what you posted earlier -

It appears to me that to constantly harp on about what someone said in the past so as to confront, embarrass and/or discredit them is immoral because it refuses to take into consideration that the persons perspective may have changed and that they no longer hold the views that they did at the time.

Can you give an example or two where you have been retrospectively trolled but in the period between disclosing those views and the retro- trolling you had changed your perspective or no longer held the views you did at the time?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Dude you think Jesus was retro-trollin when he said Satan was a manslayer from the beginning, its hilarious, get outta here man, I can never take you seriously again and here you are talkin about giving people a spanking, bwahahah, does it get any better, awe man thanks for the memories, let the good times roll.

Here is what you asked:

"Do you think it consummate with your understanding of Christian principles to retrospectively drag elements up from the past so as to confront, embarrass and discredit other people?"

I've given you an example of how Christ himself reminded people of something that a celestial being, Satan, had done in the past. If Christ was against that principle he would not have done it. Your argument here has no substance, but given your track record here at RHP, I can certainly understand why you are desperate for none of you past posting history to be brought up. 😉

Originally posted by divegeester
Here is what you asked:

"Do you think it consummate with your understanding of Christian principles to retrospectively drag elements up from the past so as to confront, embarrass and discredit other people?"

I've given you an example of how Christ himself reminded people of something that a celestial being, Satan, had done in the past. If Ch ...[text shortened]... ainly understand why you are desperate for none of you past posting history to be brought up. 😉

Dude do you think that when Jesus stated in Matthew chapter four that 'it is written. ....' that he was retro-trollin Satan?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
This is what you posted earlier -

It appears to me that to constantly harp on about what someone said in the past so as to confront, embarrass and/or discredit them is immoral because it refuses to take into consideration that the persons perspective may have changed and that they no longer hold the views that they did at the time.

...[text shortened]... etro- trolling you had changed your perspective or no longer held the views you did at the time?

Yes I know what I have written but no one has claimed that retro-trolling is intended to provide people with a reason to change their perspective.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Dude do you think that when Jesus stated in Matthew chapter four that 'it is written. ....' that he was retro-trollin Satan?

It's you who believes in "retro-trolling" and you who keeps using the word over and over and over again, not divegeester. No one else here has come out and declared themselves to be subscribers to your notion of "retrospective trolling".

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Dude do you think that when Jesus stated in Matthew chapter four that 'it is written. ....' that he was retro-trollin Satan?

No, there is no such thing as "retro-trolling" except in your mind. All you questions have been answered; you seem to be floundering robbie.

Originally posted by divegeester
No, there is no such thing as "retro-trolling" except in your mind. All you questions have been answered; you seem to be floundering robbie.

On the contrary I provided a link from a third party website detailing just what retro trolling is and why people engage in it - Your silly assertion therfore stands refuted and your empty propaganda mock-worthy.

You have ignored all the Christian principles that have been cited and instead dished us up a limp cabbage of an argument to justify retro-trolling by the scurrilous use of a single Biblical text where Christ made reverence to Satan being a manslayer from the beginning as if that somehow has any bearing on the issue. It seems that you like all balloonheads you need to puff yourselves up in order to make yourself appear bigger than you really are to compensate for lack of content and this is why you feel the necessity to make repeated appeals to some kind of alleged failure. Its transparent and plastic. The only failure here is your inability to honestly address the points that were put to you, comment on the scriptures that were cited and you have been forced into a position whereby you attempted to slither out of it with the use of some completely irrelevant text. That is what has transpired Jeester and I will continue to hold the view that retrospective trolling as engaged in by you and various other reprobates is immoral and anti biblical for reasons already cited.

Originally posted by FMF
It's you who believes in "retro-trolling" and you who keeps using the word over and over and over again, not divegeester. No one else here has come out and declared themselves to be subscribers to your notion of "retrospective trolling".

oh dear see the OP it contains a third party reference to a site which details the practice, a site and reference that I did not author thoroughly refuting your bogus claim.