The mark of Cain

Originally posted by twhitehead
yes I am what? I don't get it?

Yes you are a prick; you really only see what you want to see don't you.

Originally posted by divegeester
You probably won't get a response.

There are a number of questions arising:

Why did Cain need protection? Was it because he was already different in some way or was it because an outcast he would now be vulnerable?

If the "myth" is based on a change of skin colour, why did they believe a change of skin colour would protect Cain? Wasthe mark ju ...[text shortened]... what the writers were trying to say. I've always found this passage of scripture puzzling.

Might it be more puzzling to believers, than to nonbelievers?

Suppose it's about skin color and negroid morphology in general. What is puzzling about that -- a people, based on their theology trying to explain another people.

Originally posted by divegeester
Yes you are a prick; you really only see what you want to see don't you.

The best you can do is resort to insults? Seriously, be honest now, what have I said in this thread that warrants that response from you? And no, I don't think this has anything to do with me not wanting to see things it has to do with the fact that I am not a mind reader and can't always correctly interpret your critic posts.

Go back and read through your OP as if it wasn't you that wrote it and think about what a typical reader would see in it.

Originally posted by twhitehead
The best you can do is resort to insults? Seriously, be honest now, what have I said in this thread that warrants that response from you? And no, I don't think this has anything to do with me not wanting to see things it has to do with the fact that I am not a mind reader and can't always correctly interpret your critic posts.

Go back and read through ...[text shortened]... r OP as if it wasn't you that wrote it and think about what a typical reader would see in it.

"What have I said in this thread that warrants that response from you"

You think calling me a bigot and a racist (not to mention a fundamentalist terrorist a few weeks ago) is acceptable? I think me retaliating with "prick" is quite light actually.

Perhaps you are one of these atheist hard-men who think theist-bashing at every opportunity is acceptable; perhaps you are a small-minded pernickety, argumentative, little man who hides behind the internet looking for someone "religious" to vent your pent up anger on...I don't know Mr T Whitehead; but as you are defending your own insults by referring to what you think is poorly constructed OP by myself, then I shall do the same and point out that you too are what you post.

Originally posted by divegeester
You think calling me a bigot and a racist (not to mention a fundamentalist terrorist a few weeks ago) is acceptable?

Yes, I think that given the OP it was acceptable. I do not recall calling you a fundamentalist terrorist so I didn't realize that part of your anger was a grudge from some past thread.

I think me retaliating with "prick" is quite light actually.
I still do not think such a response is warranted. Your OP is clearly racist and I said so. Instead of clarifying and saying that was not what you meant, you decided to mock my posts. I think it was perfectly reasonable for me to then ask why you refuse to address the racism in the OP.

Perhaps you are one of these atheist hard-men who think theist-bashing at every opportunity is acceptable; perhaps you are a small-minded pernickety, argumentative, little man who hides behind the internet looking for someone "religious" to vent your pent up anger on...I don't know Mr T Whitehead;
Yes, you clearly don't.

but as you are defending your own insults by referring to what you think is poorly constructed OP by myself, then I shall do the same and point out that you too are what you post.
Well I disagree that what I post is as you describe, nor do I think insults are warranted.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Yes, I think that given the OP it was acceptable. I do not recall calling you a fundamentalist terrorist so I didn't realize that part of your anger was a grudge from some past thread.

[b]I think me retaliating with "prick" is quite light actually.
I still do not think such a response is warranted. Your OP is clearly racist and I said so. I ...[text shortened]... ell I disagree that what I post is as you describe, nor do I think insults are warranted.[/b]

You can bleat and plead your innocence all you like buddy; it is unacceptable to call people bigoted racists just because you see an 'angle' in someone's posts which you can exploit. I explained myself to you twice, even apologising once for lack of clarity - did you see that? You have thrown insults of this nature at me on at least two occasions now and I'm not going to sit for it.

You see me as a bigoted racist and said so - good for you mate. I see you as a pompous weedy prick; a small man hiding behind his keyboard looking for theists to pick on - and I've said so.

Originally posted by JS357
Might it be more puzzling to believers, than to nonbelievers?

Suppose it's about skin color and negroid morphology in general. What is puzzling about that -- a people, based on their theology trying to explain another people.

Let's try again another time, thanks for posting.

Originally posted by divegeester
You have thrown insults of this nature at me on at least two occasions now and I'm not going to sit for it.

It was not intended as an insult in this instance. Do you know what the title of the other thread was? I would like to check what it was I actually said there that has made you so angry.
I would still like clarification from you as to whether you see the existence of different races as a bad thing and who if anyone, you feel is responsible for their existence.

Originally posted by twhitehead
It [calling dg a bigotted racist] was not intended as an insult in this instance.

It [calling someone a bigotted racist] was not intended as an insult in this instance.

Was it a compliment? I bet you're fun at parties.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I would like to check what it was I actually said there that has made you so angry.

Your belief that calling someone a bigoted racist would be not be received as a insult, has lifted my mood.

Originally posted by twhitehead
It was not intended as an insult in this instance.

Is that because you don't truly think I'm a bigoted racist and are just playing silly games to prove a point of some sort, or is it because you don't really care, or both?

Originally posted by divegeester
Is that because you don't truly think I'm a bigoted racist and are just playing silly games to prove a point of some sort, or is it because you don't really care, or both?

Can you quote me calling you either a bigot or a racist? All I did was seek clarification for some of your comments in the OP and you exploded with anger.
I currently think you are deliberately trying to avoid answering my questions.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Can you quote me calling you either a bigot or a racist? All I did was seek clarification for some of your comments in the OP and you exploded with anger.
I currently think you are deliberately trying to avoid answering my questions.

You're just winding me up now right? Page 2 post 8 ("your bigotry" ). And this page (the racism in the OP" ).

I'm done with this now, it's the weekend and my lovely wife needs my attention and conversation.

You are probalby not what you seem, and perhaps I'm not either. Shoot me a game if you are really interested in talking...if not, no hard feelings from me.

Have a good evening; it's just the bloody internet!

Originally posted by divegeester
You're just winding me up now right? Page 2 post 8 ("your bigotry" ). And this page (the racism in the OP" ).

The OP clearly calls being a different race a 'curse' and 'affliction'. I found that to be racist. I asked for clarification by means of several questions which you have not tendered.
But it remains the statement in the OP that I have called racist and not you. Yes, I suggested you address your bigotry because you refused to address it. Maybe you weren't even being bigoted, but how can we know when you refuse to address the points?
Once again, I am not calling you a racist bigot. Its not the same thing at all. At no point in this thread have I addressed you that way. You on the other hand called me a 'prick' and admitted that it was intended as a direct insult.

You are probalby not what you seem, and perhaps I'm not either.
I am certainly not the way you interpret me, but I assure you that I try to be as open and honest as possible on this forum. But language has its limitations and we frequently misunderstand each other - hence my various questions seeking clarification which you have yet to answer.

Have a nice evening and I am sorry if I spoiled your day as that was not the intention at all.