|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
|
|
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203 |
WBAM--
Please show me a logical argument that proves God's existence (no flaming here, serious question). And true, re: RKMB's and anathema.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
theory9 said:
WBAM--
Please show me a logical argument that proves God's existence (no flaming here, serious question). And true, re: RKMB's and anathema.
I could offer any nuber of logical arguments that don't presuppose the existence of god then we would spend the next 50 posts debating the premise. That's why in response to you're saying theres no argument to prove the existence of God I didn't say "you're wrong" I said it's debatable. I don't have the time or desire to debate the existence of God because it's on of those endless debates. I'm not trying to write you off or anything I just don't have time to post much lately and that's why I've been avoiding this thread, but I had to respond since you mentioned Aquinus.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
|
|
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
theory9 said:
If one claims that the physical world is God, where does this evidence come from?
Inconsistency. The standards by which people use to figure out the interior components of reality keep to specific characteristics in scientific theory (i.e. it's uniformitarian). The whole of what is popularly considered "logic" (by secularism) is based upon the idea that there was no God to create the universe we inhabit. Thus it couldn't have been a designer who made us--However, there are things that are veritably unexplainable through scientific analysis and serve as a juxtapostion to other theories supposedly proven by the science in question.
Quote:
The Bible? Epiphanies?
If one were to govern his life and conclusions by "logic" this day and age, a person would conclude that more than one massly practiced philosophy can co-exist within society and still allow the well-being of all the people within it. In other words: You can live your life properly with not just one, but multiple philosphies. However, "properly" would imply a perfect philosophy, one without flaw. In which case, at some point, the way you live your life will come up short and you lose balance. More than that, the fact that there can be only one true and perfect philosophy means that more than one can't co-exist.
The Biblical scripture is the first philosophy ever created and I think I've pretty well established that its the founder of morals--And ethics are the logical extension of said morals. Not only has it been the most successful at maintaining peace in its established society and practitioner (tills its teachings are deviated from), but the wisest individuals of the past, most of whom hadn't anything to do with religion, came to the same conclusions that Judaism and Christianity had (that's as far as epiphanies go). This text was supposedly, as purported from decidedly credible sources, to be God's teachings. His philosophy.
Quote:
Any argument that proves God's existence assumes his existence, and the philosopher closest to marrying logic and faith (Aquinas) gave up this enterprise.
Firstly: Thomas Aquinas was not the only logical Christian. There were many and there are many.
Secondly: He didn't give up any such thing.
Quote:
2. The Bible is not proof of God's existence.
I never tried to say it was. My purpose in arguing about the Bible was to show to r3x, you, and Magicjay that there's more credibility within its pages than you'd care to admit.
You look at a modern history book and see something printed on the page, you'll automatically assume that's the facts of the past event. Why do you trust that book and not the Bible--Even when the Bible is secularly admited as historically valuable? Answer: Because it involves religion. Period. Their apparently best argument against the book's credibility is 'that it happened a long time ago, so no one's sure'. With that kind of reasoning, I could de-stablize the credibility of just about any history book that breaks the 300 year mark--And this would be including the historical artifacts that speak for it (considering that the Bible's evidence is constantly ignored). More to point: My sources for concluding that there is a God aren't logical or credible simply because modern times doesn't want to acknowledge them. So I hope you realize how much I can't appreciate your lip-service for you being the only one here who knows what's logical and what's not.
Quote:
I never said the sites were faked, only that the threshold for legitimate evidence is higher when you consider conventional possibilities.
"Threshold for legitimate evidence"? "Conventional possibilities"?
This is rationalization at its worst. This is the kinda stuff that people say when they don't want to acknowledge historical events in conjunction with the Bible, which are more than merely coincidental. Whatever the scenario is, there is absolutely no God, and therefore any explanation involving his intervention would be scrapped. Nothing that mentions God is "conventional".
This isn't Occam's Razor Theo. This a conversation regarding whether or not God does exist. Meaning we're trying to decide if God should be included in Occam's Razor.
Quote:
4. I have already provided extensive proof of the Catholic Church's "oversights" during WWII; scholars have exhaustively verifed that that Catholic Church committed aforementioned oversights.
Well, I'm sorry you've fallen victim to your own pride (secularist media majority), but your sources are all propogandists who draw to conclusions too quickly because all of their end scenarios involve defaming the Church. None of who you quoted has indisputable evidence of the Church collaborating with the Nazi's. All they have is guilt by association.
Quote:
5. Just like morality/ethics, being respectful and level-headed contains objective standards. Most of the things you say here ("jackass", "dumbass" and others) are things that simply wouldn't say during the course of a legitimate argument, because it weakens your position. You've found a lot of things that simply don't stand up in the face of real debate skills. Good luck, kid.
Whilst I think it hardly matters, I've localized those isults to the certain posters here, including you, who felt like belittling and lying about what I believe in and am arguing in defense of.
r3x is a liar and antagonizer who's arguing simply for the sake of winning an argument. And he hates me.
Magicjay is also an antagonizer who decides to argue against things he knows nothing about smply because they notably speak against whatever he believes in some way. And when he fails to do anything in the way of effectively making a point or at all contradicting me, he tries to be as offensive as possible. And he hates me.
You, whilst not as bad, have shown yourself to be under the same category, within this thread, as those very antagonizers.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 188
100+ posts
|
|
100+ posts
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 188 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
Magicjay is also an antagonizer who decides to argue against things he knows nothing about smply because they notably speak against whatever he believes in some way. And when he fails to do anything in the way of effectively making a point or at all contradicting me, he tries to be as offensive as possible. And he hates me.
You, whilst not as bad, have shown yourself to be under the same category, within this thread, as those very antagonizers.
 Heaven and HellI do know about the things we've discussed in this thread. I just have a very different take on reality than you. And I don't hate you, BTW. In fact I find you rather amusing! 
The G-man says: You are GOOD
r3x29yz4a is my hero!
rex says I'm a commie, asshole, fag!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
The Biblical scripture is the first philosophy ever created and I think I've pretty well established that its the founder of morals--And ethics are the logical extension of said morals.
Still, I could've sworn I had a book of Plato's Philosophies at home.
Quote:
Not only has it been the most successful at maintaining peace in its established society
The Crusades never happened?
KKK never existed?
Abortion Clinic shootings and bombings are dreams I had after eating a bad taco?
Quote:
and practitioner (tills its teachings are deviated from), but the wisest individuals of the past, most of whom hadn't anything to do with religion, came to the same conclusions that Judaism and Christianity had (that's as far as epiphanies go).
Gandhi, Buddha, Dali Llama?
Quote:
I never tried to say it was. My purpose in arguing about the Bible was to show to r3x, you, and Magicjay that there's more credibility within its pages than you'd care to admit.
I've said that the Bible documents certain geological events but that you can't prove for certain the participants of those events or the causes of those events.
The Bible has historical relevance because so many people in the last 2 thousand years have believed in it.
I've conceded its a historically relevant story, but not provable fact.
Quote:
You look at a modern history book and see something printed on the page, you'll automatically assume that's the facts of the past event.
High school and earlier history books I wouldn't believe. College text books I would if they backed it up with names and dates and showed original documents that I could research on my own.
Quote:
Why do you trust that book and not the Bible--Even when the Bible is secularly admited as historically valuable? Answer: Because it involves religion. Period. Their apparently best argument against the book's credibility is 'that it happened a long time ago, so no one's sure'. With that kind of reasoning, I could de-stablize the credibility of just about any history book that breaks the 300 year mark--And this would be including the historical artifacts that speak for it (considering that the Bible's evidence is constantly ignored). More to point: My sources for concluding that there is a God aren't logical or credible simply because modern times doesn't want to acknowledge them. So I hope you realize how much I can't appreciate your lip-service for you being the only one here who knows what's logical and what's not.
you love to villify us, huh?
The bible is unproven. You can prove that George Washington crossed the Delaware. You can prove that Slavery existed. You can prove who ruled England in what year.
Because there are books from the time, personal letters from the time, in other words proof.
The Bible is unprovable. However, I'll rethink that theory if you produce one 2 thousand year old piece of writing (not an old bible) that talks about the same events and people and causes of the events that the bible does.
And if you produce 5 two thousand year old pieces of writing, or 10, or a 100 then I'll have proof in which to base my belief that it happened.
Right now you can only produce a book and some archaelogical dig that shows a city fell down at roughly the same time the bible mentions a city being wiped out by a magic horn.
Quote:
r3x is a liar and antagonizer who's arguing simply for the sake of winning an argument. And he hates me.
fuck you too. I argue when I feel I'm right and won't back down to dumb theologies about magic.
Believe it, fine.
But don't shove it in my face unless you've got proof beyond the fact that your storybook has been reprinted over the years.
Quote:
Magicjay is also an antagonizer who decides to argue against things he knows nothing about smply because they notably speak against whatever he believes in some way. And when he fails to do anything in the way of effectively making a point or at all contradicting me, he tries to be as offensive as possible. And he hates me.
go read this thread please. you've insulted us way more than we insulted you. (well, more than he's insulted you, poopy pants).
Quote:
You, whilst not as bad, have shown yourself to be under the same category, within this thread, as those very antagonizers.
"whilst?"
thou seeks to sound of higher intellect but thine cries of godhood fall on deaf ears.
Bow ties are coool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 7,030 |
Pariah said: Quote:
Pariah said:
The Biblical scripture is the first philosophy ever created and I think I've pretty well established that its the founder of morals--And ethics are the logical extension of said morals.
Wow, you have dismissed all Eastern and non-Judeo-Christian philosophies with a few mere words.
But you haven't established a goddamn thing! Do you think knowledge of the Universe comes out of your belly button??
Why don't you actually read outside the Bible and open up your pussilanimous little vision of the world.
We all wear a green carnation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,205
fudge 4000+ posts
|
|
fudge 4000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,205 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
The Biblical scripture is the first philosophy ever created and I think I've pretty well established that its the founder of morals.
you know that's not true
 Racks be to MisterJLA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
Quote:
Chant said:
Quote:
Pariah said:
The Biblical scripture is the first philosophy ever created and I think I've pretty well established that its the founder of morals.
you know that's not true
it is true. the Bible says so.
Bow ties are coool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
|
|
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203 |
*wakes up for ignorance-induced slumber*
[responds to Pariah's stupidity]
Was that fuckin' idiot Pariah talkin' again??? I'm gonna insult that product of incest and ignore every redneck, hillbilly, KKK racist white ass! Yee-hah! And don't fergit--yer movie with Jessica Simpson is comin' out soon! Redneck morons unite![/responds to Pariah's stupidity]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 188
100+ posts
|
|
100+ posts
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 188 |
Quote:
theory9 said:
*wakes up for ignorance-induced slumber*
[responds to Pariah's stupidity]
Was that fuckin' idiot Pariah talkin' again??? I'm gonna insult that product of incest and ignore every redneck, hillbilly, KKK racist white ass! Yee-hah! And don't fergit--yer movie with Jessica Simpson is comin' out soon! Redneck morons unite![/responds to Pariah's stupidity]
Okay, maybe I do hate him!
I nominate Pariah for Late Term Abortion Poster-Child 
The G-man says: You are GOOD
r3x29yz4a is my hero!
rex says I'm a commie, asshole, fag!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
Still, I could've sworn I had a book of Plato's Philosophies at home.
Moses and his teachings/Judea predated Classical Greece.
Quote:
The Crusades never happened?
Once again. The Crusades were retaliation on the part of the Europeans.
Quote:
KKK never existed?
The KKK is not based around Christian philosophy or derivative of such.
Quote:
Abortion Clinic shootings and bombings are dreams I had after eating a bad taco?
Again, not based around Christian philosophy. Those offenders came to their own conclusions about what God would want without actually analyzing how wrong it would be according to that very philosophy.
Quote:
Gandhi,
No.
Quote:
Buddha,
Yes.
Quote:
Dali Llama?
Yes.
There was also Nietzsche, to name another name, even though he'd never admit it himself. And then there were the Greek philosophers we were talking about earlier.
Quote:
I've said that the Bible documents certain geological events but that you can't prove for certain the participants of those events or the causes of those events.
If that's the case, then I can compromise the every history book that describes past historical figures and their actions from 1800 going backwards--Hell! Even earlier than that. You can't prove their presence was their except through writing and unconfirmable geological evidence. Technically, that means your historical sources are just as corrupted as mine.
Quote:
The Bible has historical relevance because so many people in the last 2 thousand years have believed in it.
You just admitted up top that geological evidence proves past occurence is in allignment with the Bible's re-tellings. You wanna re-tract it?
Quote:
I've conceded its a historically relevant story, but not provable fact.
No historically relevant story is provable fact.
Quote:
you love to villify us, huh?
You do a pretty good job of that yourself.
Quote:
The bible is unproven. You can prove that George Washington crossed the Delaware. You can prove that Slavery existed. You can prove who ruled England in what year.
Because there are books from the time, personal letters from the time, in other words proof.
And it's only through those writings that you have any empirical evidence to the idea that the events happened. But not tangible proof. So, again, your sources are in the same boat as mine. They always were in fact.
Quote:
The Bible is unprovable. However, I'll rethink that theory if you produce one 2 thousand year old piece of writing (not an old bible) that talks about the same events and people and causes of the events that the bible does.
And if you produce 5 two thousand year old pieces of writing, or 10, or a 100 then I'll have proof in which to base my belief that it happened.
Right now you can only produce a book and some archaelogical dig that shows a city fell down at roughly the same time the bible mentions a city being wiped out by a magic horn.
If you knew anything about the matter, you'd know that there were five historians and many documents that were related to the happenings of the Old Testament whilst remaining separated from the Bible itself. As you say, this is the same type of evidence you have of your chosen occurences you feel hold more evidenciary support than Biblical accounts--Plus, geology and archeology backs up both explanations as well. Meaning you have no true reason or authority to discount the Bible using those given standards.
And it wasn't a magical horn.
Quote:
fuck you too. I argue when I feel I'm right and won't back down to dumb theologies about magic.
Believe it, fine.
No magic here son. Perhaps you're thinking of Simon Magus.
Quote:
But don't shove it in my face unless you've got proof beyond the fact that your storybook has been reprinted over the years.
Shove it in your face? You've decided to argue about with me.
And haven't secular history books been reprinted hundreds of times over the years?
Quote:
go read this thread please. you've insulted us way more than we insulted you. (well, more than he's insulted you, poopy pants).
Sure r3x, suuuuuurrre.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
Still, I could've sworn I had a book of Plato's Philosophies at home.
Moses and his teachings/Judea predated Classical Greece.
But they had nothing to do with Greece.
Quote:
The Crusades never happened?
Once again. The Crusades were retaliation on the part of the Europeans.
well, the crusades were after the Muslims left Europe, so you're talking about wars of revenge. Is that a christian concept now?
Quote:
KKK never existed?
The KKK is not based around Christian philosophy or derivative of such.
A bunch of Atheists, are they?
Quote:
Abortion Clinic shootings and bombings are dreams I had after eating a bad taco?
Again, not based around Christian philosophy. Those offenders came to their own conclusions about what God would want without actually analyzing how wrong it would be according to that very philosophy.
same as you did. all religious people come to their own conclusions.
Bow ties are coool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
Still, I could've sworn I had a book of Plato's Philosophies at home.
Moses and his teachings/Judea predated Classical Greece.
Quote:
The Crusades never happened?
Once again. The Crusades were retaliation on the part of the Europeans.
Quote:
KKK never existed?
The KKK is not based around Christian philosophy or derivative of such.
Quote:
Abortion Clinic shootings and bombings are dreams I had after eating a bad taco?
Again, not based around Christian philosophy. Those offenders came to their own conclusions about what God would want without actually analyzing how wrong it would be according to that very philosophy.
Sure r3x, suuuuuurrre.
Does anyone else find it really annoying to chop someone else's post into little sound bites? It gives the replier easy rebutal, but it takes the original post out of context. It also becomes so long that it ends the topic since no one wants to read the post.
If the original post was given in narrative form the replier has a duty to respond in kind.
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Does anyone else find it really annoying
yes. yes, i do.
Quote:
to chop someone else's
ow! that's gotta hurt!
Quote:
post into little sound bites?
Quote:
It gives the replier easy rebutal, but it takes the original post out of context.
so, you do support Hitler?
Quote:
It also becomes so long that it ends the topic since no one wants to read the post.
it's how Pariah wins these things. everyone else get's bored trying to remember what they typed that he's replying to.
Quote:
If the original post was given in narrative form the replier has a duty to respond in kind.
Bow ties are coool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
If the original post was given in narrative form the replier has a duty to respond in kind.
OK, mom.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
But they had nothing to do with Greece.
Aaaaannnnd....What's your point?
I said it was the first philosophy, not the only one. I never said anything about relating the two.
Quote:
well, the crusades were after the Muslims left Europe, so you're talking about wars of revenge. Is that a christian concept now?
You actually tried to use this before...3 pages ago. It was idiotic then and it still is now.
Europe was ruled by an objectivist government--All governments were and are. The idea behind such a government philosophy is to secure the well being of the country, which that government runs, at all costs. In which case, to secure the citizens that made up the population of that country, Europe retaliated against Islam after they took Jerusalem. Because Christianity teaches to help those in need, the government protecting the proliteriate through an offense upon would be invaders is very much so analogous to Christian principle. However, Christianity itself, nor its principles, were the reason that Europe went to war. It was because they were attacked first.
So, in short, you've totally misinterpreted history and re-defined the context of my arguments--On purpose I might add.
Quote:
A bunch of Atheists, are they?
Where did I say they were atheists? I don't remember reading anywhere that the burning cross actually represented a holy crucifix on the part of KKK members.
The overall fact here is that Christianity is not a prime motivation for the practitioners of the KKK and the philosophy of Christianity, moreover, does not encourage their behavior.
Quote:
same as you did. all religious people come to their own conclusions.
I'm sorry, but the Ten Commandments are very straight-forward, and they speak specifically against such actions as murder and harming other peoples' goods.
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Does anyone else find it really annoying to chop someone else's post into little sound bites?
It also becomes so long that it ends the topic since no one wants to read the post.
r3x obviously doesn't mind considering he does it himself and still responds to me when I make point by point posts.
Quote:
It gives the replier easy rebutal, but it takes the original post out of context.
My reply did no such thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
|
|
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203 |
Please stop refering to governments as "objectivist": you're misusing the term. Try realist instead, so that you'll appear to understand the material.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
Aaaaannnnd....What's your point?
That the Greeks got along fine on coming up with morality and ethics without your god.
Quote:
You actually tried to use this before...3 pages ago. It was idiotic then and it still is now.
3 pages ago was like 3 months ago. I'm not so into this argument that I'm going to reread every little bit of it from the past.
Quote:
Europe was ruled by an objectivist government--All governments were and are. The idea behind such a government philosophy is to secure the well being of the country, which that government runs, at all costs. In which case, to secure the citizens that made up the population of that country, Europe retaliated against Islam after they took Jerusalem. Because Christianity teaches to help those in need, the government protecting the proliteriate through an offense upon would be invaders is very much so analogous to Christian principle. However, Christianity itself, nor its principles, were the reason that Europe went to war. It was because they were attacked first.
you come off as a surly teenager who found a philosophy book and misinterpreted everything but still quote it to look smart.
Quote:
Where did I say they were atheists? I don't remember reading anywhere that the burning cross actually represented a holy crucifix on the part of KKK members.
The Klan is a fringe religious organization, and you know it.
Quote:
The overall fact here is that Christianity is not a prime motivation for the practitioners of the KKK and the philosophy of Christianity, moreover, does not encourage their behavior.
They are as much a representation of Christianity as Islamic terrorists are a representation of Islam as a whole.
Quote:
I'm sorry, but the Ten Commandments are very straight-forward, and they speak specifically against such actions as murder and harming other peoples' goods.
Thou shalt not kill doesn't cover executions but does cover abortions?
People still interpret it their own way.
Bow ties are coool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 920
500+ posts
|
|
500+ posts
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 920 |
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
"Jesus Too Wimpy For Conservative America"
People still interpret it their own way.
Everything is funny as long as it is happening to somebody else. --Will Rogers
"I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees." - George W. Bush
I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would .. try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile. - Condoleeza Rice
Barbara Bush: It's Good Enough for the Poor
To comfort the powerless and make the powerful uncomfortable.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
|
|
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
Quote:
unrestrained id said:
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
<a href="Jesus Too Wimpy For Conservative America" target="_blank">People still interpret it their own way.</a>
dude, you can't link a thread to itself. that's threadosexual.
Bow ties are coool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
But they had nothing to do with Greece.
Aaaaannnnd....What's your point?
I said it was the first philosophy, not the only one. I never said anything about relating the two.
Quote:
well, the crusades were after the Muslims left Europe, so you're talking about wars of revenge. Is that a christian concept now?
You actually tried to use this before...3 pages ago. It was idiotic then and it still is now.
Europe was ruled by an objectivist government--All governments were and are. The idea behind such a government philosophy is to secure the well being of the country, which that government runs, at all costs. In which case, to secure the citizens that made up the population of that country, Europe retaliated against Islam after they took Jerusalem. Because Christianity teaches to help those in need, the government protecting the proliteriate through an offense upon would be invaders is very much so analogous to Christian principle. However, Christianity itself, nor its principles, were the reason that Europe went to war. It was because they were attacked first.
So, in short, you've totally misinterpreted history and re-defined the context of my arguments--On purpose I might add.
Quote:
A bunch of Atheists, are they?
Where did I say they were atheists? I don't remember reading anywhere that the burning cross actually represented a holy crucifix on the part of KKK members.
The overall fact here is that Christianity is not a prime motivation for the practitioners of the KKK and the philosophy of Christianity, moreover, does not encourage their behavior.
Quote:
same as you did. all religious people come to their own conclusions.
I'm sorry, but the Ten Commandments are very straight-forward, and they speak specifically against such actions as murder and harming other peoples' goods.
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Does anyone else find it really annoying to chop someone else's post into little sound bites?
It also becomes so long that it ends the topic since no one wants to read the post.
r3x obviously doesn't mind considering he does it himself and still responds to me when I make point by point posts.
Quote:
It gives the replier easy rebutal, but it takes the original post out of context.
My reply did no such thing.
Yes it does. It's lazy of both of you. You and r3x aren't the only ones reading this. You're writing to a broader audience than him. Why are we arguing, yet again, over the meaning of a bunch of faerie tales? Take r3x's post as a whole and write a coherent rebuttal (I understand you're coherence and truth challenged). Write no more than 3 paragraphs telling me why he's wrong.
You can't do it!
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,952 Likes: 6 |
Since many of the posts here involve lengthy and complicated arguments, touching on more than one issue, and given that, much of the time, the original post and the responsive post are separated by one or two unrelated posts, I don't see why it's wrong to respond point by point.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
That the Greeks got along fine on coming up with morality and ethics without your god.
This is a complete switch of tangent. First we're talking about which philosophy came first, and then you start getting into the specifics of the philosophy itself. You're really getting desparate huh?
In any event, as was divulged earlier, Plato and Socrate's ethical ideals were indeed very successful. Something else to note, however, is that their ethical philosophy was alike to the Judea philosophy--Just short of the concept of morality. Meaning their rules carried the same principles.
And as far as God goes: Both Plato and Socrates, again, were mono-theists just as Judea was. They found logic ground in the idea that their was a God, just as the Jewish were asserting at that time--And even before then.
Quote:
3 pages ago was like 3 months ago. I'm not so into this argument that I'm going to reread every little bit of it from the past.
3 months ago? Way to sling the hyperbole.
Quote:
:izzatso:
you come off as a surly teenager who found a philosophy book and misinterpreted everything but still quote it to look smart.
Misinterpreted everything? Is this some sort of implication that you have the correct interpretation?
Quote:
The Klan is a fringe religious organization, and you know it.
No. They're not. Not all Klansmen are Christian and Christianity was never the root of its foundation.
Quote:
They are as much a representation of Christianity as Islamic terrorists are a representation of Islam as a whole.
Again: The KKK was not founded based on Christianity, and, moreover, there is nothing within Christianity that would allude to such actions. Klansmen aren't Klansmen because they're Christian. They're Klansmen because they hate black people. Muslim terrorists, however, do what they do in the name of Islam. That's a very clear foundation right there. And what's more, their doctrine also calls for such actions. Christian extremists do not truly represent their religion in their actions, whereas Muslims do.
Quote:
Thou shalt not kill doesn't cover executions but does cover abortions?
People still interpret it their own way.
Even though it is my personal belief that it does cover abortions, where did I actually say that it did? I said that the terrorists who kill abortion doctors are going against the very philosophy they claim to represent.
As for "not covering executions"; that depends on the scenario and whether or not the execution was based on just conglomeration and representation of empirical evidence.
Quote:
theory9 said:
Please stop refering to governments as "objectivist": you're misusing the term. Try realist instead, so that you'll appear to understand the material.
No. I'm not.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
This is a complete switch of tangent. First we're talking about which philosophy came first, and then you start getting into the specifics of the philosophy itself. You're really getting desparate huh?
this started when you said civilization was based on a foundation of Judeo/Christianity.
I said you were wrong.
Quote:
3 months ago? Way to sling the hyperbole.
I'm no wasting my time going back and rereading every nuance of every thread. I'll respond to what you're typing now, but I have these religious debates enough that it could've been anytime this thread got started.
Way to focus on the issues, junior.
Quote:
No. They're not. Not all Klansmen are Christian and Christianity was never the root of its foundation.
show me the Jewish Klansman. Show me the non-Christians who use the cross as a symbol in this modern age.
Quote:
Again: The KKK was not founded based on Christianity, and, moreover, there is nothing within Christianity that would allude to such actions.
there's no slaves in the bible, no oppression in the bible?
and to my knowledge there was nothing about grand iquisitions in the biblical text, but the Spanish still did it.
The Virginians still did their Witch Trials.
Quote:
Klansmen aren't Klansmen because they're Christian. They're Klansmen because they hate black people. Muslim terrorists, however, do what they do in the Islam. That's a very clear foundation right there. And what's more, their also calls for such actions. Christian extremists do not truly represent their religion in their actions, whereas Muslims do.
you're such a bigot. Islam does not teach violence and terrorism (the CIA taught them that, but it's a whole other issue).
There's as much violence and bloodshed in the bible as the koran. With both religions the mainstream these days denounce violence.
So same as how you might be offended with the cross being used as a sign of death (which is it's original purpose technically) so might the majority of Muslims be appalled by terrorist acts.
Quote:
Even though it is my personal belief that it does cover abortions, where did I actually say that it did? I said that the terrorists who kill abortion doctors are going against the very philosophy they claim to represent.
you said the ten commandments were straight forward and not really open to interpretation, I was making the argument that any religious text can be interpreted to the reader's views.
Bow ties are coool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
Quote:
Pariah said:
Aaaaannnnd....What's your point?
That the Greeks got along fine on coming up with morality and ethics without your god.
Quote:
You actually tried to use this before...3 pages ago. It was idiotic then and it still is now.
3 pages ago was like 3 months ago. I'm not so into this argument that I'm going to reread every little bit of it from the past.
Quote:
Europe was ruled by an objectivist government--All governments were and are. The idea behind such a government philosophy is to secure the well being of the country, which that government runs, at all costs. In which case, to secure the citizens that made up the population of that country, Europe retaliated against Islam after they took Jerusalem. Because Christianity teaches to help those in need, the government protecting the proliteriate through an offense upon would be invaders is very much so analogous to Christian principle. However, Christianity itself, nor its principles, were the reason that Europe went to war. It was because they were attacked first.
you come off as a surly teenager who found a philosophy book and misinterpreted everything but still quote it to look smart.
Quote:
Where did I say they were atheists? I don't remember reading anywhere that the burning cross actually represented a holy crucifix on the part of KKK members.
The Klan is a fringe religious organization, and you know it.
Quote:
The overall fact here is that Christianity is not a prime motivation for the practitioners of the KKK and the philosophy of Christianity, moreover, does not encourage their behavior.
They are as much a representation of Christianity as Islamic terrorists are a representation of Islam as a whole.
Quote:
I'm sorry, but the Ten Commandments are very straight-forward, and they speak specifically against such actions as murder and harming other peoples' goods.
Thou shalt not kill doesn't cover executions but does cover abortions?
People still interpret it their own way.
The Jews borrowed heavily from the 2 empires that affected them in their early days: Egypt and Mesapotamia. The whole idea of monotheism was first promoted by Ahknaten who was Pharoh for part of the time jews spent in servitude. Hence you have Moses with his knickers in a knot over idols and one god. Old Yaweh himself was base on a God called Baal by the Mesapotamians. The point is Judaisim was not by any stretch the first religion or philosophy as you call it.
Some how I thought objectivism was a philosophy created in the 20th century by Ayn Rand, who at this very moment is giving Karl Marx a rim job in hell. It's vision of utopia involves free market capitalism with very little government, free love and social darwinism. That doesn't sound like the Roman Empire or the Middle Ages in Europe. And by the way, Pariah, I don't think objectivists are very big on the god thing either. It conflicts with being master of your own destiny.
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
this started when you said civilization was based on a foundation of Judeo/Christianity.
I said you were wrong.
I said no such thing. All I said was that it was the first real and orchestrated philosophy to be created.
Quote:
I'm no wasting my time going back and rereading every nuance of every thread. I'll respond to what you're typing now, but I have these religious debates enough that it could've been anytime this thread got started.
Way to focus on the issues, junior.
I'm not sure what the last sentence is supposed to mean, but if you don't want to show the courtesy of reading back on the subject, as I have done, just to make sure we're arguing proper context, then you shouldn't have even responded to my post that resurrected this topic. I find it hard to believe that you've already forgotten the fact that you're repeating the arguments you're using now and have failed to refutiate my pointing out their flaws mere pages ago.
Quote:
show me the Jewish Klansman.
This doesn't prove shit. simply cuz' there weren't any Jews apart of the Klan, that doesn't mean the Klan itself is an official concentration of Christians. You'd prolly find Jewish people who hate black people, whilst not being apart of the Klan, though.
Quote:
Show me the non-Christians who use the cross as a symbol in this modern age.
Again, not all of the KKK were/are Christians. That's just your gross estimation based solely on the fact that Klan activity was centered in the Bible Belt. That, in and of itself, is not a proper indicator.
Quote:
there's no slaves in the bible, no oppression in the bible?
No. There's no encouragement of either--If that's what you're getting at. There are, however, analogous situations presented in the form of slavery and oppression on how to deal with such situations if you are indeed the oppressed or slave. And there's also verses within the Bible that say what do if in the vicinity of oppressed individuals; help them.
Quote:
and to my knowledge there was nothing about grand iquisitions in the biblical text, but the Spanish still did it.
The Spanish inquistion in particular wasn't acting on Vatican authority. When inquistions were officially instated, most were genuinely used for teaching.
In any event. I already explained to you that because the heinous acts in some of the inquisition are not endorsed by the Bible, it's not truly apart of the religion/philosophy and is moreso a problem with fanatics. So your absurd spin and attempt at double-speak fails.
Quote:
The Virginians still did their Witch Trials.
I can't really speak much for the Protestants since their version of the religion was changed according to Lutheran standards from Catholicism's. However, I'd be willing to bet that there was nothing in their doctrine that equated such behavior and they relied solely on fanaticism. In which, case the problem was themselves and not the religion--Although that does not mean I endorse Protestantism.
Quote:
you're such a bigot. Islam does not teach violence and terrorism (the CIA taught them that, but it's a whole other issue).
The legitimate teachings of Islam does indeed. We've already gone over this in past pages as well as recent posts.
Quote:
There's as much violence and bloodshed in the bible as the koran. With both religions the mainstream these days denounce violence.
The Bible describes bloodshed and violence. It does not, however, give credence to its use.
Quote:
So same as how you might be offended with the cross being used as a sign of death (which is it's original purpose technically) so might the majority of Muslims be appalled by terrorist acts.
Perhaps, but that doesn't change the fact that the religion itself is indeed proponed to such actions as terrorism since it is a way to carry out a Jihad.
Quote:
you said the ten commandments were straight forward and not really open to interpretation, I was making the argument that any religious text can be interpreted to the reader's views.
So what you're trying to say is that these particular terrorists took "Thou shalt not kill" to mean, "Kill abortion doctors"?
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
The Jews borrowed heavily from the 2 empires that affected them in their early days: Egypt and Mesapotamia. The whole idea of monotheism was first promoted by Ahknaten who was Pharoh for part of the time jews spent in servitude. Hence you have Moses with his knickers in a knot over idols and one god. Old Yaweh himself was base on a God called Baal by the Mesapotamians. The point is Judaisim was not by any stretch the first religion or philosophy as you call it.
This is totally wrong. Both Egypt and Mesopatamia were polytheistic-based countries. And Baal had nothing to do with Yaweh. And my assertion was that the Judaism religion was the first philosophy, not the first religion.
Quote:
Some how I thought objectivism was a philosophy created in the 20th century by Ayn Rand, who at this very moment is giving Karl Marx a rim job in hell. It's vision of utopia involves free market capitalism with very little government, free love and social darwinism. That doesn't sound like the Roman Empire or the Middle Ages in Europe. And by the way, Pariah, I don't think objectivists are very big on the god thing either. It conflicts with being master of your own destiny.
Objectivism's been around forever. Ayn Rand just gave it a name and more pronounced protocol so it could be more legitimately claimed as a true philosophy.
As for the "master of your own destiny" shite: Running a country through objectivism and practicing it as an individual are two very different things.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000
5000+ posts
|
|
5000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
The Jews borrowed heavily from the 2 empires that affected them in their early days: Egypt and Mesapotamia. The whole idea of monotheism was first promoted by Ahknaten who was Pharoh for part of the time jews spent in servitude. Hence you have Moses with his knickers in a knot over idols and one god. Old Yaweh himself was base on a God called Baal by the Mesapotamians. The point is Judaisim was not by any stretch the first religion or philosophy as you call it.
Oh man. Thanks. I really needed that.
<sub>Will Eisner's last work - The Plot: The Secret Story of the Protocols of the Elders of ZionRDCW Profile"Well, as it happens, I wrote the damned SOP," Illescue half snarled, "and as of now, you can bar those jackals from any part of this facility until Hell's a hockey rink! Is that perfectly clear?!" - Dr. Franz Illescue - Honor Harrington: At All Costs"I don't know what I'm do, or how I do, I just do." - Alexander Ovechkin</sub>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 85
25+ posts
|
|
25+ posts
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 85 |
Quote:
PenWing said:
The questions I would like to discuss are about religion in general. Are religions a good thing, or a bad thing? Are there pros to believing in one religion? Are there cons? Are religions good for society, or do they hurt it? Would it be benificial for everyone to believe the same thing, or are there advantages in having many people with a variety of beliefs? Should someone come along and make up a new religion for others to follow and believe in, if it would benifit society as a whole, or does something like this hurt everyone?
I don't believe anything is good or bad unless it's used for good or bad, just as I don't believe anything or anyone is completely good or evil (with a few exceptions).
When religion is used to justify evil deeds, it's bad - or at least that aspect or usage of a religion is bad.
When religion enriches someone's life and state of mind in a healthy and positive way, it's a good thing.
"Just because I don't like to fight doesn't mean that I can't."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 85
25+ posts
|
|
25+ posts
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 85 |
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
I'm amazed that past misdeeds play such a big role in determining the net worth of religions worldwide. Animosity is human nature.
So is holding a grudge.
Quote:
I think that faith is one of the most vital weapons in overcoming the baser elements of human nature, and I would suggest that those who believe otherwise are so convinced because they had unfortunate encounters with 'religious' individuals who refused to do so.
This sounds a lot like what a Jewish friend of mine once told me. He said that religion is more than a set of rules and restrictions. It's God's way of helping us master our baser instincts and channel them in positive and constructive ways.
I don't know if this is a universal idea amongst the religions, but I liked the sound of that idea. It brings a real world relevancy to religion that seems to often be overlooked in many discussions about it.
Last edited by Methos; 2005-08-15 5:37 AM.
"Just because I don't like to fight doesn't mean that I can't."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 85
25+ posts
|
|
25+ posts
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 85 |
I'm seeing the Crusades come up quite a bit in this thread, and I feel like those who refer to them only have a partial picture of the crusades and their history.
I'd like to recommend a book to anyone who's interested in the real history of the Crusades: "Chronicles Of The Crusades" (edited by Elizabeth Hallam) In addition to providing a history of all nine Crusades and the history that led up to them and followed them, it also features many written accounts by those who were there, from Christian, Muslim, and Jewish perspectives. Anyone who's seriously interested in learning about the Crusades should track down this book and read it thouroughly. (I don't recommend buying it if you don't need to, because it's expensive. However, your local libraries might have it available.)
"Just because I don't like to fight doesn't mean that I can't."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
this started when you said civilization was based on a foundation of Judeo/Christianity.
I said you were wrong.
I said no such thing. All I said was that it was the first real and orchestrated philosophy to be created.
Quote:
Pariah originally said:
http://www.rkmbs.com/...true#Post561020
The founding religions of Judeoism and Christianity created society.
it's so sad, this is how people like you go about things. you say one thing, then contradict it later. I'm sure you'll come in and tell me that you really meant something else, or that I'm idiot for some reason.
You, pariah, are a perfect example of why religion is bad for society. you sit around angrily typing idiotic (and sometimes bigotted) things and feel secure in being stupid because you've got a whole religion behind you that's just as stupid (not all members, just the vocal majority) and bigotted.
Bow ties are coool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
Quote:
Pariah said:
r3x is a liar and antagonizer who's arguing simply for the sake of winning an argument. And he hates me.
I don't really give a shit about you personally. I think you're an idiot, but to hate you I'd have to care about you one way or another.
But, go ahead, play the martyr. It's what religious folks are good at (instead of actually solving problems).
I've actually met religious people who I could respect, because they came to the conversation more peacefully. They didn't have this zealous anger to prove their faith to me. They were able to discuss it calmly and respectfully and present their beliefs as they saw them.
Bow ties are coool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
|
|
The conscience of the rkmbs! 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833 Likes: 7 |
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
it's so sad, this is how people like you go about things. you say one thing, then contradict it later. I'm sure you'll come in and tell me that you really meant something else, or that I'm idiot for some reason.
Well, thank you for taking that out of context. I'm sure since you were able to read back that far, you'd notice that-that statement was prelude to our previous argument regarding pre-flood civilizations. Allow me:
Quote:
Pariah said:
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
Quote:
Pariah said:
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
Quote:
Pariah said:
The founding religions of Judeoism and Christianity created society.
I didn't know that the Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Babylonians, and Aztecs were Jewish/Christian.
Fascinating.
Those weren't the first civilizations. Pre-flood strata has shown that civilization pre-dated those cultures. And that subscribes to the account of the Old Testament.
okay, I was making a point about old civilizations. But following your flood theory then it only proves my point.
Those people weren't christians and most likely had laws and a moral structure.
The first civilization may not have been Judeo/Christian, but they most assuredly retained belief in the God from those religions. However, later down the line, they stopped caring and were proven to be exactly the opposite of what you assert. Body’s that were dug up from Deluge strata, as well as pre-Deluge strata, have shown evidence of mass amounts of sexual deviance (including incestuous pedophilia), cannibalism, and brutality. They definitely didn’t have morals. Whether or not they had laws is irrelevant in light of their behavior. If their actions were those laws, then your argument that implies lawful civilization is junked. What they were doing was neither spiritually nor secularly reasonable to be considered at all logically lawful.
Although, when you said civilization, I thought you were talking about the more recent ones surrounding Europe. So I suppose we were both a bit confused.
Quote:
You, pariah, are a perfect example of why religion is bad for society. you sit around angrily typing idiotic (and sometimes bigotted) things and feel secure in being stupid because you've got a whole religion behind you that's just as stupid (not all members, just the vocal majority) and bigotted.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000
5000+ posts
|
|
5000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000 |
Methos, thanks for your comments. Please stick around the boards. Is this the book you are talking about: Chronicles of the Crusades?
<sub>Will Eisner's last work - The Plot: The Secret Story of the Protocols of the Elders of ZionRDCW Profile"Well, as it happens, I wrote the damned SOP," Illescue half snarled, "and as of now, you can bar those jackals from any part of this facility until Hell's a hockey rink! Is that perfectly clear?!" - Dr. Franz Illescue - Honor Harrington: At All Costs"I don't know what I'm do, or how I do, I just do." - Alexander Ovechkin</sub>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 85
25+ posts
|
|
25+ posts
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 85 |
Quote:
PenWing said:
Methos, thanks for your comments. Please stick around the boards.
I think I might just do that.
Quote:
Is this the book you are talking about: Chronicles of the Crusades?
Yes, it is. I wasn't aware there was a paperback version of it.
"Just because I don't like to fight doesn't mean that I can't."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
|
|
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203 |
Quote:
PenWing said:
Methos, thanks for your comments. Please stick around the boards.
Is this the book you are talking about: Chronicles of the Crusades?
You didn't warn him about the hazing...NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 85
25+ posts
|
|
25+ posts
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 85 |
Quote:
theory9 said:
You didn't warn him about the hazing...NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
What kind of 5,000 year old would I be if I didn't know about hazing?
"Just because I don't like to fight doesn't mean that I can't."
|
|
|
|
|
