- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Good grief, eight pages of meta-debate. I think the christian god loves this sort of bickering between his sycophants. Well done!
This thread has been more entertaining than the actual debate appears to be. Just goes to show you what a dumbing-down you get when you introduce Judeo-christian mythology.
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ July 08 2010,09:48) Good grief, eight pages of meta-debate. I think the christian god loves this sort of bickering between his sycophants. Well done! This thread has been more entertaining than the actual debate appears to be. Just goes to show you what a dumbing-down you get when you introduce Judeo-christian mythology.
Stuart
KJ
Stu,
Themselves, must be. They are their own Gods. A duality of Mind plus Desire – a Tri-ism plurality.
Quote (Stu @ July 08 2010,03:48) Good grief, eight pages of meta-debate. I think the christian god loves this sort of bickering between his sycophants. Well done! This thread has been more entertaining than the actual debate appears to be. Just goes to show you what a dumbing-down you get when you introduce Judeo-christian mythology.
Stuart
you tickle meQuote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 08 2010,01:22) If you want to ask a question of me after each rebuttal then fine. But neither of us are bound by it. 
You are SOOOOO scared of my direct questions! Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 08 2010,01:32) Mike, You got to pick the topic and who goes first.
AFTER YOU ELIMINATED 4 OF THEM! And I don't ever remember picking who goes first. Whatever Jack, it's already happening. It will be what it will be.
Hey Mike,
“it will be…”
you getting in the swing now.Take the 'Roo' by the tail and 'Swing it'
And 'Roo'; “Stay on the Mike, Stay on the Mike” (let him who has wisdom understand!)
Quote (Stu @ July 08 2010,09:48) Good grief, eight pages of meta-debate. I think the christian god loves this sort of bickering between his sycophants. Well done! This thread has been more entertaining than the actual debate appears to be. Just goes to show you what a dumbing-down you get when you introduce Judeo-christian mythology.
Stuart
Yawn. Change the record Stu.Quote (Is 1:18 @ July 08 2010,15:31) Quote (Stu @ July 08 2010,09:48) Good grief, eight pages of meta-debate. I think the christian god loves this sort of bickering between his sycophants. Well done! This thread has been more entertaining than the actual debate appears to be. Just goes to show you what a dumbing-down you get when you introduce Judeo-christian mythology.
Stuart
Yawn. Change the record Stu.
Aren't christians supposed to be bickering with other christians in this thread?Pick on someone with your own delusion!
Stuart
Quote (JustAskin @ July 08 2010,14:28) Hey Mike, “it will be…”
you getting in the swing now.Take the 'Roo' by the tail and 'Swing it'
And 'Roo'; “Stay on the Mike, Stay on the Mike” (let him who has wisdom understand!)
WJ and I have reduced you to a funny man. You were once a serious student of scripture. KJ
Hey KJ,
I love you too. And thanks for the complement.
I know when you think i've done good because you say nasty things about me. It's your way, the only way you know, of saying 'hey, JA, you spoke well'
Don't worry, no one else knows your secret and you know me, i won't tell anyone else. Mum's the word, eh?
KJ,
What did I say bad. I was jousting with both you and Mike. What's wrong with that. I'm lost as to your response.
Yes, i am funny,. Hey, if one can, should one?
Did Jesus ever laugh?
Why do we laugh anyway?
I saw 'your film' last week. Did you read the post. Yeah, 'Kangaroo Jack', was on Tv… So funny, really, i laughed and laughed throughout. But then I remembered i'd seen it before…heard it all before…yeah and I laughed at Kangaroo Jack the first time round, too.Yes, kangaroo Jack, seen you before, heard you before and laughed at you just like before.
Mikeboll said to WorshippingJesus:
Quote Wrong, because it proves what I have said all along that you cannot say “Monogenes” is proof Jesus had a beginning.
Exactly! So why does Mike still argue that “monogenes” means that Christ had a beginning?
the Roo
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 09 2010,12:51) Mikeboll said to WorshippingJesus: Quote Wrong, because it proves what I have said all along that you cannot say “Monogenes” is proof Jesus had a beginning.
Exactly! So why does Mike still argue that “monogenes” means that Christ had a beginning? the Roo
JackI think Mike is quoting me!
But he did say this…
I said…
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 17 2010 @ 10:39)
Was the term “Monogenes” ever given to Jesus before his natural birth?
And he said…Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 17 2010 @ 20:45)
Not that scripture records.
Since the term “Monogenes” means “only, of the same kind” Son of God, then you further clarified this by saying…Quote (mikeboll64 @ June 25 2010,22:22) I CANNOT EVEN COME CLOSE TO PROVING JESUS WAS THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF GOD PRIOR TO HIS COMING IN FLESH WITH ONLY THE FACT THAT HE WASN'T CALLED THAT UNTIL HE CAME IN THE FLESH. AND I WILLINGLY ADMIT THAT. THAT IS WHY I WON'T USE THIS INFO AS MY FOUNDATION – GET IT? But he still thinks that if there is no water in the glass then that does not prove there is no water in the glass because there could be water in the glass!
WJ
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
