Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 8791

[On why he bans almost all atheists after a single post on his forum.]

I have to leave at least one atheist on unbanned. People are not banned for putting forth their best effort, but they are banned, as they ought to be, for being belligerent and obstinate in their pride. This explains what happened to those before you who failed. Though you certainly have your pride like Satan that keeps you separated from Jesus and hellbound, some mercy is helpful here towards you.

Troy, Biblocality 316 Comments [12/28/2005 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 6
WTF?! || meh

1 2 3 4 5 10 13
A Friend

I did not post,

A Friend

#310836

A Friend

#310838

9/21/2007 1:03:42 AM

Boing

*Gives A Friend a hug* Then a slap in the mush, and a command to go out and find a female, and copulate. Harshly.

9/21/2007 1:05:08 AM

A Friend

May you receive the joy of knowing that God fully proved Himself in the 4 Step Perfect Proof for God of the Bible and using the Minimal Facts Approach.

9/21/2007 1:08:34 AM

I am a robot (for Christ<3).

Bleep, blop, bloop, zip, zap, ping.

9/21/2007 1:44:50 AM

A Friend

I did not post

A Friend

#310840

A Friend

#310851


9/21/2007 1:52:35 AM

Rime

Step 1 Remains Unchallenged.Since there is no way to count the number of effiminates and homos on computers 2000 years ago, you can't make that comparison. You can only compare apples to apples, e.g. number of child sacrifices per capita, or number of families with more than one wife, or crime rate per capita.

I see you can't understand what I'm trying to say and although it is clear to everyone but you, you stated that I'm trying to say there were people on computers 2000 years ago. If it's clear to other people who read this, you're simply looking for some way to avoid my point and still act like you've answered it. If you think this counter argument is sufficient, then I'll leave it up to the other visitors to decide for themselves.

You fail to convince me that your counterpoint is valid.

The reason why it seems like there are more induglence on the surface to the undiscerning is because there are over 6 billion people on the planet. About 1000 BC there were only 100 million people on the planet. That is why you have to compare on a per capita basis.

And yet you continue to brag that there has been an exponential increase in global conscience? Sin is sin is sin. While you claim that the murder rate and wartime casualties are down, we're suffering from an obesity epidemic, fornication, (mainly because non-christian couplings are increasing, especially since you wouldn't recognize Catholics, Calvanists and non-partial rapture Protestants as Christian) and a lot of "sinning in the heart." Especially considering that for a long while, marriage was a big part of Christianity, and it wasn't fornication then.

The rate of homosexuality per capita has gone down. In the Bible there were whole cities engaging in such practice which were then destroyed. Today it is less so on a per person basis indicating an exponential improvement.

It was popular before. It decreased in frequency for a long while. More recent statistics show that it is increasing in frequency. That's okay. If you can't address the point I'm trying to make while everyone else can understand, then I'm satisfied to let you think you've won.

Sacrificing humans on altars can be compared, but you can't compare the clinal practice of abortions because this advanced was not available until recently.

You did as I expected you would. That's okay, I forgive you for misreading. I'm sure it's clear to everyone else. As it is to me. Your counterpoint doesn't succeed.

The Bible says in the latter days there will be an exponential acceleration in technology. That's now! But this is not conscience. In terms of conscience there will be a brief period of serious falling away in the latter days, but it will be short-lived, like a short-lived war, for then Christ returns to reign for the glorious millennial kingdom, in which the nations will no longer be deceived (Rev. 20.3) by war. This is unprecedented in human history and an exponential progression of conscience from previous millennia.

This addresses nothing. Stick to the topic.

Step 4 Remains Unchallenged. Your argument against Step 4 is you think Gary R. Habermas had an emotional conversion. Even if he did, how would that help you disprove Step 4? You don't make the connection.

True enough. But you see I might already have mentioned so, right?

I am not sure where you think that, for his conversion was very typical of most Christians emotionally, intellectually and spiritually. He investigated, and then gave his life to Christ. That is what most Christians do and they search out with all their heart and soul. You don't do that, that is why you are not saved.

Yeah, you just justified my point, they convince themselves, therefore it must be true. I've seen that happen with fortune tellers who can ask the right questions about their clients. Their clients think they really DO have some magic power, when it's just the savvy and the right way to probe for information. Sorry for the drift off topic. My bad.

You're too arrogant and self-cented, exalting yourself above your creator. Nothing is dumber.

Okay, so now you're resorting to insults. That's okay, I forgive you.

You can't compare obesity, because you can only compare apples to apples (same wealth ability to be gluttonous) and it should be globally considered. No nation in history has been more wealthy, so food shortage is not an issue, which was an issue even in the most prosperous nations in history, because the production levels were just not there like we have the ability today. USA is gluttunous for it is falling babylon, just like previous nations who were on top were gluttunous. I believe USA is the last great nation to fall before the rise of the Roman Empire again which is the European Economic Union. The EU currency will not stop rising over the long-term, while USA's currency will continue to tank, creating painful inflation and they will lose the hegemony of their currency.

Fat people are obviously gluttonous. Obesity is epidemic. Sorry if you can't make that leap. Wait a minute, did you just drift off topic? Again?

And finally, if you read the dictionary, you'll find that unchallenged is not the same as undefeated, and you are misusing the word "unchallenged." If you can't give me better answers than that, I'll simply leave.

9/21/2007 2:19:40 AM

David B.

"Since there is no way to count the number of effiminates and homos on computers 2000 years ago, you can't make that comparison. You can only compare apples to apples, e.g. number of child sacrifices per capita, or number of families with more than one wife, or crime rate per capita."

Which we also cannot count the number of 2000 years ago.

9/21/2007 3:53:41 AM

A Friend

David B.,

Not exactly. We know in historical records that multiple wives per family was quite common. We also know that the number of children per family was quite high, much higher than the average today. We know child sacrifices was quite prevalent among many nations in antiquity, but not so today. We also know the number of wars was much more prolific then and deaths due to war per capita was much higher than today. Crime rates per capita in the past half century are down significantly, even in a country that has no social net like United States. These things are not disputed among scholars, but they are an issue for belligerent people who shut their minds down to such obvious data. You need to get over that hurdle in your personality, and start dealing with the strong evidence; once accepted, address the fact that this exponential curve in conscience indicates there cannot be an eternity of the past, so there must be an uncreated creator.

Most people give up such futile arguments against the existence of an uncreated creator. They move onto the next step to determine who if anyone is the Creator? Is it Jesus? Maybe it is someone else? Who else said they were God besides Jesus? I don't know anyone else who had the audacity to.


9/21/2007 4:11:38 AM

David B.

A Friend.

That's a lot of words, but no numbers. You say the per captia rates for these things were higher then than now. Please publish both sets of figures so I can confirm that 'then' really is higher than 'now'.

Also, you say there is an exponential growth in human conscience, I'd like to check this too. Please post your figures so that I can confirm the growth actually is exponential as you say, and not some other sort of progression that does not support your proof.

9/21/2007 5:52:56 AM

A Friend

David B.,

You don't need to publish numbers, except know in historical documents it was significant then and is not the case now.

And, just this past century women can vote when they couldn't before. This too typifies an exponential porgression. It is not straight-line, but revealing an exponential improvement.

If the drop of child sacrifices was linear and not exponential, then there would still be quite a significant number of child sacrifices now, but you don't find that to be the case.

In large part you can thank God's chosen people for erradicating those evil nations. I just watched a movie last night about this sacrificing children called "One Night With the King".

Basically what happened was Israel didn't finish the job, and those people who were remnants of those evil nations generations latter retaliated against Israel causing Israel much heartache. Such evil nations were defending their evil practice of child sacrifices and wanting to do Israelites harm for stopping them. That's powerful corroboration of what I have been saying all along. This was a Christian movie by the way.




9/21/2007 6:02:06 AM

David B.

You say X is greater than Y, tell me X and Y and I can see for myself. You say Z is growing exponentially, give me a table of values for Z and I can confirm this.

Here, for example, is a linear progression of child sacrifice numbers (per million capita) that leads to just the situation you claim is true today.

1000AD - 1010
1200AD - 810
1400AD - 610
1600AD - 410
1800AD - 210
2000AD - 10

So not only would a linear decline is child sacrifce not mean "there would still be quite a significant number of child sacrifices now", but it could also be completely consistent with your assertion about the current figures.

So please publish your figures, so that I can rule out linear, sigmoid and other progressions and confirm this is exponential like you say.

9/21/2007 6:20:31 AM

A Friend

I did not post

A Friend

#310999

Why does this imposter do this?

It's because he knows he can't find anything wrong with the 4 Step Proof for God and the Minimal Facts Approach.

9/21/2007 6:23:59 AM

A Friend

I did not post

A Friend

#311035

9/21/2007 6:25:01 AM

A Friend

David B.,

Indeed, if there was a linear drop of child sacrifices, there would still be quite a few, but we don't see it today. Therefore, it is an exponential improvement.

I am glad you could not show otherwise. You don't need numbers listened; all you need know is it was prevalent before, and today virtually non-existent. Such non-existence can not be arrived at by a linear equation but requires an exponential improvement.

Take some calculus classes.


9/21/2007 6:49:55 AM

A Friend

listed NOT listened.

9/21/2007 6:50:39 AM

David B.

"Indeed, if there was a linear drop of child sacrifices, there would still be quite a few, but we don't see it today. Therefore, it is an exponential improvement."

Mathematics says otherwise, you can start from a big number, subtract the same amount from it every year and end up with a small number.

Neither is every progression either linear or exponential. So please post your figures and I can see for myself that you are right.

"I am glad you could not show otherwise. You don't need numbers listened; all you need know is it was prevalent before, and today virtually non-existent. Such non-existence can not be arrived at by a linear equation but requires an exponential improvement."

I cannot show that you are right either because you have not posted any figures.

These then are some per capita rates of child sacrifice from 1AD to today.
Year PC-sacrifices
102 0.009481444
125 0.009364514
411 0.007910524
453 0.007697001
616 0.006868327
747 0.006202339
919 0.005327911
1055 0.004636502
1105 0.004382308
1262 0.003584138
1288 0.003451957
1421 0.002775801
1469 0.002531774
1616 0.001784443
1704 0.001337062
1742 0.001143874
1806 0.000818505
1810 0.00079817
1940 0.000137265
1965 0.0000101678

Clearly, in the first century AD child sacrifices were very high, nearly 1 in a 100 people going under the knife. Fortunately now the rate is much lower, barely 1 in 100,000 being lost. This, by the way, is a linear decline.

So again, post your figures so that I may prove to myself that the exponential decline you say happened is real.

"Take some calculus classes."

Perhaps you'd like to re-read some of your comments where you claim that all the 'personal attacks' showed you were right.

I am asking for your help in proving to myself you right and you will not give it. What should I reasonably conclude from that?

9/21/2007 7:13:38 AM

David B.

"all you need know is it was prevalent before, and today virtually non-existent. Such non-existence can not be arrived at by a linear equation but requires an exponential improvement."

Speaking of calculus. You have 'vaguely' indicated two data points, which is precisely all that is needed for a linear relationship.

Two points define a line. So (prevalent, before) and (non-existent, now) are two points on the line with a gradient of "(non-existant - prevalent) / (now - before)" passing through "(non-existent, now)".

This is why I'd like to see the numbers.

9/21/2007 8:05:10 AM

Rime

Jesus said even He could not convince you if He were before you this very instant (hence, the need for hell). I don't mind then when I speak reasonably to you that you reject such reasonable things, for notice you admit you don't find fault with what I said, yet it still does not convince you.

I've seen the articles you've written on your forums. You are capable of understanding me better than you letting on here. Your misunderstanding of the word "unchallenged" being just one example of how you appear to be playing dumb.

You'll have to show me where I admit I don't find fault with what you said. I wouldn't be discussing with you if I didn't find fault with what you say.

Suffice it to say when you compare things to examine if there is an exponential progression, you must use commonalities across all time periods.

I didn't see that rule anywhere when I was reading about exponentional growth.

[/b]There is no indication fornication per capita is on the rise. It is argued the number of births per family household is going down at an ever faster rate.[/b]

Effective birth control, and willfully refusing children is also a sin. It looks like I have a new point to add. Sorry.

Christians whine about contraception it all the time. Fornication is sex outside marriage. You dodged the point about "True Christian" marriage which really puts a dent in your counterpoint because there aren't many people you recognize as Christian.

Obesity, as was said, cannot be compared because of our technology that allows us to mass produce food unlike every before.

Counterpoint invalid, because there's no excuse for so many people being obscenely overweight.

Homosexuality is decreasing per capita as well.

I'd like to know where you got that idea. Before the 50's the rates were a LOT lower. Sinusoid.

So all these data points, we find none agree with you.

I've found that Hawker agrees with me. I've seen no one here agree with you.

Right now I've seen only one disagree with me. I've seen nearly everybody disagree with you.

But I digress.

Why don't you just give your life to Christ? The law in the OT was put in place to show no man could keep it. We are all sinners and we all need to be saved, forgiven by God. Come to the joy of Christ, and be my brother in the Lord. Then join Biblocality forums, and study the things that will build your spiritual life from God's Word. I can help you for I have gone through that doorway already.

Coming to Christ is not convincing oneself, for if that is how you think one is saved, you will never be saved. The way of salvation is by authenticity. God will receive you no other way. By accepting God fully proved Himself as the Creator since nothing in nature happens all by itself, know that Jesus is God, for who else said of himself he is God. Only Jesus did! And who else died for your sins sinlessly? Only Jesus did! He is the best! He is the greatest! It is easy to see. Let go of yourself.


Thanks. Please stick to the topic. You aren't responding to any point here.

I don't point you out, but everyone who has not received Christ into their lives is self-exalting themselves in one way or another. You are not exception. It is not to insult you, for I was unsaved once also, so I know what you are going through: it is an independency and rebellion against God.

It appears your ability to misunderstand the new child sacrifice and your excuse about my point regarding gluttony (among other things) doesn't line up with your abilities to write essays like Mozart's involvement with the freemasons. If you can't come up with something better I'll just conclude that you're trolling. Just as you have no time for trolls, neither do I.

Back to the issue of obesity, this can not be used to determine exponential progression of conscience, because until recently production capabilities to produce food were just not there.

Sin is sin. Gluttony is a sin. Obesity is epidemic, and it doesn't have to be. I don't see how this couterpoint is valid.

Everything you have said is not only unchallenging, but you leave the 4 Step Proof for God of the Bible unchallenged and the Minimal Facts Proof completely undealt with.

Challenge: a call or summons to engage in any contest, as of skill, strength, etc.

Okay. You keep using that word.
It has been challenged and it won't be you, but the visitors who come here, many who won't bother to say anything, who will decide that. As I mentioned before, my time is running out, and you're continuing to exhibit a special density toward my counterpoints.

9/21/2007 10:36:06 AM

Rime

It appears that one of my bold tags was misplaced. Sorry. I'm sure a bright guy like yourself can figure it out.

9/21/2007 10:37:40 AM

A Friend

David B.,

If the linear drop is too steep it will go negative which is impossible, hence it is not linear considering the virtually zero child sacrifices today, yet there is still some remnant of it.

Nobody can be as accurate as you claimed towards the number of child sacrifices, so don't even try.

Know your data is wrong since there are not 60,000+ child sacrifices a year. There are not 100,000+ parents that take there 60,000 children and throw them into the fiery mouth of Molech or other false god. Hence, your linear attempts failed you.

Do understand the point that a linear progression ultimately goes negative, which is impossible, therefore it must be an exponential progression.

That's just how the calculus works out.

9/21/2007 2:38:17 PM

A Friend

Rime,

Don't be upset that you have not posed any considerable thought against the Proof and that is why it remains unchallenged, but this should cause you to prostrate yourself before God and finally come to Him with an open heart.

Still you don't find fault with what I said, which must frustrate you. Read Step 1, which you admit you didn't realize, about the exponential progression in conscience which is why there cannot be an eternity of the past of cause and effects.

Having less children in an overpopulated world is not willfully refusing children. How silly. It's called doing the right thing. You cannot compare birth control, because it was not available in previous centuries.

It is true there are not as nearly as many Christians as you would think, that is probably why you don't understand why only 1 in 100 Christian marriages that pray together nightly end in divorce. Compare that to non-Christian divorce rates.

Though there is no excuse for people being obese, for the purposes of Step 1 obesity is something that cannot be compared because of different times in which mass production of food was not so readily available. To be scientific about this we really can't compare eating habits at least not the last century or two, but prior to that I think food production methods were about the same.

The only reason you think homosexuality is on the rise is because the population of the world has increased from 2 billion to almost 7 billion in the last 2 centuries. You have to determine it on a per capita basis. Search out for that data if that interests you. Are you a homosexual?

Both you and Hawker agree that what I have said is true because you could not disprove it.

The very point here all along is Jesus is fully proven as being God, you are in need of salvation, and only Jesus can save you.

You have not challenged, because you have not even engaged in the contest yet to provide something worthy of competition. For example, if you are Djokovic and I am Federer at tennis, you would be a challenger, but if you are not even in the rankings, you pose no challenge. My ranking remains unchallenged by you.

Don't let your petty self go on a rampage with your misreading of the word challenge as your reason to reject Christ. How silly.

9/21/2007 2:59:09 PM

A Friend

I did not post,

A Friend

#311327

A Friend

#311334

A Friend

#311339


9/21/2007 3:01:21 PM

A Friend

Disregard all the posters pretending to be myself A Friend.

May you receive the joy of knowing that God fully proved Himself in the 4 Step Perfect Proof for God of the Bible and using the Minimal Facts Approach.

9/21/2007 3:01:30 PM

Rime

Don't be upset that you have not posed any considerable thought against the Proof and that is why it remains unchallenged, but this should cause you to prostrate yourself before God and finally come to Him with an open heart.

Still you don't find fault with what I said, which must frustrate you. Read Step 1, which you admit you didn't realize, about the exponential progression in conscience which is why there cannot be an eternity of the past of cause and effects.


Upset? No.
Yes, I do find fault. Why would I continue to refute your counterpoints if I couldn't find any fault? Stop dragging down the discussion by boasting.

Having less children in an overpopulated world is not willfully refusing children. How silly. It's called doing the right thing. You cannot compare birth control, because it was not available in previous centuries.

Christians argue that the world is not overpopulated. And birth control has been practiced througought history. One example: Olive oil. Not a terribly good contraceptive, but one nonetheless. There are plenty of others, if you would care to do the research.

It is true there are not as nearly as many Christians as you would think, that is probably why you don't understand why only 1 in 100 Christian marriages that pray together nightly end in divorce. Compare that to non-Christian divorce rates.

This is about fornication, not marriage. Stay on topic.

Though there is no excuse for people being obese, for the purposes of Step 1 obesity is something that cannot be compared because of different times in which mass production of food was not so readily available. To be scientific about this we really can't compare eating habits at least not the last century or two, but prior to that I think food production methods were about the same.

Thank you for agreeing with me on the sin of gluttony and its rise in recent society.

The only reason you think homosexuality is on the rise is because the population of the world has increased from 2 billion to almost 7 billion in the last 2 centuries. You have to determine it on a per capita basis. Search out for that data if that interests you. Are you a homosexual?

I am satisfied that homosexuality is on the rise, as I have checked data that says so. Search out the data on its decline if it interests you. No, I'm not a homosexual.

Both you and Hawker agree that what I have said is true because you could not disprove it.

No, I've proved it to my satisfaction. And if you don't come up with anything new in your next few counter-arguements, I'll conclude you're just here to troll. I'll let Hawker speak for himself.

The very point here all along is Jesus is fully proven as being God, you are in need of salvation, and only Jesus can save you.

You have not challenged, because you have not even engaged in the contest yet to provide something worthy of competition. For example, if you are Djokovic and I am Federer at tennis, you would be a challenger, but if you are not even in the rankings, you pose no challenge. My ranking remains unchallenged by you.


This does not change the definition of challenge. And I forgive you for your boasting about my apparent lack of skill. This does not need to be said and only denigrades your position.

Don't let your petty self go on a rampage with your misreading of the word challenge as your reason to reject Christ.

Boasting. This is proving nothing. Stick to the discussion.

How silly.

I forgive you.

9/21/2007 3:14:51 PM

A Friend

Rime,

You speak of some refutation, but you never show it, which boasting for the Lord gives glory that you failed as not you nor anyone is able to find fault with the God of the Bible.

Christians don't say the world is not overpopulated. We say it is overpopulated. You can't compare birth control because the technology is far more effective now and you admitted that the previous method was "not a terribly good contraceptive".

Fornication and marriage can not be separated as topics, for sex outside marriage is fornication.

The sin of gluttony in eating habits in USA is expected for it is falling babylon, but for the purposes of Step 1 and the exponential progression of conscience, we can not compare to previous centuries the matter of food and gluttony because we did not have the ability to eat so much food before given our technology today. You're slow to understand this. Other nations are less gluttonous. Compared to the opportunity to eat so much, so many choices, perhaps people should even be fatter than they are, but due to the exponential progression in conscience, they are not.

Don't just assume homosexuality is on the rise on a per capita basis. For remember in the Bible, Sodom and Gomorrah were such sinful cities in homosexuality they were completely destroyed. Nothing quite compares to that today. You don't even see San Francisco being nuked for it being a homo city. Even still the homo rate was much less in that city than the cities destroyed in the Bible.

Since you don't respond to the evidence I have given you, you should not be satisfied with not responding to that evidence.

It is not your lack of skill that keeps you unsaved, but it is your free-choice to be a bad person with Satan and bound for hell.

The definition of challenge remains used appropriately, why does that offend you? Is it not because you are clinging to your petty self to reject Jesus?

Noticing your petty self on a rampage is not me boasting, but it is noticing your sin and telling you about it.

There is no need to forgive me as I have done you no harm.

9/21/2007 3:37:09 PM
1 2 3 4 5 10 13