bornagainathiest Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 No! Not this. This, below. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sent 14 June 2014 - 07:27 AM IronHorse, On May 23 I asked you if you considered the Gospels to be an unbiased historical record. You still haven't done me the courtesy of replying. I've also had to repeatedly PM you on two previous occasions to prompt a response from you. More recently I answered a post of yours in the, 'No Shit Sherlock' thread in the Den. It concerned Nicolaus Copernicus. My response can be found on page # 22, post # 443. I concluded the message with a question for you. Please answer it, either here or in that thread. And please answer the question I put to you here, weeks ago. Y'know what, IronHorse? (Rhetorical question, btw.) I just don't buy this I've-been-too-busy-to-reply crap from you. Not any more. As far as I can judge you're following the standard pattern of behavior of most Christians who come to this forum. They start out confident that their arguments, their testimonies, their witnessing and the Bible quotes they post will have some great effect on us. But they just don't quite 'get' the fact that we are EX-Christians. Not lapsed or fallen-away Christians. Not lost or confused Christians. EX-Christians. The Christian apologists don't realize that there are ex-pastors, ex-missionaries and ex-lay preachers here. They don't see that individually, some of us have decades and decades of Christian life safely behind us. That collectively we've got millennia of personal experience of Christianity to look back on. That any scriptural knowledge, any spiritual gifts and any spiritual fruit they have, we've also had and in far greater abundance and with far greater understanding. That any argument they can cite, we've already seen and already seen thru and already dismantled. That any item of scientific data or any piece of history they might think about using is already known to us. That any website or book they know of, we already know of. That we will always be one step ahead of them. When the Christians gradually realize all of the above, their behavior here changes. Just as yours has changed. They stop replying to posts where their arguments are refuted. They fail to answer polite requests for answers on various issues. Their initial optimism sours and the dialog between them and us changes. It devolves into the following cycle. They pop up infrequently to make an occasional argument and then, when it's roundly demolished by us, they stubbornly, petulantly and rudely refuse to respond any further or to admit that they were wrong. After a suitable period of sulking, they pop up again and the cycle repeats itself... ad nauseaum. And this is where it's at with you, IronHorse. The above description fits your behavior here to a tee. There's no real dialog taking place any more - things have devolved to a clash of wills between us. You can't make any headway, but you're so convinced you're right that you just won't give up. You aren't the first Christian to change like this and you won't be the last. We've seen many, many of them change this way and their wilful, stubborn resistance usually results outcomes like these. 1. The persistent and stubborn Christian unwittingly embarks upon a kind of negative Christian ministry - actively turning people away from Jesus by their behavior. Even if their arguments are flawless, their doctrine sound and their words are loving, people will see thru this façade by looking at their behavior - their fruit. These Christians can talk the Christian talk, but their behavior shows that they don't walk the Christian walk. People see this and take note. We have taken note of your behavior too. 2. The persistent and stubborn Christian might begin to behave badly, getting themselves warned, confined to the Den or even banned. SteveBennett is a classic example. He's tried to get back in here and have his say, forcing his views on us... how many times now? Six? Or is it seven? We'll always catch him. Likewise with Thumbelina - the textbook example of an unwavering religious fanatic. She abused a newbie, was unrepentant (after all, she's doing God's work - so how could she possibly have done wrong?) and has been confined to the Den ever since. Or the Christian might start lying. JayL and Rayskidude are just two that I've caught doing so. We catch them all in the end. People see this and take note. Just as we've taken note when sdelsolray recently caught you quoting in the 'F.A.O. Ironhorse' thread without citing your source. Ok, that's not actively lying, to be sure. But that kind of maneuver is indicative of a less-than-totally-transparent-and-honest mindset. If you understand nothing else about this post, understand this. We always take note of your behavior. Yes! Yes! I know! I know! Those people aren't TRUE Christians. But you are. Isn't that what you were thinking? ('nuther rhetorical question, btw.) Well Ironhorse, Jesus said that we'll know who the true Christians are by their fruit - their behavior. We are taking note of yours. 3. The persistent and stubborn Christian might end up as a permanent, but impotent fixture here. They continue to pop up in various threads, but they are largely ignored until they write something that stirs us up. When this happens they stick around for a while, usually until their position is shown to be wrong and/or mistaken. Then, when the 'crunch' is imminent and they should admit they were wrong and/or mistaken... they quit. They quit because they wilfully refuse to change their minds about the issue. They know that we've dragged them a fork in the road and they have to make a choice, which way to go. To avoid making that choice (and losing face, I suspect) they don't choose... they quit the thread, never to return. They don't quit because they no longer have the time or the energy to put into the thread any more. They don't quit because they simply don't understand what's being said. They don'tquit because God told them to. No. It's much simpler than that. They just won't change their minds. When it comes down to it - they refuse. It's that simple. And so we're back to the Nicolaus Copernicus issue, Ironhorse. I replied to your post. I showed you where you were wrong. I asked you a question about it... and you quit the thread. Well, I've taken note of this and as you can see from the above, your behavior is evolving nicely along the lines I've described. You are gradually becoming more and more defined by the type of behaviors I've outlined. This is no real surprise to me. But here's your chance to surprise me! Why don't you do the proper thing and reply to me (out in the forum, not here) about Copernicus, conceding that he wasn't motivated by his Christian faith to explore the universe, but was using a non-Christian methodology, first formulated by Thales of Miletus? Go on, surprise me, Ironhorse! BAA. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I privately messaged this to Ironhorse back in June last year. Needless to say, he still hasn't got back to me about the gospels being an unbiased historical record. Nor has he replied about Nicolaus Copernicus. (So no surprise there...so he didn't surprise me.) I've sent reminders to him on Aug 27, Nov 10 and Dec 1, about outstanding questions he promised to answer. Still nothing. Anyway, yesterday I was going back thru my PM's and I noticed the above message. I took a second look and realized that of the three outcomes I listed, # 3 seems to be the one that fits Ironhorse best. Impotence. He doesn't present flawless arguments and sound doctrine - because he doesn't present any kind of arguments or doctrine at all. (Just, "I believe...") So that's # 1 ruled out! Option 2 doesn't really fit either. Ok, sdelsolray caught him acting less-than-honestly, but Ironhorse can hardly be described as a badly-behaved Christian fanatic/troll, like Thumbelina or SteveBennett. Which leaves # 3. Imho he's become a permanent, but impotent fixture in this forum. . . . Oh and just for the record...this post IS an ad hominem attack on Ironhorse. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, means responding to arguments by attacking a person's character, rather than to the content of their arguments. I make this ad hominem attack on his character because he (pathetically) no longer presents any arguments. BAA. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Furball Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 I have to say that you are correct. Believers act like the rest of us have no clue what the bible says and are coming from a place of total christian ignorance. I hate it when they think they know everything about it, and the rest of us are unlearned about christianity. -it really makes me want to pull my hair out -CC 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 CC don't pull your fur out, that's cruelty to kittehs. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onyx Posted January 21, 2015 Share Posted January 21, 2015 Yeah, don't, CeilingCat. Ironhorse, like his God, is weak against the iron of our arguments. Not worth the time. All he can do is to be a seagull Christian. Why don't we have a party? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Pick on someone your own size lol. I been a-wall I know. No one missed me anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 I'm too sad too post cuz what happen.. Well I just posted eh my brain mush. Take care now bye bye then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted January 23, 2015 Author Share Posted January 23, 2015 Pick on someone your own size lol. I been a-wall I know. No one missed me anyway Size isn't important, A1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Furball Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Pick on someone your own size lol. I been a-wall I know. No one missed me anyway Sorry about that. I humbly apologise 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 I agree Size does not mean *Everything* but it is important. That's a fact. Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duderonomy Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Does one's size matter if one is impotent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 What does impotent mean? Sorry my English is horrendous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 What does impotent mean? Sorry my English is horrendous. Here's a definition for you: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+does+impotent+mean%3F 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 What does impotent mean? Sorry my English is horrendous. Perhaps I have been too hard on you. What is your native language? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 What does impotent mean? Sorry my English is horrendous. Here's a definition for you: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+does+impotent+mean%3F wow.....that was kinda Hot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 What does impotent mean? Sorry my English is horrendous. Perhaps I have been too hard on you. What is your native language? naw you were correct for being hard on me english is my first language i just suck(not cocks tho) so any "Hardness" could be necessary for negative reinforcement of my grammar skills. I failed english twice its just not my thing and neither is math. now theology a different story....i am the Farmer of all crops Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 naw you were correct for being hard on me english is my first language i just suck(not cocks tho) so any "Hardness" could be necessary for negative reinforcement of my grammar skills. I failed english twice its just not my thing and neither is math. now theology a different story....i am the Farmer of all crops Well, it's nothing personal. You are probably my favorite Christian of the active ex-C visitors. You are a decent person and for the record my English is horrible too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 naw you were correct for being hard on me english is my first language i just suck(not cocks tho) so any "Hardness" could be necessary for negative reinforcement of my grammar skills. I failed english twice its just not my thing and neither is math. now theology a different story....i am the Farmer of all crops Well, it's nothing personal. You are probably my favorite Christian of the active ex-C visitors. You are a decent person and for the record my English is horrible too. holy crap that brought tears to my eyes i thought you hated me the most! Rofl well I respect your logic and your abiltiy to be firm. Alot of times i do see you are nto trying to be mean but you are trying to be informative and honest and be authentic about what is being said. If you see BS you will call it. Your a realist. And to me thats ok in my book. Some christians cant take your honesty lol but i rather but hurt by the truth then feel good about a lie. Honesty can hurt even the bible says that lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 i rather but hurt by the truth then feel good about a lie. If this were true, you would deconvert. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duderonomy Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 i rather but hurt by the truth then feel good about a lie. If this were true, you would deconvert. No, FT. A1 will deconvert when he is ready, or maybe he won't deconvert at all. Maybe his lie is us and his truth is Christianity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 If I rather feel good then why would I choose a belief that is the 2nd most hated in the world. There's nothing that feels *good* about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 If I rather feel good then why would I choose a belief that is the 2nd most hated in the world. There's nothing that feels *good* about that. It has nothing to do with choosing. You don't choose to see through the illusion. Instead you wake up one day and you realize something. It doesn't matter if you didn't want to. Most of us didn't want it to happen. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 i rather but hurt by the truth then feel good about a lie. If this were true, you would deconvert. No, FT. A1 will deconvert when he is ready, or maybe he won't deconvert at all. Maybe his lie is us and his truth is Christianity? Where I was coming from was that according to logic, science, archaeology and history, xianity is a lie. Most xians believe because it feels good. When people start valuing whether the things they believe are true or not, that's when they may realise xianity is a lie, and deconvert. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gall Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 What does impotent mean? Sorry my English is horrendous. Here's a definition for you: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+does+impotent+mean%3F which since he is already using the internet he could have looked up on his own. He is just playing stupid games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gall Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 If I rather feel good then why would I choose a belief that is the 2nd most hated in the world. There's nothing that feels *good* about that. it is actually the 1st most hated. All those other religions despise the high and mighty BS that is christianity and those that follow it for the most part. So while everyone else the seculars think you suck so do all the other religions of the world Take pride you way of life is dying and will be over within 150 years I am guessing if not sooner. Your kind will be nothing but history in books soon. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 What does impotent mean? Sorry my English is horrendous. Here's a definition for you: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+does+impotent+mean%3F which since he is already using the internet he could have looked up on his own. He is just playing stupid games. You didn't click on the link, did you? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts