Freethought & Rationalism Archive

SkepticBoyLee · 09-14-2004, 04:49 PM

http://p083.ezboard.com/fhavetheolog...cID=1028.topic

Quote:

Ok well here's the deal:

(1) yes it has to do with certain kinds of people.

(2) But also I realized I'm not a good apologist anymore. I can't do what I used to do. I know that's becasue I don't have time and I let certain issues slide, and I could get good again, but I just don't want to devote that much of my life to what is essentually a hobby.

It was brought on by confrontation with the Sec Webers. They are such jerks, and they have prefected and hoaned their art of obfuscation and personal abuse to a degree unrivaled on the net. They are absolute masters of obfuscation and personal abuse.

They mainly did it by picking out little knitt picky things that it would take time to track down and just harping on that to the piont that it totally overshadowed the whole debate.

Then when I coulnd't answer it they go "we will never take you seriously because you can't spell and you are wrong about this."

They actually said my site is full of "errors" because I was wrong about one minor issue, and in fact I wasn't really wrong, they just disagreed with me. But they knitt pick on every single thing I say and demand that I prove and documen and when I do doucment it it's not good eough. and they keep doing that until I can't prove something and then they go "riddaled with errors."

specific issues:

(1) arguing Doherty. I make one comment in a segment that is totall off the major point, about how John Rylands frament threw off the dating scheme of 19th century liberlism. one of them then announces that i don't know anything because Rylands as been redated.

I challenged him to show that it's the consensus and he asserts it is and then demands that i prove its not. This all totally unimportant in the over shceme of the argument anyway. meanwhile I've got 18 people telling me I don't know anything and that my site is full of errors because of this one deal on the dating. He never proved it, he linked to an article he wrote, never showed that it's the consensus.

but he totally loses sight of the fact that it was a statment of fact that the old date did thorugh off the dating secheme, if there is a new date for Rylands it hasn't set the old 19th century dating back in place. They still put John in the 90s and the synopitics in 65-80. So what's the difference?

the kicker is that it's only 20 year difference in his date and mine! But because of that, becasue I don't know that suppossedly it's been redated by 2o years I don't know anything, my site is worthless and I will never be taken seriously.

I keep telling them but that doesn't validate Doherty, they go "you are the issue."so now they even admitt what their strategy is.And they did this way on a whole bunch of things. Essentially they did it on everything I said.

(2) they made numerous harpings on my spelling. they just will not let that go. I have to spell check and not have any mistakes which means I'll never be able to keep up with their posts.

and I don't believe they can't read it.If you know what I"m saying here then you can read my posts.

(3) Kirby took several opportunities to rub my nose in being wrong about something. We got into this argument about Christ meaning "annointed" or "hero." I sure as hell was told by my Greek prof that it was used as "hero." He just asserts no I'm wrong and puts this great long thing from several lexicons. But it has nothing to do with the issue anyway. its' just a chance to say that I"m wrong.

(4) I said that Jesus is in the mishna and that goes back to firs century. of course they dispute that. o no it doesn't. I document that. Then they say Jesus can't be in it because it's a legal document. I get a quote from wickopedia talking about the mentions of Jesus in the Mishna, but not good enough I have to tell them where it is.

so it goes on this way over about 40 issues, none of which are all that important to the major arguments, but the issues are totally lost by now and I truely have become the issue.

so Kirby took several opportunities to show at great length with tons of docs that I'm wrong about something. And they are doing with almost every single word I utter. so I'm just wrong wrong wrong. And then all thake this as confirmation that my site is full of errors and they actualy said it's a worthless site.

So I was totally overwhealmed with bull @#%$. I used to be able to do thw overwhealming. A person reading that would think I really am a dumb @#%$ because I was wrong about so many many little things (which anyone would be if you took the time to comb every word he utters for the slightest mistake).

Meanwhile, they are so ignorant they don't even know the most basic common knowledge about the Bible. It's all prove it prove it prove it.

they are much worse than I've ever seen them> I used to kick ass over there. Now I can't even get them to listen to anything I say. Ive just been branded as a dubm @#%$ and they were explaining thing real condensendingly like I didn't know what the New Testament was and so forth.

I have a @#%$ PH.D! I do! I am a doctoral student I know I am I know I'm good. @#%$ you mmother fuckers I know I' @#%$ good! They just tried and they conspired to make me look like and feel like a piece of @#%$ and totaly derailed any chance of a discussion.

I used to posted on his board and read others since 2001. I was banned because of a little nit Zarove3 who gets into it with virtually everyone(who just HAPPENS to also be a dyslexic theist). Niether here nor there. Anyways I have read his recent posts here and I dont see anyone being overtly hostile to him. You guys are simply tearing into his work, which is to be friggin expected of atheist, agnotics and skeptics. What does he expect??

Its like hes not satisfied unless we all say "ya know, you are correct!! You really are!! Your apologetics are definatly the new wave and will sweep over the entire world, NAY the UNIVERSE!! You rule Meta. Thanks for illuminating our minds and hearts".

anything less than that is "stupid people on II are just assholes". But then I see just as much venom spewed by him. This is very hippocritical. Like I said I dont see anyone being over the top rude to him in the first place and I have found the mods here and the community here to be MUCH more fair and polite than Theoweb or Sec web. and VERY quick to tame dissention and ad hom's. Some may say that this is just because I am a skeptic but I really dont think it is.

I think Meta is a good apologist and a smart guy. Hes actually a pretty cool guy too as Ive had a good time dicussing various other things besides apologetics and religions on his off topic boards. But I think he is competitive to the point of being ego-maniacal. I have to wonder if his intent is to more "bring people to christ" or to show people what a brilliant and superb apologist he is.

I ran into his boards in 2001 after I had realized the err of my ways in being somewhat a fundy christians. I ws excited at the prospect of "a different way". The way of the liberal christian who can harmonize all this science, biblical atrocoties and things of this nature, and seemingly nonsensical doctrines into something that could still be believed. All I found is that Fundies are morons and Liberals are simple pickers and choosers. Simple as that.

Anyways just thought Id let you guys know you caused Metacrock to give up apologetics.

Intelligitimate · 09-14-2004, 05:21 PM

Quote:

I think Meta is a good apologist and a smart guy. Hes actually a pretty cool guy to as Ive had a good time dicussing various other things besides apologetics and religions on his off topic boards. But I think he is competitive to the point of being ego-maniacal. I have to wonder if his intent is to more "bring people to christ" or to show people what a brilliant and superb apologist he is.

This sums up my opinion perfectly.

Also by Meta:

Quote:

Kirby is good. i can't keep up with him. I could if I spent all my time. But to do the philosphical stuff and the Bible stuff and the theology stuff and write my diss, I just can't cover the Biblical bases as throughly as he does.

taht irks me because I know I used to be a much better apologist. in the old days I would fight it out and win out over them by sticking to it and putting the time in to show that I know my stuff. But I just can't do that now. I know I' can't be the apologist I used to be. So I dont' want to do it anymore.

Becasue I can't argue with them at this level because they are so intent on making me look stupid and they assert that I'm stupid.

Toto · 09-14-2004, 05:31 PM

I feel for Metacrock. But he has an inflated opinion of how well he used to do.

And anyone here can read the threads and realize that no one abused Metacrock or told him that he was stupid.

Peter Kirby · 09-14-2004, 05:46 PM

Meta had some rather unpolite things to say about me (one thread was closed). I never implied that he was all wrong because of minor errors or that he was stupid, etc. In fact I explicitly told him that I had nothing of the sort in mind on more than one occasion. Nevertheless he continues to act as if that is my M.O. Meta almost seems to have desired ungentlemanly conduct (saying that we are all pussycats, etc.). I think that his account is almost entirely backwards, at least in respect of my exchanges with him. I took verbal abuse and did not give him any. If he's reading this, I want him to know that I have respect for him, that I know that he has dyslexia and don't discount him for his spelling errors, and that I wouldn't mind having a discussion in the future (maybe not on Jesus though).

best,
Peter Kirby

Vorkosigan · 09-14-2004, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Anyways just thought Id let you guys know you caused Metacrock to give up apologetics.

That's too bad. I thought he was very effective.

In any case, this is not BCH material.

Vorkosigan

spin · 09-14-2004, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkepticBoyLee

Anyways just thought Id let you guys know you caused Metacrock to give up apologetics.

Gosh, that was easy.

spin

jdlongmire · 09-14-2004, 08:50 PM

I am very...embarassed, but sympathetic for 'crock...makes me understand a bit better the ammunition II's can use against us Christians...ow...

...as a matter of fact, I am suprised that you don't say/post, "Oh, yeah? What about this guy? He is a pretty good apologist but lookee here...

hmmm. shame on us.

...and believe me the finger is pointing right at me.

SkepticBoyLee · 09-14-2004, 09:10 PM

HUH???

Also jdlongmire actually Tennessee is the Bible Belts "buckle. I wish you guys could take that title away but.....I mean take a look at a map.

Metacrock · 09-14-2004, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vorkosigan

That's too bad. I thought he was very effective.

In any case, this is not BCH material.

Vorkosigan

That's incredible. I can't believe you would say that! Anyway thanks.

Ok just some points at random:

(1) More to Lee's banning that he isnt' telling you, but I wont go into it as I have no desire to make him look bad. I considered him a friend, and really still do. I'm sure he'll come back eventually.

(2) Calling you all Pussy cats was really not meant to be an insult.It wasn't! I was just saying you are basically good as individuals and not as prone to ad homs as some in the past. I think each of you are probably fine people, but in a gestalt (now I must have spelled that wrong) on a message board, a dynamic forms that is just carried away beyond what any one individual would do in a private conversation.

(3) I know I can be egotistical. But I really don't have a desire to "win." I really do aim to spark an interest in thinking and understanding different view points. But when I speak of doing well, I don't intend that to mean I "won" like in highschool debate, but that I was good as covering the stuff.
'
I was. I don't think anyone can dispute that. I was good at covering all the bases.

(4) As far as not seeing personal abuse, I find that increible that you can't see what I mean by that. But be that as it may, maybe I was just being too sensative.

(5) I apologize to Peter. It really did seem that he went out of his way to make me look bad on points that wheren't important, and it would have been just as easy to give the same attention to the major points of my arguments.

But perhaps I overreacted. I really do like Peter and I admire and respect him for what he's done. So I apologize for blowing my cool. If I said offensive things I am sorry.

(6) Ditto the rest of you. Spin, included.

(7) I guess you just see what I'm talking about. I guess I can't fault you if you don't know what you are doing that bugs me. But you know. I don't even want to go into it.

Just ask yourselves did you really mind the crucial issues that the arguments turned upon, or were you really into showing I could be wrong about anyting you could find? You all basically harp on everything I say and give no credence to know anything.

I'm a professional academic (although low level, just getting started). It is deflating to the ego to be spoken to like I'm some amature whose never read a book on the subject before.

and I do know Greek. I don't use it anymore and thus am very rusty. But I studied it for five years, and I've read the whole NT in Greek, plus portions of Septuagent, plus classics. My undergrad language was classical Greek.

Then when people go "you must not understand any of this or know anything about it because you think x" and it's some thing I've seen 25 people talking about and read it for years--that's angry making. I've stumaled over the statment about Jesus is in the Mishna so many times I can't believe none of you have seen that. I even got a wicapedia article saying so. But instead of going "O see he didn't makethat up" you go "show where the passages are," Like it just doesn't even dawn on you that I've proven that someone thinks its in there.

To me that is a form of abuse because it's just refussing to examine what I have to say in a light that would even give me a chance. That is not being egotistical, that is not asking to be commended as the Master of deabte or any of that. It's just basic common human dencency, just asking not to be treated like an idiot. I mean I'm almost 50, why doesn't occur to you I just might have learned something in this span of wasted youth?

I wont be back. I feel that the atmosphere here is not conducive to what I'm after in terms of "meeting of the minds." But you are all welcome to come on my boards.

Btw in my day no one knew what dylexia was. so dyslexics were commonly humilated and actually called "stupid" by teachers in class. This left deep deep emotional scars that has set the motion of my entire life. So all your harping on spelling is just a reminder of that. I can't help but see that as abuse when obviously you can understand what I'm writting. There is just no point in it.

SkepticBoyLee · 09-14-2004, 10:03 PM

Why dont you spend more time ripping up fundies? You realize that 99% of former christians are no longer christians because of fundamentalism dont you? THEY are your real enemy dude! I know that you dont think that fundies represent the majority of christians but I dont know how you can say this. Your average everyday church you pass on the road IS a fundy church. Maybe you feel this way because you are so immersed in world of academia and liberal theology. Fundies are a scrouge of the world and of christianity. They more than anything are the cause for not only skepticism and atheism but the outright venom and sometimes hatred we nontheists sometimes show towards christianity. Otherwise we may disagree with it but we may not be full of so much venom if not for fundies and their role in the Country.

I think that you like a challenge and the intelligent skeptics and athiests here present a fair challenge to you. But I really dont know what it is you want though. You seem to imply that people here arent smart enough to know the good points you have made. I think they are and do acknowledge them. You just blow up when people here critique your stuff. And not just the last week. Ive been followig your saga through II via the search option, looking at all your old posts, for some time now. Also I believe that even YOU would still be on this side of the fence if not for you "mystical experience". You got more in common with people here than your average christian me thinks.

Anyways I engage people on the topic of religion on non religious boards in the off topic sections of thos baords. Places like NFL football and pro basketball off topic boards. I do this so I can be a big fish in a small pond there. Its fun to engage laymen, that dont study these things and visit religious baords all the time. People that normally never question what they have been taught in their culture growing up. Im an amature here and other places were serious students of these matter gather but on those baords I am something to behold!I always run into fundies and, knowing that I cant show them the err of their ways or turn them skeptic (obviously) I always link them to you boards so that they may at LEAST give some thought on their stupid, rigid and often barbaric fundy views of the world. At least they can find out that their is another view on christianity even though I personally dont agree with it.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-14-2004, 05:31 PM	#3
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	I feel for Metacrock. But he has an inflated opinion of how well he used to do. And anyone here can read the threads and realize that no one abused Metacrock or told him that he was stupid.

09-14-2004, 05:46 PM	#4
Peter Kirby Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: the reliquary of Ockham's razor Posts: 4,035	Meta had some rather unpolite things to say about me (one thread was closed). I never implied that he was all wrong because of minor errors or that he was stupid, etc. In fact I explicitly told him that I had nothing of the sort in mind on more than one occasion. Nevertheless he continues to act as if that is my M.O. Meta almost seems to have desired ungentlemanly conduct (saying that we are all pussycats, etc.). I think that his account is almost entirely backwards, at least in respect of my exchanges with him. I took verbal abuse and did not give him any. If he's reading this, I want him to know that I have respect for him, that I know that he has dyslexia and don't discount him for his spelling errors, and that I wouldn't mind having a discussion in the future (maybe not on Jesus though). best, Peter Kirby

09-14-2004, 08:50 PM	#7
jdlongmire Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: American by birth, Southern by the grace of God! Posts: 2,657	I am very...embarassed, but sympathetic for 'crock...makes me understand a bit better the ammunition II's can use against us Christians...ow... ...as a matter of fact, I am suprised that you don't say/post, "Oh, yeah? What about this guy? He is a pretty good apologist but lookee here... hmmm. shame on us. ...and believe me the finger is pointing right at me.

09-14-2004, 09:10 PM	#8
SkepticBoyLee Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 759	HUH??? Also jdlongmire actually Tennessee is the Bible Belts "buckle. I wish you guys could take that title away but.....I mean take a look at a map.

09-14-2004, 10:03 PM	#10
SkepticBoyLee Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 759	Why dont you spend more time ripping up fundies? You realize that 99% of former christians are no longer christians because of fundamentalism dont you? THEY are your real enemy dude! I know that you dont think that fundies represent the majority of christians but I dont know how you can say this. Your average everyday church you pass on the road IS a fundy church. Maybe you feel this way because you are so immersed in world of academia and liberal theology. Fundies are a scrouge of the world and of christianity. They more than anything are the cause for not only skepticism and atheism but the outright venom and sometimes hatred we nontheists sometimes show towards christianity. Otherwise we may disagree with it but we may not be full of so much venom if not for fundies and their role in the Country. I think that you like a challenge and the intelligent skeptics and athiests here present a fair challenge to you. But I really dont know what it is you want though. You seem to imply that people here arent smart enough to know the good points you have made. I think they are and do acknowledge them. You just blow up when people here critique your stuff. And not just the last week. Ive been followig your saga through II via the search option, looking at all your old posts, for some time now. Also I believe that even YOU would still be on this side of the fence if not for you "mystical experience". You got more in common with people here than your average christian me thinks. Anyways I engage people on the topic of religion on non religious boards in the off topic sections of thos baords. Places like NFL football and pro basketball off topic boards. I do this so I can be a big fish in a small pond there. Its fun to engage laymen, that dont study these things and visit religious baords all the time. People that normally never question what they have been taught in their culture growing up. Im an amature here and other places were serious students of these matter gather but on those baords I am something to behold!I always run into fundies and, knowing that I cant show them the err of their ways or turn them skeptic (obviously) I always link them to you boards so that they may at LEAST give some thought on their stupid, rigid and often barbaric fundy views of the world. At least they can find out that their is another view on christianity even though I personally dont agree with it.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.