Wayne Delia

Smokescreening, handwaving, and a Jesus complex (ref. John 2:4, John 7:6, John 7:8, John 7:30, John 8:20, in which "My time has not yet come" is supposed to be a valid excuse.) By any chance, will your "time to post" be very long after more video games and kickin' back with your buds?

Just not in any way you can demonstrate.

WMD

gagster

I don't know about anyone else, but the only reason I followed this debate was becuase I find Bible John kind of fascinating.

As far as what the bible, as originally written, says about homosexuality, I suspect that Pervy is right. He made a pretty good case, but really, I don't care if he's right or wrong.

You can debate about whether or not the bible strongly condemns homosexuality if you like, but there's no debate about whether or not the bible strongly condemns slavery. It doesn't condemn it at all. Clearly, the bible is worthless as a moral guide. So why should I care what it says?


Greg

Bible John

Go for it! Lets debate with a 2 week time frame in between statements in place.

John

gagster

Bible John, I suspect my name is near the top of the list of people that you think hate you, but you're wrong. I don't hate you.

So, please believe me when I tell you that jumping right into another debate is not a good idea. The same factors that caused you to forfeit the previous debate are likely to cause you to forfeit the next one. At the very least, take some time off before repeating your mistake.


Greg

seebs

I doubt very much that the majority of IIDB readers post to Usenet. I'm one of the only Usenet users here.

I do not see why a group needs someone to preach or teach. People should be studying on their own. Is the Spirit no longer good enough?

David Vestal

BUUUUUUUUUUUUULL-SHIT!

Claiming personal issues and missing deadlines (often while simultaneously being highly active in other online fora) is an ineffective trick you learned from Gastrich. There is no way that you weren't able to send an email to Nightshade asking for an extension, yet WERE able to post excuses here immediately after the debate.

My guess is you saw Pervy's post, crapped your pants as you learned how far out of your depth you were, and were afraid to continue. I don't know if Pervy's scholarship holds or not, but I know that it's on a level far above yours.

But that aside, now you DO have the opportunity to rebut Pervy. I see that instead you're going with the standard christian tactic of claiming that you know the answer, but aren't going to tell it because we wouldn't understand. Bullshit again.

Dean Anderson

Yep.

Go for it...

Johnny Skeptic

And why didn't you engage my comments in the other peanut gallery thread about homosexuality? I asked you if you had any practical arguments against homosexuality. You said that you did, and I asked what they were, but you never replied. Why was that? Why do you believe that the Bible writers spoke for God regarding homosexuality and not for themselves?

SonOfFred

You're out of excuses, John.

SonOfFred

Yep, it's vintage Gastrich. However, "Bible John" has taken his cues from Gastrich. Even his public prayers in Usenet employed Gastrich's as something of a template.