Gullwind

Posted by you, April 13 at 9:03 AM:

Granted, you did not specifically say "I promise," but you did say you would share your views.

Steven Avery

And I will share my views as they are refined and formulated in whatever forum seems appropriate at the time. Meanwhile after I wrote that I did receive one paper that touched on some issues but not some others, then at the time of the suspension I put the whole topic down and I was researching and writing on totally different Bible issues, such as the corruption of Codex Sinaiticus and the purity of the King James Bible.

Notice that I also made no assertion (much less promise) about the "two questions" or the "four threads" (whatever they are) that are the harumphing above.

So please.. those who spoke incorrectly should best correct themselves here. And VL, save your time and energy, you won't find your supposed "promises".

Shalom,
Steven

Gullwind

The chronology you referred to in April was that of the biblical flood, thus the "two questions" are precisely what you said you would respond to.

Vicious Love

The post quoted by Gullwind is the promise to which I was referring. Thanks for saving me the trouble, by the way.

RED DAVE

From praxeus (April 13 at 9:03 AM):
From praxeus (July 18 at 9:56 PM):
Translation: I am punking out.

Figures. When my students know they can't handle a test, they usually cut the class.

RED DAVE

Sauron

I have, on numerous occasions.

If the skeptics are not satisfied with your answers, I think that says more about the quality of your responses than anything else.

Usually because the answer offered requires a leap of faith, or rests upon another unproven assertion. Again: the problem lies with the quality of your response, and not with the skeptics.

RED DAVE

Somehow, I missed this gem.

From praxeus:
No, this issue is precisely the date. Since you have a distinct tendency to wander about and obfuscate, I boiled the issue down to two questions.

From praxeus:
In other words, they get into the date.

From praxeus:
Well, three months and more ago you wrote:

From praxeus:
Now, in the English language, the word "will" generally expresses a postive intention to perform a certain act. Two statements such as "I will share with you" and "I promise to share with you" are pretty much equivalent, except "I will share with you," which you wrote, is actually stronger.

So, one more time, to give you a change to be honest:

1) What is your date for the Flood (i.e. the one that you accept for purposes of argument)?

2) If it's approximate (and there's no reason why it shouldn't be), what are the outside limits?

Or you can bullshit around.

RED DAVE

Sven

Interestingly, we (almost) never hear whining about mod actions and being taken to task about what one said from moderate/liberal/whatever you like to call them Christians, but (almost) always from folks like praxeus.

And having a look at the thread about banned users, it's quite clear that nobody is banned or suspended here for his worldview, only for his actions.

Apart from this: Why isn't a thread in which someone complains about mod actions not in QP&C?

Steven Avery

Probably because the thread started by some claim that I had :

"abandoned .. four threads"

(without even indicating the four, btw) without even mentioning that I had been suspended by the IIDB 'administration' for my 'actions' in vigorously defending the Bible and Christian views and that this was done in a sudden and abrupt (and draconian imho) manner that even surprised one of the 'moderators' that built up the dossier. And the above was done playing to the IIDB audience here, not QP&C, whatever that is.

Incidentally, I am not claiming that every 'warning' was unwarranted, simply that some were nonsense, the cards are stacked with the method of 'moderator' intervention on threads and the 'coordination' between the faceless administration bureaucracy and the moderators leads to actions that will work to suppress vigorous pro-Christian non-skeptic posting.

Nonetheless :

Romans 8:28
And we know that all things work together for good
to them that love God,
to them who are the called according to his purpose.

Even in the posting just last night, like trying to deal with Toto's attempt to handwave early dating theories in his 'era error' about the Gospels, I have rediscovered how much energy has to be put in here on just trying to straighten out simple issues. When the skeptics are so paradigmically bound and confused.

That is why the month-plus hiatus was truly used of God in my behalf, and one reason why it is unlikely I will post on many threads here.

Shalom,
Steven

Sven

Exactly because of the above, I think that the thread belongs in QP&C!

Preaching again?

This also seems to be fundamentally off topic for BC&H (as are the complains of people about your posting history).