jgibson000

Er ... if you'll take the time to look at my profile, you'll see that am neither a Christian nor a theist.

But may I ask how, even if I had hurt Christian toes, how would that render invalid the questions I am asking, as you seem to think it does?

The issue isn't whether M is/was wrong. The issue is the degree to which he has "studied" Christianity and whether his claims to have done so in some depth have any merit.

I'm sorry that you seem incapable of seeing that.

Jeffrey Gibson

EarlOfLade

I'm sorry you are incapable of acting as a normal human being and have to be obnoxious in order to trump your point.

Do you really think a good discussion will follow your rants?

Do you treat people this way in real life too? If so, I'm glad I'm not around you.

Amaleq13

Please return to a discussion of the OP and refrain from creating tangents about personalities.

Thanks in advance,


Amaleq13, AS:C&H moderator

jgibson000

Could you please point out where it is in this thread that I've engaged in a, let alone more than one, rant?

So far as I can see, all I've done is to raise the question of whether or not M has the expertise in Christianity and NT studies that he claims he has and whether he's actually engaged in an in depth and proper study of these subjects.

I'd be grateful if instead of hurling ad hominems against me and/or characterizing my questions, you'd actually take some time to answer them.

Do you think -- and on what grounds do you do so, if you do -- that M has engaged in the depth of study of Christianity and the NT that is necessary to warrant his putting himself forward, as he most certainly does, as one whose statements on, and critiques of, Christianity and the NT should be taken as well informed and authoritative?

And might I ask that you sign your posts with your real name rather than addressing me with what appears to be a rather ostentatious moniker. Are you really an Earl?

Jeffrey Gibson

EarlOfLade

I'm not going to answer your questions since Amaleq13 asked us not to discuss personalities, but i will say I have seen better ways of addressing the OP's knowledge.

And yes, I'm a direct descendant from the Earl of Lade which was a Viking Earl but since Norway has gotten rid of the nobility, I can not use the title in real life. But for what it's worth, yes I'm an Earl

jgibson000

But I'm not asking you to discuss personalities. I'm asking you to say whether (and why) you think that M's claims are any good and/or give any indication of their being well informed.


So then, this is not real life?

Great. But I hope you'll forgive me for saying that in the light of your refusal to sign your critiques with your real name, I cannot (nor do I think anyone should) take your critiques seriously or give then any credence or consider that you are someone who has any right to make them.

A person who hides behind a moniker when he slams someone else and who is, therefore, not willing (afraid?) to take public responsibility for his name-calling is, in my eyes, a coward who has given up any claim that he might otherwise have had to be listened to.

Jeffrey Gibson

spin

I for one certainly have no interest in who you are, but I will be happy and interested to read when you have something well thought out to say. As it is, this "I've got a real name so I'm a real man" stuff just lets testosterone ripple through one's writing.

You seem to post regularly enough to give one the impression that you are not just engaging in drive-bys but have some interest in discussion here, so why not re-subscribe under a moniker. Come back as "Hellrazer" (or "-/razor") or "Occam" or "Gidney" (or even "Cloyd") or "TheCatInTheHat" or "Wascal's Pager" or "Powderfinger" or "Radio" or "Metatron" or "Gyro" or whatever the hell you like. Get into more commenting and less meta-commenting. Please. It'll save me from doing so as well.


spin

Toto

Gentlemen (and ladies if applicable): this is all very interesting, but please avoid these off-topic, personal discussions in this forum. The topic here is the endtimes, not Malachi151's study habits or expertise, nor is it anyone else's personal idiosyncrasies

This is your second mod warning. Shape up!

Toto

EarlOfLade

I did not address whether his claims were good or not, just your response and the way responded.

I'm not a biblical scholar and hence you rarely see me post in ASC&H, but i do like to read the threads.
In case you haven't noticed, the net is full of idiots and I, like most other posters here, have no interest in having my real names plastered all over the net and that is my prerogative and I couldn't care less what you think.

Sorry toto, I'm done with this thread in any other form than reading, but i felt the need to address gibsons allegations.

jgibson000

Since M's has declared that his claims about Christian's/Mark's/John of Patmos' beliefs about the "end times" are based in, and arise out of, his "study" of Christianity, then questions about what this "study" habits are, what his "study" of Christianity and the NT consisted in, and how in depth it really is/was seem to be to be wholly on topic as well as absolutely necessary and entirely legitimate.

If I recall correctly, you yourself recognized this point when you said that the issue of the nature and depth of one's study of a topic was fair game when during Yuri's "discussion" of Lukanisms in John 8, there was reason to suspect that Yuri's claims that he was adept in Greek had little merit.

In any case, I notice that M has never answered the questions of what he has studied re Christianity and the NT and whether or not his study ever went beyond what he finds on these topics on the Internet. I wonder why.

Jeffrey Gibson