Radorth

More pedantic Rad baiting questions. Interesting how you reworded my assertion.

http://www.ehs.pvt.k12.ca.us/ehs/pro...rome/Will.html

(extracts) "But gladiators didn't last much longer. In 404 A.D., a Christian monk named Telemachus stopped two combatants from fighting in the middle of a fight. The crowd then went berserk, jumped the rail and ripped Telemachus limb from limb. After that, the Emperor Honorius, banned gladiating. That was the end of the gladiators."

IMO only somebody looking to denigrate Christian contributions would not give major credit to this martyr.

Rad

Toto

Thank you for having a relatively civilized discussion. I have already suggested that either of you open a new topic on the virtues of Christianity in Moral Principles or General Religious Discussions, especially since I suspect that many people who would be interested in the topic are no longer following this thread.

Rad - asking you to detail your sources is not "pedantic Rad-baiting". It is how people normally carry on debates.

PS - some classical scholars think that the tale of Telemachus is a pious Christian fable. (See this note )

PPS - please do not throw the term "fundy bigot" around as if were a general insult with no meaning. I see no evidence that Charles Finny was a fundamentalist - he appears to have been a liberal for his time, and I see no evidence of bigotry.

Buffman

Rad

Ah so you were baiting me, and now blaming me for going off topic, after you raised the issues. I wonder if Toto noted.

Baiting you? What an absurd allegation! I have asked you this sincere and extremely important question on at least two occasions. You have consistently avoided providing any kind of sincere answer. Instead, you do what you always do when you are without any accurate response. You seek a quick way out and blame the person asking the question in order to avoid embarrassing yourself...yet again.

Pretty much, yeah. If find no Biblical basis for Hitler's actions or world-view. (Nor Luther's, toward the Jews)

Fair enough. However, I seem to recall that Hitler did not do everything by himself any more than Luther did. What about those tens-of-millions of other humans that supported these two religious and racial bigots? Weren't some of them Christians? How many? How many humans who fought Hitler weren't Christians?

That is unfortunately typical of pigeonholing and your simplistic rhetorical questions.

I am not about to concern myself with your discomfort if my statements cause you to have to think outside your Christian box.

Our leaders did not have to kill enemies to stay in power.

Oh? And exactly which leaders were those? Which enemies?

The best scientists came here.

Oh? Do you mean the best scientists of Jewish parentage? How many of the best scientists of Christian heritage came here?

There were too many extraordinary and favorable coincidences to list here.

I can accept that statement because it makes sense. Few things are just black or white...especially where accurate history is concerned.

We won battles we never ought to have won due to these, due to the arrogance and gaffs of the axis powers. All coincidence? Ask Ben Franklin and George Washington.

Once again you were doing just fine until you fell back into your Christian conditioned tar pit. Ask Ben and George what? Exactly!

Huh? Your argument rests on this assertion?

(Boy is this getting old.) I am not "arguing" or "debating" with you. I am attempting to treat you like a reasoning human being and "discuss" issues with you in a calm, meaningful and accurate manner. Having been on the senior NATO Staff, I do have some insights that may not have been available to you. Having been deeply involved with weapons of mass destruction, I have some insights that may not have been available to you. So I was asserting nothing. I was attempting to offer you some of my personal observation insights.

That is doubtless one reason he praised the teachings of Jesus so highly.

And why he cut out all the dogma BS. However, "without exception" very clearly does not place the philosophies of Jesus on the same level as those of the other three men he named as the "greatest." Obviously those three reasoned in ways that Jesus did not because if they merely parroted the Bible, then Jefferson would have requested only one picture. (Of a black, brown, tan, white, polka dot man with a beard.)

Heh. This atheist automaton "info" has been proven, in the case of Washington and Franklin, to be complete nonsense, hardly worthy of a response.

Why? Because revisionist, propagandist, historians like Barton, Federer and you say so? (Muhahahahaha! Please include that bit in your next Comedy Club Show.)

For those who don't get out much and remain ignorant of history, Franklin and Washington saw the hand of God working everywhere, and Washington begged the nation not to forget what Providence had done for them.

And why do you think I included the info about them being Deists? Because I am attempting to claim that they were Atheists? ( Oh! This is just too funny for words.) Obviously since you, and your pals, have never been able to find conclusive evidence that these particular founders were devout Christians, you are forced to pretend that Deism is the same as Atheism. Well, golly gee, sorry to tell you! It just isn't so no matter how hard you wish to believe that it is. So, besides the outstanding display of your own lack of knowledge, you are now insulting anyone who knows more than you do about Deism. (Keep that up and someone will use the "Hook" on you the next time you are performing on stage.)

A Christian college graduated the first balck female?

Oberlin College, 1850, Mrs. Lucy Stanton Sessions. I have no idea why you posted all the rest of that.list. I located the male graduates from Oberlin long ago. I asked for some proof of the name, college and year of the first black female college graduate. This is the kind of thing I sought and just found with, "YES", your help. Thank you.

http://www.oberlin.edu/wwwcomm/ats/a...sidelines.html

(Extract)
New Cleveland Hall of Fame Member
The Early Settlers Association of the Western Reserve recently inducted Lucy Stanton Day Sessions, Class of 1850, into the Cleveland Hall of Fame as part of the city's bicentennial celebration.
Sessions was the first African-American woman in the nation to complete a collegiate course of study. (However, it was not until 1862 that Mary Jane Patterson became the first African-American woman to receive a baccalaureate degree.)
Early Settlers Association Vice President Gilbert M. True said Sessions was chosen for "her work as an abolitionist, educator of freedmen in the post-Civil War South, and memorable writing." At her graduation, Sessions gave an acclaimed address titled "A Plea for the Oppressed." Listening was a trustee who had supported the College's open admissions policy. He reminded the audience how others had predicted ruin if Oberlin admitted blacks. Stanton's eloquent address, he said, refuted that prophecy.
(End extract)

OH BTW, the fundy bigot Charles Finney was president during a large part of this period.

How many of these black students weren't Christian? My dear Radorth, there are many forms of bigotry. Racial bigotry is only one form. What about religious bigotry?

Radorth

He asked me what "order" the monk was from. And "How many of these black students weren't Christian?" That's pretty chicken^%$# in my opinion. But I suppose if I can't chase down every fact he asks for, I've lost the argument in his mind.

Then you say things like "you're too fearful to respond" and then "This is not the appropriate one for me to be asking you to explain another of your numerous, and all too often spurious, allegations in greater detail. "

Sorry, I call these tactics baiting, for lack of a better word I suppose. It's a subtle way of controlling the conversation, by forcing the person onto the defensive, or to spend an inordinate amount of time chasing down meaningless details, all the while casting aspersions on them.

Nevertheless you manage to supply me with many golden opportunities to vindicate Christians, the Gospel, and historical truth.

Thanks for helping correct the definition of a "deist" by the way. There has been considerable confusion since I pointed out what a bad fit the founders were. At least you haven't continued the practice of redefining it until it covers 75% of all theists.

Rad

Radorth

None.

Roosevelt and Churchill killed people to stay in power? Exactly which rivals did they kill off? My, and here I thought they were Christians.

They were already here.

You're just wasting everybodys time asking inane questions Buffman, but it's how you keep from having to respond with facts and rational arguments I suppose.

Rad

Radorth

I disagree completely with "meaningful."

Do refresh my memory. Which comments are based on your insights and not meant to keep me on the defensive, or chasing down meaningless and irrelevant facts?

Rad

Radorth

You would call a revivalist who thought all unbelievers go to hell a liberal? Most people here would call him a bigot, from what I've been reading.

Rad

Daggah

FOR HIS TIME, Radorth. I doubt you could find a Christian who didn't think unbelievers were going to hell in his time. And even the most liberal person 200 years ago would be considered a bigot by today's standards.

Pot...kettle...etc.

Pot...kettle...etc.

I can't be totally sure, but I'm starting to think Radorth is another one of those atheist trolls who come here to give Christians a bad name.

Radorth

So he was a bigot then. Would you had shown such a remarkable flexible definition of "fundy bigot" in Luther's case.

Rad

Toto

Rad - Finney championed abolitionism and promoted education for women and former slaves, advancing the cause of equality. Luther called for Jewish temples to be burned and rabbis lynched, their money to be confiscated, etc., setting back the cause of toleration. I hope you see the differerence.