Vorkosigan

Meta, the problem with his "evidence" is that it is full of blatant mispresentations. He has no "evidence" at all.

Vorkosigan

[ May 15, 2002: Message edited by: Vorkosigan ]</p>

Ted Hoffman

Metacrock
Thanks, great idea.
WTF, Metacrock, I thought U were a Xstian? Actually, a Xstian apologetic?
Helen
I find it amusing. The title is intriguing in its boldness and ambition.
I will. I will actually post my response here, for "tearing up", before I approach the battle field.
I am very forceful. Arrogance is squashed like a bug by my mere presence - there is hardly any room for arrogance available. I believe I inspire humility in mortal men - I mean, sometimes.
He is nice. But its not necessary when dealing with me. I believe if he wasnt open to the possibility that my views have merit, he would have refuted my article and never bothered to get to know me. To date, he has not responded to my article, he waffled and cited being busy marking theses as the reason.
He has just thrown the book at me to keep me busy and draw my attention from his lack of response to my article.
But its Ok with me.
That much is clear. But I believe he is in for a surprise given he is twice older than me and has this condescening air of self-righteousness that christian "elders" wear around them.

All I want to do is to cut his beliefs to pieces. I know it has a diabolical ring to it, but hey, I feel the excitement. Its like I have been presented with a chance to clear my backyard.

I have been an atheist for quite a while now but I have never really laid my christian "demons" to rest given my christian upbringing. Maybe its because most christians I know have been so evasive and incompetent as "opponents".

I believe the time has come.

MOJO-JOJO

Bravo! BRAVO!!

HelenM

Hi IntenSity

I only just realized you'd responded to me here...

So he does have that condescending air? *sigh* I was hoping maybe not but...oh well.

Anyway, I understand why you're excited.

I hope you aren't disappointed by how the interaction goes when you get to be face to face with him and present your best arguments against his faith.

After all, most Christians aren't used to interacting with skeptics in any meaningful way - so I've found.

So I'm thinking he's more likely to evade your points than interact with you in a satisfying way...

Still, if he is evasive then the most obvious conclusion from that is that he is no match for your arguments...which in itself could be somewhat satisfying to you...

Anyway, I hope you blow him away with the force of your arguments and it's a wake-up call to him to the need for him to have a better defense of his faith than ETDAV...

love
Helen

[ May 16, 2002: Message edited by: HelenSL ]</p>

Sojourner553

Agreed, McDowell's books are full of "quotes".
But most of the time these "quotes" are from "other" Christians who never question their original source.

This is supposed to be a POSITIVE?

To be consistent(!) then we should all be impressed with Muslim claims that reference OTHER Muslim scholars who vouch for their authenticity.

ie, Wouldn't it show more objectivity if a Muslim referred to an authority that was known to have an INDEPENDENT attitude towards what he was saying? (ie if the "authority" were not already a believing Muslim)?

As another example: Take an old Elvis Presley fan who claimed to have "seen" Elvis after he died, who then referred to another Elvis devoted fan that "they" also saw Elvis. Objective?

These are the tactics one sees McDowell using!

Sojourner

[ May 19, 2002: Message edited by: Sojourner553 ]</p>

Ragnarok

The precise chemical name is d-lysergic acid diethylamide I believe -

freemonkey

ROFLMAO!!!

h

I also have read New Evidence That Demands a Verdict. He's a fucking a moron. I went through and highlighted some of the particularly absurd things he said; you can email me if you need quotes.