Daggah

Lacking in reading comprehension it is, then.

Let's read it again:

Q: So what are you saying? That you (with God helping) are now incapable of sin...
A: ...yes, pretty much.

Full context can be found in the link I posted, so it's obvious that I'm not taking anything out of context.

Next time, Radorth, try reading the question before coming up with an answer, eh? The point is, you did say this, so Fenton and I aren't making it up. Maybe you didn't mean it. That's not the point.

Then again, from many of your posts here, it is indeed VERY obvious that you have a reading comprehension problem, or you're intentionally NOT reading people's replies to you. That would indeed explain a lot of things about your trolling here!

If you can show me just ONE thread in which you respond to everything by keeping the discussion on topic, without rambling about various pointless things...just ONE thread, mind you...I'll apologize to you and leave you alone for the rest of your days trolling this forum.

Just one. So have at it.

Radorth

I never said I was without sin. You are lying, based on the definition you have always used in my case. You call Christians liars for not quoting ALL A PERSON SAID on a subject. You have not done so, therefore you are a hypocrite and a liar by your own definition. Right?

You are simply out to get me at any intellectual cost. I know that because when a skeptic openly lied about my contributions on a controversial thread, and totally misquoted me, you never said anything to him about it. But at least he apologized.

Rad

Radorth

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

This is really funny, since you and Fenton are the worst offenders! What a bunch of self-righteous BS that is.

Rad

Dr Rick

So what are you saying? That you (with God helping) are now incapable of sin...

Radorth:..."yes, pretty much."

Then on this thread:

...Here we have a guy who...is allegedly no longer able to sin.

to which Radorth replies: "I never said the last- in fact I said quite the contrary."

and then again, after the first quote and link were posted on this thread for all to see: "I never said I was without sin."

Radorth

Thank you. Yes I never said I was "no longer able to sin or without sin."

(Rad uses Dr Rick's pedantic and technical interpretation techniques to advantage now).

Gee if we had to guess what three people would jump on the band wagon here, who would it be? Hey, where is Toto anyway?

Rad

Radorth

Today's II history quiz/ memory test:

1. Who is most likely to admit they have faults or weaknesses, or to sign a post "Kettle"?

A. Fenton Mulley

B. Daggah

C. Toto

D. Dr Rick

E. Rad

What poster has admitted to a weakness on this very thread and argued anything on the thread topic?

A. Fenton Mulley

B. Daggah

C. Dr Rick

D. Rad

Rad

Daggah

Again, just one thread. And no, sorry, Radorth. You're quite wrong here. In fact, I can't think of a single thread you've participated in that you haven't tried to derail with ramblings and red herrings.

So again, just one. That's all I'm asking.

And when you answer a question in the affirmative, you are agreeing with the statement made in the question. This is a simple concept, Radorth. Everyone here can read what you said. Either admit you didn't read the question, admit that you failed to be clear, or admit that that is what you VERY clearly stated.

Or are you denying that you ever made the post in which you answered in the affirmative when someone asked you if you were incapable of sin?

Daggah

Ah, so in other words, you just "admitted weakness" so that you could use it later as an excuse for self-righteousness.

Well, lessee. All the posters mentioned have argued on-topic to some extent. But if we had to list the one poster who was trying, with all his might, to avoid answering simple questions...well, I think we all here can figure out who that might be.

Yellum Notnef

I said none of the frames that I or my friends had ever broke and that these frames were put through MUCH more than frames that were just used for racing. And yes Radorth,I not only had a yard full of ramps,but I also used to race.
Our frames didn`t happen to break,but apparently a lot of other people weren`t so lucky and probably got hurt.
And because none of ours broke we were not aware that they could break,but after reading that article I see that they do. I still don`t see any indication that they broke every race like you claimed.


I`m well aware of what "double butt" means. I`m much more aware of what it means than you are about where original sin comes from. Thanks.


How can you repeat something you never said? You never asked me the above question. Never.
But whatever the case,it would be hard to answer that question without emailing a BMX guru. I was 23 in 1n 1993 and haden`t looked at a BMX magazine in quite a few years. I actually ditched the bikes when I got my license and realised girls cared more about a guy with a car than some shmuck with a BMX bike regardless of how many cherry pickers,360`s and "rock walks" he could do.
Why don`t you just tell us what company it was and be done with it. I really don`t care much and it`s not really even something deserving of much skepticism.
I would have never doubted or questioned it at all if your religious ramblings here haden`t already proved you to be the all time world wide gold belt wearing king of bullshit.

Oh I see. We need to consult a REAL skeptic on the matter. Maybe Wells and Durant used to ride BMX bikes. Perhaps you should email them and ask.

I don`t have a problem believing you used to build bikes. I do however doubt that all these frames were as weak as the "one race and in the trash" junk you`re saying they were. I`m also not quick to believe that yours was the first that riders couldn`t break.

There is one thing that I`ll never ever believe and that is that you couldn`t have done it without Jesus. That sir is ridiculous and I`m sure someone here will refresh your memory if you try to claim that you didn`t give the credit to Jesus.

Dr Rick

The Bible shows that Jesus could forgive our sins without dying:

Mark 2:5-10

5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven."

6 Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves,

7 "Why does this fellow talk like that? He's blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?"

8 Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, "Why are you thinking these things?

9 Which is easier: to say to the paralytic, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up, take your mat and walk'?

10 But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins . . .

Just to make sure we don't miss the point, the story is also told in Luke 5.

Rick