The only thing you are an expert in is using the fact that you USED to be a pastor some 15 years ago, to try and pass your half truths, illogical reasoning and downright dishonesty as good arguments. You are an expert at that.
TD, I'm sure that there are a number of Christians on this blog who have been truly embarrassed by your insults and attitude. How old are you, 16? Grow up man and show a little respect for others. I supposed you have forgotten the "do unto others."
Anthony: These 'insults' are about as insulting as calling a man a male, a woman a female, or your son a child, i am not insulting Loftus, I am telling the TRUTH, and like Chris said, critiquing Loftus. What I said are not insults but TRUE statements, Loftus did used to be a pastor some 15 years ago, Loftus does use that fact to pass half truths, illogical reasoning and downright dishonesty as good arguments. These are true statements.
For instance, Anthony, YOU are a hypocrite, that is a TRUE statement, not an insult. Don't confuse the two.
Phillip said: I suppose TD also thinks that once you graduate college, you are no longer educated.
Graduating from college does not ensure someone is intelligent, there are many examples of this, but Loftus is a prime example. He has a degree in theology but is very ignorant in theology. Why on earth would someone with a degree in theology say "Psalm 137:9 touts the pleasure of dashing children against rocks" this is an ignorant statement, as a simple reading of the WHOLE Psalm states the following: 7 Remember, O LORD, against the sons of Edom The day of Jerusalem, Who said, “Raze it, raze it, To its very foundation!”
8 O daughter of Babylon, who are to be destroyed, Happy the one who repays you as you have served us! 9 Happy the one who takes and dashes Your little ones against the rock! The psalmist is remembering how babylon razed Jerusalem and is specifically stating that whoever destroys babylon is the one that will be happy about killing infants. We know from history that the PERSIANS captures babylon, so it would be the PERSIANS that were happy to kill infants.
TD, you crack me up, here all along I thought you were being serious.
Oh what a minute, you are being serious. Yes, this is how we "discourse" with people, calling them names and throwing insults.
Little wonder that I take some portions of Christianity seriously anymore. I'm glad that there are at least some representatives of that faith that try to be respectful and reasonable.
Does it make you feel better to use capital letters? Okay, then, YOU my friend are a MORON. Wow, this "do unto others" thing can work the other way huh.
Anthony, you are devoid of anything logical or reasonable. You have effectively proved you don't know what an insult is, you have effectively proved your hypocrisy on several occasions, and you have effectively proved you are illogical and irrational. You are the equivalent of a cheerleader, you aren't actually in the game, you just sit on the sidelines waving your pom poms ignoring your 'sides' mistakes while calling out the other 'sides' mistakes. Doubtless this analogy will go completely over your head and you will respond with yet another comment that is devoid of logic. Closed minded people like you aren't worth my time, so unless you say something worth responding to, I will treat you like the cheerleader you are and simply ignore you.
TD, on the issue of Psalm 137, actually John is right. The Psalmist is wanting sweet revenge against Babylon and gives it's conquerors a blessing for smalling the babies against the rocks. The Psalmist is indeed taking pleasure in it.
TD, this isn't a pissing contest. I'm not going to sit here and beat my chest to prove to you I'm a man.
you have effectively proved your hypocrisy on several occasions, and you have effectively proved you are illogical and irrational
Listen, I'm not here to correct everyones mistakes or to tell John or anyone else that they should argue this way or that way. Like you I'm here to participate, but I do not always have time to respond to every discussion, or even everyone that engages anything that I have written.
Show me where I have been illogical or irrational.
Doubtless this analogy will go completely over your head and you will respond with yet another comment that is devoid of logic.
So all of the comments that you have made on this blog have been logical?
I do not mind corresponding with Christians here or else where, I was one for 25 years. I do not blame Christians or even Christianity for people like you, it's a personality issue. I find people like you among atheists, agnostics, and various religious faiths.
Closed minded people like you aren't worth my time
You've judged me before you got to know me. And contrary to what you have said, I consider myself to be very open minded.
I will treat you like the cheerleader you are and simply ignore you.
You do whatever you have to do if it makes you feel better.
Hey TD, I thought I would respond to a few more of your comments.
For instance, Anthony, YOU are a hypocrite, that is a TRUE statement, not an insult. Don't confuse the two.
Do you know what an "insult" is? It is variously defined as:
- to treat or speak to insolently or with contemptuous rudeness
- to offend or demean
- to treat with gross insensitivity, insolence, or contemptuous rudeness
- to behave arrogantly
Now one can still speak truth and be insulting, and one can speak truth without being insulting. You have been the former throughout the postings that I have seen come from your keyboard.
What I said are not insults but TRUE statements
Whether what you said regarding John is true has to be demonstrated all you have done is assert. But you have been insulting to him and others on this blog.
You said of John,
you USED to be a pastor some 15 years ago, to try and pass your half truths, illogical reasoning and downright dishonesty as good arguments
Now, let's get down to the nitty gritty, let's start discussing these "half truths," "illogical reasoning" and "downright dishonesties." Give examples so they can be discussed.
TD, one last comment for now from me. I do want to apologize for the sarcastic post and calling you a moron. That is not how I am nor is it typically how I communicate with people. I allowed your demeanor to get the best of me and for that I am sorry.
TD, on the issue of Psalm 137, actually John is right. The Psalmist is wanting sweet revenge against Babylon and gives it's conquerors a blessing for smalling the babies against the rocks. The Psalmist is indeed taking pleasure in it.
No, John is not right, John is spectacularly wrong. The Psalmist is specifically saying
"9 Happy the one who takes and dashes Your little ones against the rock!" The happy person is not the psalmist, the happy person are the people that are repaying Babylon, which would be the PERSIANS. The psalmist is not taking pleasure in anything, the happy people he is describing are the PERSIANS. Now you AND JOHN are both spectacularly wrong.
For the record Scott facehead is me, I accidentally posted the message using my wifes screen name.
Listen, I'm not here to correct everyones mistakes or to tell John or anyone else that they should argue this way or that way. Like you I'm here to participate, but I do not always have time to respond to every discussion, or even everyone that engages anything that I have written.
First off whether you are here or not to correct everyons mistakes is irrelevant, if you are going go out of your way to correct my mistakes, but refuse to correct Loftu's mistakes even when I specifically pointed them out to you multiple times, you are a hypocrite, its plain and simple. There is a difference between saying "hey TD you made a mistake here" and I don't say anything, but if you point out my mistake and I ask you to "Point out Loftus's mistakes, not just mine," then you suddenly fall silent, you are engaging in hypocrisy. Its simple.
Show me where I have been illogical or irrational.
This is the problem, the number one problem: evidence, or the lack thereof. If you think we reject Christianity for irrational or emotional reasons, or pride, or hard heart is simply ridiculous and shows that you are not familiar with where many of us stand.
This is a red herring, which is a logical fallacy. I was stating the simple fact that evidence does not guarantee belief so you should not fault God for not providing enough 'evidence,' you attempted to change the subject to me thinking you and the other people on this board reject Christianity for irrational or emotional reasons, or pride, or hard hearts. I never stated that at all, my whole argument about how evidence does not guarantee belief was addressing Loftus faulting God for not supplying 'enough evidence.' The reasons you and other people on this blog reject Christianity was a completely different topic that you tried to change it to. Red herring, which is illogical. So all of the comments that you have made on this blog have been logical?
Yes. Prove a single statement to be illogical and I will gladly concede this specific point, unlike you and Loftus I have no problem admitting when I am wrong. Now one can still speak truth and be insulting, and one can speak truth without being insulting. You have been the former throughout the postings that I have seen come from your keyboard.
Once again, I will gladly concede the point if you show me non insulting way to TRUTHFULLY tell someone they are a hypocrite, dishonest, and speak half truths. Perhaps there are non insulting words that convey the same meaning, perhaps you might be able to show me.
Now, let's get down to the nitty gritty, let's start discussing these "half truths," "illogical reasoning" and "downright dishonesties." Give examples so they can be discussed.
Just look at the other thread. Loftus tries to change the subject multiple times, which is dishonest and illogical. The half truths are the psalms 137 example. That is just the tip of the iceburg, but we'll start with these for now.
TD said...The happy person is not the psalmist, the happy person are the people that are repaying Babylon, which would be the PERSIANS.
Really? What an odd interpretation in order to escape the conculsion warranted by the text. It's called gerrymandering.
Here it is again:
7 Remember, O LORD, what the Edomites did on the day Jerusalem fell.
"Tear it down," they cried, "tear it down to its foundations!"
8 O Daughter of Babylon, doomed to destruction, happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us-
9 he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.
I'll make this short. This Psalm was written by somone with nationalist fever. Jerusalem was home to the one and only God in that his temple was there.
The Psalmist is upset at what had happened. He prayed to God for revenge. That's what it means to "Remember..." What else could it mean to "Remember" what they did to God's people?
And when it comes to the people who should be happy to repay them, the Psalmist is continuing the theme he started with the word "remember." The Psalmist probably had the same view of God as can be found in the book of Job where God brought disaster on Job and his family. You see, nothing happened that God didn't have a hand in. So if the Babylonians are to be destroyed then the Psalmist believes God is causing it. The Psalmist is gleefully awaiting the day of their destruction. So the people who smash these babies against the rock will be doing God's will and they should be happy to be used by God in this way.
The language is definitely picturesque. The only reason to ask for the smashing of babies against the rocks is if the author is hoping for a complete genocide.
This is a genocidal passage and the Psalmist wants it.
17 comments:
The only thing you are an expert in is using the fact that you USED to be a pastor some 15 years ago, to try and pass your half truths, illogical reasoning and downright dishonesty as good arguments. You are an expert at that.
What a devastating critique.
TD, I'm sure that there are a number of Christians on this blog who have been truly embarrassed by your insults and attitude. How old are you, 16? Grow up man and show a little respect for others. I supposed you have forgotten the "do unto others."
I suppose TD also thinks that once you graduate college, you are no longer educated.
Anthony:
These 'insults' are about as insulting as calling a man a male, a woman a female, or your son a child, i am not insulting Loftus, I am telling the TRUTH, and like Chris said, critiquing Loftus. What I said are not insults but TRUE statements, Loftus did used to be a pastor some 15 years ago, Loftus does use that fact to pass half truths, illogical reasoning and downright dishonesty as good arguments. These are true statements.
For instance, Anthony, YOU are a hypocrite, that is a TRUE statement, not an insult. Don't confuse the two.
Phillip said:
I suppose TD also thinks that once you graduate college, you are no longer educated.
Graduating from college does not ensure someone is intelligent, there are many examples of this, but Loftus is a prime example. He has a degree in theology but is very ignorant in theology. Why on earth would someone with a degree in theology say "Psalm 137:9 touts the pleasure of dashing children against rocks" this is an ignorant statement, as a simple reading of the WHOLE Psalm states the following: 7 Remember, O LORD, against the sons of Edom
The day of Jerusalem,
Who said, “Raze it, raze it,
To its very foundation!”
8 O daughter of Babylon, who are to be destroyed,
Happy the one who repays you as you have served us!
9 Happy the one who takes and dashes
Your little ones against the rock!
The psalmist is remembering how babylon razed Jerusalem and is specifically stating that whoever destroys babylon is the one that will be happy about killing infants. We know from history that the PERSIANS captures babylon, so it would be the PERSIANS that were happy to kill infants.
TD, you crack me up, here all along I thought you were being serious.
Oh what a minute, you are being serious. Yes, this is how we "discourse" with people, calling them names and throwing insults.
Little wonder that I take some portions of Christianity seriously anymore. I'm glad that there are at least some representatives of that faith that try to be respectful and reasonable.
Does it make you feel better to use capital letters? Okay, then, YOU my friend are a MORON. Wow, this "do unto others" thing can work the other way huh.
Anthony, you are devoid of anything logical or reasonable. You have effectively proved you don't know what an insult is, you have effectively proved your hypocrisy on several occasions, and you have effectively proved you are illogical and irrational. You are the equivalent of a cheerleader, you aren't actually in the game, you just sit on the sidelines waving your pom poms ignoring your 'sides' mistakes while calling out the other 'sides' mistakes. Doubtless this analogy will go completely over your head and you will respond with yet another comment that is devoid of logic. Closed minded people like you aren't worth my time, so unless you say something worth responding to, I will treat you like the cheerleader you are and simply ignore you.
TD, on the issue of Psalm 137, actually John is right. The Psalmist is wanting sweet revenge against Babylon and gives it's conquerors a blessing for smalling the babies against the rocks. The Psalmist is indeed taking pleasure in it.
TD, this isn't a pissing contest. I'm not going to sit here and beat my chest to prove to you I'm a man.
you have effectively proved your hypocrisy on several occasions, and you have effectively proved you are illogical and irrational
Listen, I'm not here to correct everyones mistakes or to tell John or anyone else that they should argue this way or that way. Like you I'm here to participate, but I do not always have time to respond to every discussion, or even everyone that engages anything that I have written.
Show me where I have been illogical or irrational.
Doubtless this analogy will go completely over your head and you will respond with yet another comment that is devoid of logic.
So all of the comments that you have made on this blog have been logical?
I do not mind corresponding with Christians here or else where, I was one for 25 years. I do not blame Christians or even Christianity for people like you, it's a personality issue. I find people like you among atheists, agnostics, and various religious faiths.
Closed minded people like you aren't worth my time
You've judged me before you got to know me. And contrary to what you have said, I consider myself to be very open minded.
I will treat you like the cheerleader you are and simply ignore you.
You do whatever you have to do if it makes you feel better.
Hey TD, I thought I would respond to a few more of your comments.
For instance, Anthony, YOU are a hypocrite, that is a TRUE statement, not an insult. Don't confuse the two.
Do you know what an "insult" is? It is variously defined as:
- to treat or speak to insolently or with contemptuous rudeness
- to offend or demean
- to treat with gross insensitivity, insolence, or contemptuous rudeness
- to behave arrogantly
Now one can still speak truth and be insulting, and one can speak truth without being insulting. You have been the former throughout the postings that I have seen come from your keyboard.
What I said are not insults but TRUE statements
Whether what you said regarding John is true has to be demonstrated all you have done is assert. But you have been insulting to him and others on this blog.
You said of John,
you USED to be a pastor some 15 years ago, to try and pass your half truths, illogical reasoning and downright dishonesty as good arguments
Now, let's get down to the nitty gritty, let's start discussing these "half truths," "illogical reasoning" and "downright dishonesties." Give examples so they can be discussed.
TD, one last comment for now from me. I do want to apologize for the sarcastic post and calling you a moron. That is not how I am nor is it typically how I communicate with people. I allowed your demeanor to get the best of me and for that I am sorry.
TD wrote: "like Chris said, critiquing Loftus."
Dude, when I wrote "What a devastating critique" I was being sarcastic.
TD, on the issue of Psalm 137, actually John is right. The Psalmist is wanting sweet revenge against Babylon and gives it's conquerors a blessing for smalling the babies against the rocks. The Psalmist is indeed taking pleasure in it.
No, John is not right, John is spectacularly wrong. The Psalmist is specifically saying
"9 Happy the one who takes and dashes
Your little ones against the rock!"
The happy person is not the psalmist, the happy person are the people that are repaying Babylon, which would be the PERSIANS. The psalmist is not taking pleasure in anything, the happy people he is describing are the PERSIANS. Now you AND JOHN are both spectacularly wrong.
For the record Scott facehead is me, I accidentally posted the message using my wifes screen name.
Listen, I'm not here to correct everyones mistakes or to tell John or anyone else that they should argue this way or that way. Like you I'm here to participate, but I do not always have time to respond to every discussion, or even everyone that engages anything that I have written.
First off whether you are here or not to correct everyons mistakes is irrelevant, if you are going go out of your way to correct my mistakes, but refuse to correct Loftu's mistakes even when I specifically pointed them out to you multiple times, you are a hypocrite, its plain and simple. There is a difference between saying "hey TD you made a mistake here" and I don't say anything, but if you point out my mistake and I ask you to "Point out Loftus's mistakes, not just mine," then you suddenly fall silent, you are engaging in hypocrisy. Its simple.
Show me where I have been illogical or irrational.
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=21219785&postID=6693947811407787843
You said the following.
This is the problem, the number one problem: evidence, or the lack thereof. If you think we reject Christianity for irrational or emotional reasons, or pride, or hard heart is simply ridiculous and shows that you are not familiar with where many of us stand.
This is a red herring, which is a logical fallacy. I was stating the simple fact that evidence does not guarantee belief so you should not fault God for not providing enough 'evidence,' you attempted to change the subject to me thinking you and the other people on this board reject Christianity for irrational or emotional reasons, or pride, or hard hearts. I never stated that at all, my whole argument about how evidence does not guarantee belief was addressing Loftus faulting God for not supplying 'enough evidence.' The reasons you and other people on this blog reject Christianity was a completely different topic that you tried to change it to. Red herring, which is illogical.
So all of the comments that you have made on this blog have been logical?
Yes. Prove a single statement to be illogical and I will gladly concede this specific point, unlike you and Loftus I have no problem admitting when I am wrong.
Now one can still speak truth and be insulting, and one can speak truth without being insulting. You have been the former throughout the postings that I have seen come from your keyboard.
Once again, I will gladly concede the point if you show me non insulting way to TRUTHFULLY tell someone they are a hypocrite, dishonest, and speak half truths. Perhaps there are non insulting words that convey the same meaning, perhaps you might be able to show me.
Now, let's get down to the nitty gritty, let's start discussing these "half truths," "illogical reasoning" and "downright dishonesties." Give examples so they can be discussed.
Just look at the other thread. Loftus tries to change the subject multiple times, which is dishonest and illogical. The half truths are the psalms 137 example. That is just the tip of the iceburg, but we'll start with these for now.
TD said...The happy person is not the psalmist, the happy person are the people that are repaying Babylon, which would be the PERSIANS.
Really? What an odd interpretation in order to escape the conculsion warranted by the text. It's called gerrymandering.
Here it is again:
7 Remember, O LORD, what the Edomites did on the day Jerusalem fell.
"Tear it down," they cried,
"tear it down to its foundations!"
8 O Daughter of Babylon, doomed to destruction, happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us-
9 he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.
I'll make this short. This Psalm was written by somone with nationalist fever. Jerusalem was home to the one and only God in that his temple was there.
The Psalmist is upset at what had happened. He prayed to God for revenge. That's what it means to "Remember..." What else could it mean to "Remember" what they did to God's people?
And when it comes to the people who should be happy to repay them, the Psalmist is continuing the theme he started with the word "remember." The Psalmist probably had the same view of God as can be found in the book of Job where God brought disaster on Job and his family. You see, nothing happened that God didn't have a hand in. So if the Babylonians are to be destroyed then the Psalmist believes God is causing it. The Psalmist is gleefully awaiting the day of their destruction. So the people who smash these babies against the rock will be doing God's will and they should be happy to be used by God in this way.
The language is definitely picturesque. The only reason to ask for the smashing of babies against the rocks is if the author is hoping for a complete genocide.
This is a genocidal passage and the Psalmist wants it.
Cheers.
Now you AND JOHN are both spectacularly wrong.
Actually John has hit the nail on the head with his last post on this.
Hell even John Calvin and John Gill both use the word "glory" in reference to God's genocide of Babylon.
Here is what Calvin said in reference to Ps. 137:9:
"...and glory in the fact that it is well with us in our worst distresses, and that our enemies are devoted to destruction."
For Calvin the Psalmist was glorying in the destruction of his enemy, Babylon.
John Gill says that the infants being smashed against the rocks was a "just retaliation" and was for the "glory of divine justice."
Post a Comment