[spracks21]

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

hmmm



ok pal

I tried to calmly discuss with him. He made no such attempt, and was childish from the start. If he acts like a child, I will treat him and refer to him as such. And my second statement was following his own faulty logic. I admit I behaved immaturely, but only after he had, and refused to discuss rationally. This is a common theme for 270. Make an arrogant statement, ridicule all who disagree, post a mindless image, and repeat his faulty points over and over again. He constantly retreats behind childish behavior.

[spracks21]

I will again ask anyone who cannot discuss topics respectfully, to leave. Respect the thread you are in, or stay out.

[270KIDZ]

Originally Posted by spracks21

Make an arrogant statement

What's arrogant about telling someone that their belief is largly mistaken and giving them evidence that is unanimously accepted as fact.

Originally Posted by spracks21

ridicule all who disagree

Because I'm the only one who is ridiculing in here. Who called who a child first?

Originally Posted by spracks21

post a mindless image

Because I posted the first image, right?

Originally Posted by spracks21

repeat his faulty points over and over again.

If by faulty, you mean accepted by the entire scholarly community.

Originally Posted by spracks21

He constantly retreats behind childish behavior.

You're right. Sounds childish to me.

------

Get off your high horse, brah. This is a crappy subforum on a paintball website filled with trolls who believe that google and wikipedia can teach you more than a 4 year degree. Don't get so uptight. It just makes you look childish.

[spracks21]

Originally Posted by 270KIDZ

What's arrogant about telling someone that their belief is largly mistaken and giving them evidence that is unanimously accepted as fact.
It's arrogant when you say someone is wrong, that your belief is fact, and give no evidence to support your claim, besides that popular opinion is on your side. And I'd still like to see a source on your scholarly opinion point.



Because I'm the only one who is ridiculing in here. Who called who a child first? You were first to behave like a child, and troll this thread. As according to our thread rules, we may flame and troll other trolls. That is why you received your dogma Jesus image. You brought your arrogant tone into this, ad you often do, and refused to be respectful.



Because I posted the first image, right?
You refused to counter his points and calmly discuss the topic. You were then judged to be a troll, and trolls get asked if they bmad, bro.


If by faulty, you mean accepted by the entire scholarly community.
By faulty, I mean a claim made without offering any support material or said claim. In this quote of yours, you take my saying of "faulty" which was in context of a completely different thought, and apply it to the discussion of Jesus. This is a fallacy, and intentionally deceptive.

You're right. Sounds childish to me.
Posting a picture of a man in a tinfoil hat, towards someone who does not believe exactly as you do, is indeed childish. And it is also a common tactic of yours, attempting to play to the crowd with images and gifs, instead if being mature and countering points made.

Last warning, stay out of this thread for Atheists, or discuss respectfully. Otherwise you will be reported for trolling.

[spracks21]

Originally Posted by 270KIDZ

Get off your high horse, brah. This is a crappy subforum on a paintball website filled with trolls who believe that google and wikipedia can teach you more than a 4 year degree. Don't get so uptight. It just makes you look childish.

Would you appreciate me engaging in the same trolling in the CK thread? If you wish to open a thread where you can spit off your mindless rhetoric and self-proclaimed facts as truth, then do so. But not in this specific thread.

I personally have mentioned that I am open to being convinced Jesus the man existed. I would love to calmly discuss this with you. But it seems like nobody can ever talk to you, because it always ends with you resorting to a childish attitude. If you wish to discuss something, then do so respectively. Right now, you are only stirring up pissing matches.

[spracks21]

Originally Posted by teamsilentassassins

Because you have any right, at all, to report anyone for trolling other than Treg.
yes, I do.


As if you haven't already. But hey, look! spracks21 made a thread and now he gets to be the boss! Makes all dem rulz n stuf! Now da hi hoers iz bigg a$$ Trodgan Hoers! Woooo hackzorz. You made the, like, 7th version of the same thread that everyone use to get in pissing matches? The power...is overwhelming!
I don't recall any time I have trolled CK. Anytime I was asked to leave, I did. And this post of yours does not help your already low credibility.


Read a book, or use something other than wikipedia.

http://www.sowhataboutjesus.com/existed.php

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcno.htm

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread390640/pg1
Your sources are so much more credible And the books I read don't include talking snakes, or magical kingdoms. I stopped reading those books in 5th grade.

This is all the work I shall do for wee lil spracks. Now do something else other than sit on here, refuse to use the internet beyond the nation at all, and learn something. It'll do wonders to your arguments, and people just might take you seriously.
Unlike 270, I don't believe you ever had any credibility to begin with. You usually just piggy back on what 270 says, or quote him and suck his dick with praise. Stay out of this thread if you cannot contribute. You are also only intentionally adding to the pissing match.

I am behaving the exact same as I have in every other thread I have created in the past. I hope you can agree that when I start threads, I make a point to keep it on topic, and civil. I apologize for sinking immaturity to counter yours. But if you wish to continue posting in here, keep t respectful. I have never gone into CK and intentionally tried to evoke emotion, as you two trolls are blatantly doing now.

[teamsilentassassins]

Originally Posted by spracks21

I am behaving the exact same as I have in every other thread I have created in the past. Mmmm, nope. Normally, my only issue with you is that we disagree. Now it's because you're being annoying and childish.

I hope you can agree that when I start threads, I make a point to keep it on topic, and civil. Sometimes.

I apologize for sinking immaturity to counter yours. That was my first post, responding to your immaturity. How is that countering?

But if you wish to continue posting in here, keep it respectful. I have never gone into CK and intentionally tried to evoke emotion, as you two trolls are blatantly doing now. I'm sure if I wanted to go through the last few threads CK has had, I could find something. I have this thing called a life, however. Although I may do it later just to do it.

.

[270KIDZ]

Made a thread. Off to work. Enjoy:

https://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...1#post70590949

[spracks21]

In what way have I been more childish than 270? I've tried to get this back on respectful discussion for awhile now.

I wasn't referring to only you in the maturity post. I was apologizing for the immature nature of my own posts, which I made to counter the immaturity being displayed by the non-members of this thread.

I have only ever posted in one CK thread. Shouldn't be that hard. I admit to have shown immature moments in there, but always after ignorance and immaturity were shown to me first. And again, once I am told to leave, I leave.

I am now asking you to please leave. You clearly cannot respect thread rules, or the posters in here. Please exit.

[teamsilentassassins]

Originally Posted by 270KIDZ

Made a thread. Off to work. Enjoy:

https://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...1#post70590949

[spracks21]

Originally Posted by 270KIDZ

Made a thread. Off to work. Enjoy:

https://www.pbnation.com/showthread.p...1#post70590949

Thank you, this is what I wanted from you.

[teamsilentassassins]

Originally Posted by spracks21

In what way have I been more childish than 270? I've tried to get this back on respectful discussion for awhile now.

I wasn't referring to only you in the maturity post. I was apologizing for the immature nature of my own posts, which I made to counter the immaturity being displayed by the non-members of this thread.

I have only ever posted in one CK thread. Shouldn't be that hard. I admit to have shown immature moments in there, but always after ignorance and immaturity were shown to me first. And again, once I am told to leave, I leave.

I am now asking you to please leave. You clearly cannot respect thread rules, or the posters in here. Please exit.

Sure, I'll leave. Read the new thread, and post in there.

[spracks21]

Originally Posted by teamsilentassassins

You usually just piggy back on what 270 says, or quote him and suck his dick with praise. Stay out of this thread if you cannot contribute.

Don't forget the reach-around.

(Just a joke, please don't go into e-battle mode)

[spracks21]

Originally Posted by teamsilentassassins

Sure, I'll leave. Read the new thread, and post in there.

Will do, but give me some time please. I'm off to work for now, but promise to discuss in the thread when I get home and have time.

[teamsilentassassins]

Originally Posted by spracks21

Don't forget the reach-around.

(Just a joke, please don't go into e-battle mode)

Agreeing =/= dick sucking. Cool story bro.

[spracks21]

Originally Posted by teamsilentassassins

Agreeing =/= dick sucking. Cool story bro.

Just saying, the way you tag-team with 270 and frequently quote/worship his posts, suggest some sinful attraction that you have for the guy. You are very quick to get on your knees for him any time he does something you like...

But it was a joke anyway, breh. I think our pissing match has come to an end now, no?

[teamsilentassassins]

Originally Posted by spracks21

Just saying, the way you tag-team with 270 and frequently quote/worship his posts, suggest some sinful attraction that you have for the guy. You are very quick to get on your knees for him any time he does something you like...

But it was a joke anyway, breh. I think our pissing match has come to an end now, no?

Not when you continue it. I apologize for having an oddly similar belief system to someone else on this forum. Not knowing who it is coming in, and seeing the similarities is just cool, and yea, if someone like you is *****ing at him for completely idiotic reasons, I'll help him out. Only fair.

If you want the last word, take it, but all I'm doing is helping someone out. Sue me. Congrats, though, you win!

[spracks21]

Disengage your e-battle mode, good sir. It was a joke. And I'm glad to see you have adopted the same posting tactics as 270 now. But I fear you two might be getting a bit too close for your own salvation...

/Last word.


(TBC?)

[Umami]

Originally Posted by 270KIDZ

Agreed. But to claim that he never lived is a joke.

He's right, most of the scholarly community accepts that a man fitting Jesus' description existed at that time. I wonder what his name was in his native tongue...

Originally Posted by 270KIDZ

No offense, but are just wrong. It's historical fact by every standard. I don't know how else to argue it besides telling you to study it for yourself. The evidence of his existence is overwhelming.

Can't be mad at us for using the same argument you use against us... you weren't there so you can't know it for absolute fact. Plus, even then, the photons are just hitting receptors in your brain and creating images, we don't know for sure what's really out there... nothing's absolute 100% fact, man, it could all be an illusion...

You get my point.

Originally Posted by 270KIDZ

I am not going to answer your question because I disagree with your initial premise.

[Treghc]

lolol

And I never stated I believed a man named Jesus never existed. Once again, 270KIDZ is blindly throwing words in my mouth to feed his self-indulgence.

All I ever stated was that there is no evidence to prove his existence. And he's so blind by his own ambitions that he's unable to show any amount of humility or humbleness by agreeing with the facts (the facts being that there are no absolute facts about his existence).

We could take his argument of "so many people say it's true, so it's true" and turn it right back around on him when it comes to extraterrestrial life. Wait. We did that. We told him that most scientists would say that the chance of there being life in the universe is greater than the chance of there not. But of course, that didn't fit his agenda, so he refuted it because... there's no evidence. HO LAWD the hypocrisy

Moving on...

[wavesport001]

Could you point me in the direction of some "atheist information". I'd like to know more about both sides of the argument, seeing as how I was an atheist, now a Christian, but realized I never really looked at what atheists had to say, just kinda didn't want to accept a God.

To answer your question, much of what Athiests think about the bible is very different from the "traditional" view. I would guess that most Athiests accept the scholarly, secular view of how the Bible was written. This version is based on textual clues and archaeological data and it differs greatly from the version you'll hear in Sunday school. Scholars have learned much about the history of the bible and its compilation by using a technique called redaction criticism. I should say, first off, that secular scholars start with the assumption that the book was written by humans and that it shows the evolution of religion over time. That being said, I think that the secular conclusions make more sense, objectively, than the traditional christian conclusion. If you'd like to learn more about it, just google redaction criticism or the documentary hypothesis. You're sure to find secular explanations of the hypothesis as well as christian apologist websites that will explain away your doubts.

If you truly want a challenge to your beliefs and want to hear the counter-Apologist arguments then I encourage you to check out the Reasonable Doubts podcast. You can find it on Itunes in the religion section. The website for the podcast is: http://doubtreligion.blogspot.com/

I feel I should warn you about pursuing "both sides of the argument". Learning the arguments for Athiesm is a lot like Neo's choice to take the red pill in the Matrix: knowing the truth does not always equal happiness. Most people are happy with their religious beliefs and if it makes you happy go with it. For what it's worth, In my personal experience Athiests tend to intimately know both sides of the argument while Christians do not.