Mr. Carter's Hypocrisy

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

CARTER
There's no need to whine just because you can't compete with Sims' logic. Do
you ever notice that when you can't beat someone at a game, you try to bring
them to a different turf?
CARTER
I would be interested in a systematic presentatation of your arguments
against the Christian explanation of Matthew's genealogy before I spend a
large amount of time on the subject.

POOBAH
I'm afraid my irony meter just broke. Does someone have a spare? Jason, you
are the undisputed world champion of both techniques in this newsgroup.

When is the last time you didn't end a thread by sulking away from difficult
questions? When is the last time during a thread you didn't attempt to shift
the burden of proof, demand answers to your questions, and refuse to answer
reasonable requests from others?

Why just today we've seen you sulk away from a request to prove that you
actually know enough about logic to demonstrate that you understand the
nature of truth claims. I'm sure you won't ever provide it, because you
can't, because you've never studied logic outside the realm required of
apologetics. To do such study would endanger your faith, and it's just too
dangerous.

Have you *ever* demonstrated knowledge of arguments for a point of view that
you don't hold? Remember, you're the one that was caught in the lie that you
had examined Biblical justifications for atrocities when you never had.
You're the one who claimed that you had read most of the articles on
infidels.org and found them all to be childish & emotional, and could never
back up that claim. I don't think you've ever studied a non-Christian point
of view except through an apologist's filter, but why don't you prove me
wrong; take some issue and argue it as a skeptic would; let's see if you can
do it.

Here's a question: Name the last three books about science you read that
aren't Christian apologetics tracts.
Name the last three books of modern Biblical criticism that don't assume a
conservative literalist point of view.
Name the last three books about philosophy and/or logic you've read that
don't assume a Christian point of view.
Name some field of science, logic or philosophy from the 20th century,
unrelated to Christianity, with which you have familiarity.

You, like most fundamentalists, live in a world of 18th century science
combined with medieval philosophy & logic. You're probably more acquainted
with demons than quantum mechanics, and probably consider Darwin to be one.

You've already been provided with arguments against the genealogy. Argue
against those. Or instead, why don't *you* critique the arguments against
the Christian explanation of Matthew's genealogy? Prove me wrong and prove
to us that you actually do non-apologetic research for a change?

Given your record of sulking away from threads & ignoring difficult
questions, why should anyone bother to provide you with "systematic
presentations" that you will simply ignore anyway?

• Previous message: Matthew's Genealogy
• Next message: Mr. Malcolm's hypocrisy was Re: Mr. Carter's Hypocrisy
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]