Commentary on Q and Mark
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-12-2015, 04:36 AM (This post was last modified: 01-12-2015 04:40 AM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Commentary on Q and Mark
(01-12-2015 03:46 AM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  
(30-11-2015 01:05 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Correct, I refuse to answer those questions you pose that are off topic to the resolution at hand.

Are we done yet?

This one made my day. Holy ignorance batman. How could he say that none of the 40+ questions were on topic when they all either asked the question directly or could be used to support or refute the argument. Incredible. Just incredible what religion can do to a mind. I wonder how sharp he could be if he just got rid of that yoke.

Yep Bowing

You nailed that far better than I could. Thanks Big Grin
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mark Fulton's post
01-12-2015, 04:38 AM
RE: Commentary on Q and Mark
I can do as well.

Q. You lost.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
01-12-2015, 04:42 AM
RE: Commentary on Q and Mark
(01-12-2015 04:38 AM)Banjo Wrote:  I can do as well.

Q. You lost.

Thanks mate Big Grin

I hope you're having a good day.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mark Fulton's post
01-12-2015, 04:44 AM
RE: Commentary on Q and Mark
(01-12-2015 04:42 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(01-12-2015 04:38 AM)Banjo Wrote:  I can do as well.

Q. You lost.

Thanks mate Big Grin

I hope you're having a good day.

Well seeing Q get his arse kicked helped me laugh.

So thanks for that Mark.

BTW. Q. You are so weak and your arguments are worse. Pathetic actually.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
20-12-2015, 03:30 PM
RE: Commentary on Q and Mark
(01-12-2015 04:44 AM)Banjo Wrote:  
(01-12-2015 04:42 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Thanks mate Big Grin

I hope you're having a good day.

Well seeing Q get his arse kicked helped me laugh.

So thanks for that Mark.

BTW. Q. You are so weak and your arguments are worse. Pathetic actually.

I suspect Q is disappointed with his own performance in the debate. He must have realised the deficiencies in his knowledge and that most of what he believed about Paul was unsubstantiated.

I'm guessing he spent some time on the internet trying to find ideas to back up his opinions, and wasn't able to, so he just ignored most of what I wrote.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-12-2015, 09:47 PM
RE: Commentary on Q and Mark
(20-12-2015 03:30 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(01-12-2015 04:44 AM)Banjo Wrote:  Well seeing Q get his arse kicked helped me laugh.

So thanks for that Mark.

BTW. Q. You are so weak and your arguments are worse. Pathetic actually.

I suspect Q is disappointed with his own performance in the debate. He must have realised the deficiencies in his knowledge and that most of what he believed about Paul was unsubstantiated.

I'm guessing he spent some time on the internet trying to find ideas to back up his opinions, and wasn't able to, so he just ignored most of what I wrote.

HA!! I don't buy that. I bet you that he just retreated to his lair to rest and feed. I rather doubt you got him to realize much. Although I imagine you did make him delve into his apologetic books to try to reinforce his position.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes The Organic Chemist's post
21-12-2015, 03:13 AM
RE: Commentary on Q and Mark
(20-12-2015 09:47 PM)The Organic Chemist Wrote:  
(20-12-2015 03:30 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I suspect Q is disappointed with his own performance in the debate. He must have realised the deficiencies in his knowledge and that most of what he believed about Paul was unsubstantiated.

I'm guessing he spent some time on the internet trying to find ideas to back up his opinions, and wasn't able to, so he just ignored most of what I wrote.

HA!! I don't buy that. I bet you that he just retreated to his lair to rest and feed. I rather doubt you got him to realize much. Although I imagine you did make him delve into his apologetic books to try to reinforce his position.

Yep.

I was continually surprised by how little he knew, and kept waiting for him to add something useful to the debate. That never happened.

Maybe it is nieve of me to imagine he spent time looking stuff up. I think I made the same mistake with Alla. I'm learning.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-12-2015, 03:31 AM
RE: Commentary on Q and Mark
Q lost rather convincingly. Tail between legs lost.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-01-2016, 05:10 PM
RE: Commentary on Q and Mark
The bit about Paul being beaten by the Romans reminds me of something I read just the other day (in E.P. Sanders' Paul: A Short Introduction). In one of his letters, Paul claims to have been beaten "countless times" -- and then immediately proceeds to count them.

Laugh out load
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-01-2016, 07:10 PM
RE: Commentary on Q and Mark
(14-01-2016 05:10 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  The bit about Paul being beaten by the Romans reminds me of something I read just the other day (in E.P. Sanders' Paul: A Short Introduction). In one of his letters, Paul claims to have been beaten "countless times" -- and then immediately proceeds to count them.

Laugh out load

YepBig Grin

The point is (here) that he doesn't say who has beaten him...he definitely doesn't say it was "the Romans." I'm pretty sure about this, but would be happy to be corrected by our "expert."
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: