Nick Seldon - A Quotation
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-09-2015, 03:51 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(25-09-2015 08:46 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(24-09-2015 02:12 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  "Are you suggesting we take your anecdotal "like attracts like" experiences and say they are smoking gun proof against all religion and all religions?"

No. I was discussing the topic of religion in the context of my doctor/patient relationships.

"Mark, the chapter I've read in your book show a lot of rhetoric without substance."

Blah blah blah. I doubt you've read the chapter. It's too long for you. You haven't explored the links. If you would care to debate the topic of "Paul" with me, you know where the boxing ring is.

"I'm not looking to anger you or goad you or make you feel defensive."

I don't care what you imagine the effect your words might have on me are.

"...you are only widening the rift between our camps."

Too right. Your "camp" is a cancer on the world.

To date, per your request, I've offered five or six debate resolutions, all of which you refused.

If you would care to debate the topic of "Paul" with me, you know where the boxing ring is.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-09-2015, 01:48 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(25-09-2015 03:51 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(25-09-2015 08:46 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  To date, per your request, I've offered five or six debate resolutions, all of which you refused.

If you would care to debate the topic of "Paul" with me, you know where the boxing ring is.

Resolution: Paul

This is not a debate resolution. Repeating, wouldn't mind debating with someone who understands how formal debates are to be conducted. I mean, what is the affirmative position here you wish to debate for?

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-09-2015, 05:57 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(28-09-2015 01:48 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(25-09-2015 03:51 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  If you would care to debate the topic of "Paul" with me, you know where the boxing ring is.

Resolution: Paul

This is not a debate resolution. Repeating, wouldn't mind debating with someone who understands how formal debates are to be conducted. I mean, what is the affirmative position here you wish to debate for?

How about

"Paul was a charlatan"?

I will put forward the affirmative case.

I assume you will disagree.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-10-2015, 01:43 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(28-09-2015 05:57 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(28-09-2015 01:48 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Resolution: Paul

This is not a debate resolution. Repeating, wouldn't mind debating with someone who understands how formal debates are to be conducted. I mean, what is the affirmative position here you wish to debate for?

How about

"Paul was a charlatan"?

I will put forward the affirmative case.

I assume you will disagree.

Paul is recognized by liberal and conservative scholars to have the following skills: halachic interpretation, rabbinical knowledge, Greek speaking and writing, church planting, movement leading and more. A charlatan claims to have skill but is a fraud. Of course, you would have to provide evidence the scholars are yet to unearth. Perhaps you have some paperwork where Paul was on trial for deceiving the public? He was only put into court for claims that Christianity was causing an uproar among the Jews.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-10-2015, 04:32 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(05-10-2015 01:43 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(28-09-2015 05:57 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  How about

"Paul was a charlatan"?

I will put forward the affirmative case.

I assume you will disagree.

Paul is recognized by liberal and conservative scholars to have the following skills: halachic interpretation, rabbinical knowledge, Greek speaking and writing, church planting, movement leading and more. A charlatan claims to have skill but is a fraud. Of course, you would have to provide evidence the scholars are yet to unearth. Perhaps you have some paperwork where Paul was on trial for deceiving the public? He was only put into court for claims that Christianity was causing an uproar among the Jews.

Sounds like you have a good case. You do know where the boxing ring is don't you?
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
08-10-2015, 08:01 AM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(05-10-2015 04:32 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(05-10-2015 01:43 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Paul is recognized by liberal and conservative scholars to have the following skills: halachic interpretation, rabbinical knowledge, Greek speaking and writing, church planting, movement leading and more. A charlatan claims to have skill but is a fraud. Of course, you would have to provide evidence the scholars are yet to unearth. Perhaps you have some paperwork where Paul was on trial for deceiving the public? He was only put into court for claims that Christianity was causing an uproar among the Jews.

Sounds like you have a good case. You do know where the boxing ring is don't you?

You don't understand the definition of the word charlatan:

"A person who makes elaborate, fraudulent, and often voluble claims to skill or knowledge; a quack or fraud."

Every Bible scholar, secular or religious, affirms Paul was a brilliant expositor and author. Your debate is already ended. You already lost.

And if I tolerated this nonsense, do you have any textual, historical or other evidence you would use in the debate outside the scriptures? Any extra-biblical sources? You do not affirm the validity and reliable nature of the scriptures so how would you use a "false" text to affirm a debate resolution? Again, one of several reasons not to debate with you is you don't understand how a formal or informal debate works, Dr. Fulton.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-10-2015, 10:48 AM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(08-10-2015 08:01 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(05-10-2015 04:32 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Sounds like you have a good case. You do know where the boxing ring is don't you?

And if I tolerated this nonsense, do you have any textual, historical or other evidence you would use in the debate outside the scriptures? Any extra-biblical sources? You do not affirm the validity and reliable nature of the scriptures so how would you use a "false" text to affirm a debate resolution? Again, one of several reasons not to debate with you is you don't understand how a formal or informal debate works, Dr. Fulton.

Hmmmm... calling your opponent's view point "nonsense" before even entering the discussion sure is a great way to begin an informal or formal debate - right there Q?

The self righteous, condescending and arrogant approach sure will get the talks going on a good footing!

“Truth does not demand belief. Scientists do not join hands every Sunday, singing, yes, gravity is real! I will have faith! I will be strong! I believe in my heart that what goes up, up, up, must come down, down, down. Amen! If they did, we would think they were pretty insecure about it.”
— Dan Barker —
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Timber1025's post
08-10-2015, 09:33 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(08-10-2015 10:48 AM)Timber1025 Wrote:  
(08-10-2015 08:01 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  And if I tolerated this nonsense, do you have any textual, historical or other evidence you would use in the debate outside the scriptures? Any extra-biblical sources? You do not affirm the validity and reliable nature of the scriptures so how would you use a "false" text to affirm a debate resolution? Again, one of several reasons not to debate with you is you don't understand how a formal or informal debate works, Dr. Fulton.

Hmmmm... calling your opponent's view point "nonsense" before even entering the discussion sure is a great way to begin an informal or formal debate - right there Q?

The self righteous, condescending and arrogant approach sure will get the talks going on a good footing!

This is the second time he's claimed victory in a debate with me, yet he won't step into the ring. He then tells me that I don't understand how debates are run!

Fancy him suggesting that I have no extra biblical sources, whereas he has almost no understanding of history! Pick almost any of my posts, and it is obvious that I place the characters described in an appropriate historical context. Read any of Q's posts, and it is obvious he doesn't.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Mark Fulton's post
08-10-2015, 09:39 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(08-10-2015 09:33 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(08-10-2015 10:48 AM)Timber1025 Wrote:  Hmmmm... calling your opponent's view point "nonsense" before even entering the discussion sure is a great way to begin an informal or formal debate - right there Q?

The self righteous, condescending and arrogant approach sure will get the talks going on a good footing!

This is the second time he's claimed victory in a debate with me, yet he won't step into the ring. He then tells me that I don't understand how debates are run!

Fancy him suggesting that I have no extra biblical sources, whereas he has almost no understanding of history! Pick almost any of my posts, and it is obvious that I place the characters described in an appropriate historical context. Read any of Q's posts, and it is obvious he doesn't.

Don't let him get to you Doc. He's a troll.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like GirlyMan's post
08-10-2015, 09:39 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(08-10-2015 08:01 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(05-10-2015 04:32 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Sounds like you have a good case. You do know where the boxing ring is don't you?

You don't understand the definition of the word charlatan:

"A person who makes elaborate, fraudulent, and often voluble claims to skill or knowledge; a quack or fraud."

Every Bible scholar, secular or religious, affirms Paul was a brilliant expositor and author. Your debate is already ended. You already lost.

And if I tolerated this nonsense, do you have any textual, historical or other evidence you would use in the debate outside the scriptures? Any extra-biblical sources? You do not affirm the validity and reliable nature of the scriptures so how would you use a "false" text to affirm a debate resolution? Again, one of several reasons not to debate with you is you don't understand how a formal or informal debate works, Dr. Fulton.

You are feigning expletives so as to avoid engaging in debate.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Mark Fulton's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: