Religion II

[Actor]

boxcar keeps rambling about the "Law of Non-Contradiction". I have searched the Religion I thread and find that nowhere in the first 5000 posts did he ever use said law to prove anything. He simply keeps making unsupported statements about said law, such as "Nothing in the Bible violates the Law of Non-Contradiction" or words to that effect.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

That is definitely your style and speed.

Ad hominem! boxcar's "style and speed".

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

boxcar keeps rambling about the "Law of Non-Contradiction". I have searched the Religion I thread and find that nowhere in the first 5000 posts did he ever use said law to prove anything. He simply keeps making unsupported statements about said law, such as "Nothing in the Bible violates the Law of Non-Contradiction" or words to that effect.

You didn't search hard enough. I used the law to refute Thask's opinion that the one and the same unrepentant and repentant thief on the cross (you know: the guy who changed his mind hours later!") violated the law. In fact, if memory serves, Mr. HalvBaked was involved in that exchange as well.

Also, no one has ever asked me to use the LNC to prove that any of their alleged contradictions in the bible weren't valid.

As the Good Book sez -- "Ask and you shall receive."

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

Ad hominem! boxcar's "style and speed".

But mixed in with numerous substantive posts, which if far more than can be said for the entire lot of you skeptics.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by boxcar

You didn't search hard enough. I used the law to refute Thask's opinion that the one and the same unrepentant and repentant thief on the cross (you know: the guy who changed his mind hours later!") violated the law. In fact, if memory serves, Mr. HalvBaked was involved in that exchange as well.

Also, no one has ever asked me to use the LNC to prove that any of their alleged contradictions in the bible weren't valid.

As the Good Book sez -- "Ask and you shall receive."

Of course. The name calling starts. I've outsmarted you so many times here it has simply gotten boring.

It must be great going through life knowing it would be impossible for you to get brain cancer.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

You didn't search hard enough.

I made no claim that the search was exhaustive. Not yet. As I've pointed out in the past, PA's search engine is rather primitive. By searching for "non-contradiction" I also get hits for just "contradiction." Then I have to search through all the posts to see if any apply. None so far. It's quite time consuming. Between the two threads there are close to 40,000 posts. I'm about 12% done.

Originally Posted by boxcar

I used the law to refute Thask's opinion that the one and the same unrepentant and repentant thief on the cross (you know: the guy who changed his mind hours later!")

No, I don't know. Care to give the post # ? Or not. Whatever.

Originally Posted by boxcar

Also, no one has ever asked me to use the LNC to prove that any of their alleged contradictions in the bible weren't valid.

Well, I'll ask you now. Just for starters.

• Ex. 20:13 v. Ex. 32:27
• Ex. 20:16 v. 1 Kings 22:23
• Ex. 20:5 v. Ezek. 18:20
• Psa. 145:9 v. Is. 45:7
• Rom. 15:33 v. Ex. 15:3
• John 14:27 v. Matt. 10:34
• John 8:14 v. John 5:31
• John 1:18 v. Gen. 32:30

Originally Posted by boxcar

As the Good Book sez -- "Ask and you shall receive."

Non-testable hypothesis!

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

Of course. The name calling starts. I've outsmarted you so many times here it has simply gotten boring.

It must be great going through life knowing it would be impossible for you to get brain cancer.

Quit flattering yourself. You couldn't outsmart a rock.

After your last entrance into this thread, saying a lot of nothing as usual, I responded and you slithered away into the darkness from which your emerged, not to be heard from until now.

Quit hissing already...

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

You couldn't outsmart a rock.

Matt. 5:22

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

Matt. 5:22

Halv and I aren't related.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by Actor

I made no claim that the search was exhaustive. Not yet. As I've pointed out in the past, PA's search engine is rather primitive. By searching for "non-contradiction" I also get hits for just "contradiction." Then I have to search through all the posts to see if any apply. None so far. It's quite time consuming. Between the two threads there are close to 40,000 posts. I'm about 12% done.

No, I don't know. Care to give the post # ? Or not. Whatever.

Well, I'll ask you now. Just for starters.

• Ex. 20:13 v. Ex. 32:27
• Ex. 20:16 v. 1 Kings 22:23
• Ex. 20:5 v. Ezek. 18:20
• Psa. 145:9 v. Is. 45:7
• Rom. 15:33 v. Ex. 15:3
• John 14:27 v. Matt. 10:34
• John 8:14 v. John 5:31
• John 1:18 v. Gen. 32:30

Non-testable hypothesis!

You're already had your three swings to hit a home run but you have struck out, as have all other skeptics to which I have extended the same courtesy. You're out of shots and and ammo...and plain out of luck, Dumpty.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by boxcar

Quit flattering yourself. You couldn't outsmart a rock.

After your last entrance into this thread, saying a lot of nothing as usual, I responded and you slithered away into the darkness from which your emerged, not to be heard from until now.

Quit hissing already...

If you had a brain you'd realize that for me to be as smart as you, I'd have to lose about 50 IQ points.

You mess with the snake you get your ass bit.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

If you had a brain you'd realize that for me to be as smart as you, I'd have to lose about 50 IQ points.

You mess with the snake you get your ass bit.

You've got things backwards, as usual. For you to be only half as smart as me, you'd have to gain at minimum 50 I.Q. points.

And I'm as immune to snake bites, as Paul was (Act 28:3-5). Therefore, you suffer two deficits: You're as fangless, with respect to me, as you are clueless.

[Actor]

Originally Posted by boxcar

And I'm as immune to snake bites, as Paul was (Act 28:3-5).

You've finally come up with something we can actually test. There's a cult in the Appalachians who can arrange it.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by boxcar

You've got things backwards, as usual. For you to be only half as smart as me, you'd have to gain at minimum 50 I.Q. points.

And I'm as immune to snake bites, as Paul was (Act 28:3-5). Therefore, you suffer two deficits: You're as fangless, with respect to me, as you are clueless.

You remind me of Zelig:

.... it shows exactly what you can do, if you're a total psychotic!

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

You remind me of Zelig:

.... it shows exactly what you can do, if you're a total psychotic!

And if I were, I'd still be normal compared to you.