Pages

Monday, December 03, 2007

Reveling in the periscope of Mt 18:1-6

"The most harden and reveling position Jesus takes in this context is over his love and protection of the exclusive truth of the faith of Israel and its God...Although Jesus warns against adults harming any Jewish child’s faith (Matt. 18:1-6), he has (as expressed in the above periscope)..."

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/11/was-jesus-jewish-religious-bigot.html

I don't spend much time browsing DC these days. It's a rehash of a rehash of a rehash. I reviewed Loftus' book a long time ago, and I've also commented on the best arguments of his most capable team-members—before they exited DC.

For a blog that lays claim to the rational superiority of infidelity, it's striking to see the downright illiteracy of its team-members. Harry McCall's post reads like something torn from the pages of Li'l Abner. And that was a spoof. Unfortunately, this is for real. "The most harden and reveling position"..."the above periscope..."

Where, exactly, does Loftus recruit these intellectual giants of infidelity?

14 comments:

  1. And somewhere on the USS Debunking Christianity submarine, Cap'n Loftus or one of his lieutenants is issuing the order "Up pericope!"

    ReplyDelete
  2. 'And somewhere on the USS Debunking Christianity submarine, Cap'n Loftus or one of his lieutenants is issuing the order "Up pericope!"'

    LOL!

    CMA

    ReplyDelete
  3. "I don't spend much time browsing DC these days. It's a rehash of a rehash of a rehash."

    And if a non-believer were to write "I don't spend much time browsing Triablogue these days. It's a rehash of a rehash of a rehash," the Christians would protest: "How do you know it's a rehash of a rehash of a rehash if you don't spend much time browing it?"

    "it's striking to see the downright illiteracy of its team-members."

    Ever read something by Paul Manata? Talk about illiteracy!

    Silly Stevie! You just keep shoving thy foot deeper into thine orifice. Please, don't stop!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Otis said:
    ---
    And if a non-believer were to write "I don't spend much time browsing Triablogue these days. It's a rehash of a rehash of a rehash," the Christians would protest: "How do you know it's a rehash of a rehash of a rehash if you don't spend much time browing it?"
    ---

    Actually I'd say "What do you mean 'these days'? Since when have you ever read an atheist's comment that gave you the impression the atheist ever read what was on Triablogue?"

    But that's just me.

    ReplyDelete
  5. OTIS SAID:

    And if a non-believer were to write "I don't spend much time browsing Triablogue these days. It's a rehash of a rehash of a rehash," the Christians would protest: "How do you know it's a rehash of a rehash of a rehash if you don't spend much time browing it?"

    **********************************************************

    Are you trying to be simpleminded? There's no conundrum here. If, back in the days when I was still browsing DC on a regular basis, I noticed that it was becoming a rehash of a rehash of a rehash, which is one reason I stopped browsing it (and, remember, that isn't the only reason I gave—I also mentioned my review of Loftus' book), and if, on the rare occasions that occasionally I check out what is going on over at DC, it confirms my earlier impression that it was becoming a rehash of a rehash of a rehash, then that is how I know it's a rehash of a rehash of a rehash.

    BTW, if you're going to accuse Manata of illiteracy, I suggest that you avoid misspelling "browsing" as "browing." It kind of kills the putdown.

    And this is also a reason why it would be prudent of you to avoid anatomical allusions, lest they adhere to your own blunders.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Ever read something by Paul Manata? Talk about illiteracy!"

    Not knwonig how to raed ins't the smae as not knwoing how to splel. Waht a spaz.

    ReplyDelete
  7. For a blog that lays claim to the rational superiority of infidelity, it's striking to see the downright illiteracy of its team-members.

    Not knwonig how to raed ins't the smae as not knwoing how to splel. Waht a spaz.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Not knwonig how to raed ins't the smae as not knwoing how to splel. Waht a spaz."

    Yet your accusation was that he is illiterate for misspelling pericope as periscope.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous said:
    "Not knwonig how to raed ins't the smae as not knwoing how to splel. Waht a spaz."

    Yet your accusation was that he is illiterate for misspelling pericope as periscope.

    ***********************************

    You must be as illiterate as McCall. Try rereading the excerpt I quoted for two other blunders. Three blunders in all, not just one—and in such a short compass.

    In addition, you're quoting Manata, not me. So you're confusing my accusation with his tongue-in-cheek riposte.

    Sounds like you have all the credentials to be a team-member over at DC.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Steve said:
    ---
    Sounds like you have all the credentials to be a team-member over at DC.
    ---

    They were going to pull him on board, but now they can't because it would be proof that you're right and that's more intollerable than not being born with wings....

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thanks. I got what I paid for.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Peter Pike said: They were going to pull him on board, but now they can't because it would be proof that you're right and that's more intollerable than not being born with wings....

    Do you mean "on-board/onboard"? LOL!!!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Stevie said: You must be as illiterate as McCall. Try rereading the excerpt I quoted for two other blunders.

    Did you mean "of two other bludners"? Or were you one of the blunders and and Peter the other? Oh, but "excerpt" is singular instead of the expected plural, so the fog intensifies. LOL!!!

    ReplyDelete
  14. YoMamma said:

    "Oh, but 'excerpt' is singular instead of the expected plural, so the fog intensifies. LOL!!!"

    I see that you're just as illiterate as McCall. A singular excerpt can contain several blunders.

    ReplyDelete