Templar crosses. An expression of papal loyalty.
(media.scored.co)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (112)
sorted by:
Oh, u/TallestSkil does expect people to read his mind. IMHO. He also expects them to take him solely at his word without inferring anything. He has a history of playing it both ways, but his self-contradiction isn't the most endemic or destructive so we play with him much as he claims to play with you.
Cite quotes.
(This implies a narrative where the earth is less than 6,000 years old. Others have called this oft-repeated narrative his fanfic.)
This is just the first one that is easy to reference, let me know if you need more. Now we could claim u/TallestSkil doesn't actually believe his fanfic, but he doesn't deny that he believes it either. He doesn't make clear that he certainly believes in the billions either; so I don't know what he believes. He throws all kinds of garbage out upon us without concern and declines to resolve the issues or commit to a position. He seems to be a Christian but he's not one who easily gets along with others who follow Christ alone.
Anyway, if you haven't been exposed to his unique style, now you have, and you've gotten a fair warning about it. Use good judgment.
The first quote is his theory/prediction. So?
Like how jEWs keep kveeching about the hollycast garbage? That garbage?
Like how the Christkillers didn't get along with Christ?
So it's unclear if Skil believes young earth or old earth and speaks out of both sides of his mouth. Another one is the meaning of supersessionism where I haven't found him to enunciate a clear position.
Yes, Skil's rants about being white-genocided without recourse are very reminiscent of those Holocaust exaggerations that have been caught from time to time. I need not remind him of this because it's well-known that I regard an irrational presentation of anti-Semitism as potential evidence of being pro-Semitic (shilling to make one's opponents look bad). The test of the evidence if if the person continues being irrational.
I'm not sure I'd compare his standoffishness to those Jerusalem Jews who called for Jesus's death. He does get along a bit with whitists and with sycophants, and there are probably points where we generally agree; but he is aggressive to root out what he disagrees with and to ridicule it dramatically, possibly for his own psyche's sake.
Incidentally, if you're interested in a number of Biblical points about covenant history, my views are unique and incisive.
No shit. It’s almost as though you’re pretending you don’t know what jews are.
Good job proving what I said—that I don’t randomly change my views like you openly and admittedly have with respect to the age of the universe. Your own links take viewers directly to the conversation where you do this. Spectacular job.
That’s because you’re paid to post lies on this website.
The jew (or is it jew? or maybe even jew?) cries out in pain as it strikes you. Reported for libel.
Given that you openly lied about it—and every single other thing you have ever said on any topic—I can’t imagine why.
Good ol’ libel.
Removed for rule 1 violation, will be approved upon edit of the first sentence.
I’ll remove the sentence when you also delete the comment to which it’s replying, attacking the person and not the argument. Don’t fucking play games with me. You want rules? I’ll give you rules.
Pretty sure the previous comment was observations between the two of yours history, I don't see how it's an attack.
My request stands.
You'd be surprised. I recall you thinking you know how those laws work and your assuming that they can't possibly be used to create a universe currently in its 6,018th year. I tell everyone else to work with me to select criteria by which a particular new law of physics can be discerned objectively and undeniably, but they always back down long before we get into full negotiations. If you're interested in constructing a test of laws of physics where you would be willing to submit to its results, let me know.
But somehow, reading your mind, I think you're not referring to miracles generally but only taking a swipe at the number of Swamp Rangers being irrelevant as not affecting the results of your life. So far I'm the only Ranger with a mission on Scored, the same mission in Christ you claim BTW. And I'm very happy with the progress of my work with you. Sometime we can engage another round of mutual learning.
No. I wouldn’t. God created them. You can’t violate them.
Your memory is irrelevant to the immutability of the physical laws of the universe.
Didn’t happen. Try again with actual physical evidence.
Did that. You rejected those laws of physics because they hurt your feelings.
You mean like how you were unable to prove by any metric whatsoever that “the speed of light has changed”? That backing down?
Translation: “Engaging in strawmen because what was written hurt my feelings.”
Oh, so you admit to having sockpuppets.
The God you deny, you mean.
This is an attack on the person, not the argument.(Edit per user I took to being attacked, this isn't an attack, thanks for helping me learn)
Lotta violations today, my fren, is there something I can do to help you two talk more productively?
If you think I deny Christ, then when I affirm his mission (even as he defines it to you) then you should thank me for stepping in the right direction. If you have no evangel for those who affirm Christ's mission, what evangel do you have?
SwampRangers.com has always admitted to being a membership organization.
Your inability to acknowledge a difference between what is thought and what is said continues, which was my initial point.
Now, perhaps you recognize that the laws of physics as we know them are incomplete and perhaps you recognize that those deeper laws that God has preset, such as the ones he uses for "miracles" and "resurrections", are also part of the laws of physics, but your inability to acknowledge difference between thought and word suggests you don't recognize this either.
If you recognize that the laws as known are incomplete, you'd have no problem with variable lightspeed; but if you believe constant lightspeed is the whole of the law then you'd be surprised, as I said. Of course when we discussed it you hemmed and hawed, sometimes going with millions and sometimes with billions, without indicating what you actually believe. So I'm not sure you want the debate.
The challenge I lay to people is as to new experiments that can be constructed. We can talk that if you like, but you seem to prefer to deal with interpretation of evidence already submitted. To that end I submit that the resurrection of Jesus in 33 AD (with 3D photographic evidence recorded in the Shroud of Turin) demonstrated an exception to currently-known laws of physics. The spontaneous reorganization of the body and soul into the glorified life displayed by Jesus (and a number of others at various times) requires energy from currently-unknown sources and may even require violation of current lightspeed assumptions.
Do you mean the laws as known by God (in which case variable lightspeed need not violate those laws)? Or do you mean the laws as currently known by man (in which case the resurrection does violate those laws)?