[eDebate] Korcok's answer

Donald Bryson anabaptist
Thu Apr 10 19:33:52 CDT 2008

American Heritage Dictionary '05
dem?a?gogu?er?y  - The practices or rhetoric of a demagogue. 

Okay, so.....

Random House Dictionary '06
-noun 1. a person, esp. an orator or political leader, who gains power and popularity by arousing the emotions, passions, and prejudices of the people.  
      2. (in ancient times) a leader of the people.  
-verb (used with object) 3. to treat or manipulate (a political issue) in the manner of a demagogue; obscure or distort with emotionalism, prejudice, etc. 

It kinda looks, like I hit that nail on the head.

A2: Your insult of Foy

If you didn't insult Foy, then it sure seemed like you made light of his stating of his belief's.  I have a feeling I know what he meant by what he said, but I'm not 100% sure.  But it was less ambiguous and more important and meaningful than you made it out to be.  Yet another example of you demeaning the beliefs of other people when those beliefs don't agree with your's.

You're right, I shouldn't have called you an idiot and I apologize.  I was pretty angry when I started that post.  I hope you will accept my apologies.

On your first piece of evidence...no, I didn't forget it.  I only read eDebate through the archives and thought that it was two separate pieces of evidence, but that doesn't make a difference.  I'm not sold on the argument that this source makes.

Furthermore, I'm not Catholic, so I don't care about your papal knowledge or that the Catholic messed up.  My beliefs stem from Anabaptists and Waldenses, both of whom were slaughtered at will by the Catholic church for centuries, so don't expect me to defend Rome.  On top of that, none of these arguments against the Catholic church and/or Christianity answers why religion in general is bad.  Please tell me what forms of oppression and domination have come out of Buddhism.  Sikhism?  Zoroastrianism?  I gotta be honest, I can't think of any.  If you're going to go after religion and the "tribal shaman" you need to explain what's wrong with ALL of them.  Your can of worms, not mine.

A2: Psalms 93:1 "Yea, the world is established, it shall never be moved." 
Okay, and?  It says, "God made the world and it will go unchanged."  I don't see Earth or Sun or center or revolve anywhere.

A2: 1 Samuel 2:8 "For the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, and on them he has set the world." 
This is getting to be monotonous.  It says, "God created the world and he has dominion over it."  Again revolve?  Sun?  Center?  Science bad?

A2: Joshua 10:12-14 "Then spoke Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord gave the Amorites over to the men of Israel; and he said in the sight of Israel, 'Sun, stand thou still at Gibeon, and thou Moon in the valley of Aijalon.' And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? The sun stayed in the midst of heaven, and did not hasten to go down for about a whole day. There has been no day like it before or since, when the Lord hearkened to the voice of a man; for the Lord fought for Israel." 

Okay, so God made the Earth stop spinning....I consider myself devout, but this doesn't convince me that the Earth is the center of the universe.  This isn't persuasive.

Then there is this long diatribe about Catholic History (see above) and then you go into my "Garden of Eden" argument and answer it with "Flood."  C'mon Korcok, you can't bring up a new sheet of paper this late in the game....but oh well.

1) Mutliple cultures have stories about the flood...it must've come from somewhere.
2) Science is actually INCONCLUSIVE on the flood, believe it or not.

Then "Eden Proper"

1) Yes, Adam and Eve were homo sapiens, in my opinion.
2)  200,000 years?  Okay, why not?  If God did it and you don't understand my thinking, then we need to revisit what a god is.  Your roll is to convince me that I'm wrong.  My roll is to convince you that you can have your beliefs, but don't impose them on those of us who are religious.
3)  Why would the Bible mention cells, or DNA?  Why doesn't "The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire" mention archaelogy or carbon-dating?  What's your point?  Science, DNA, cells, RNA, etc. are not the purpose of the Bible.
4) Korcok calls my explanation ad-hoc, but fails to explain why it isn't reasonable or ad-hoc.

We've already covered your next arguments, but those pieces of evidence are just conjecture and the surveys sounds poorly done.

I don't understand your fascism stuff.  Please tell me what churches existed in Nazi Germany.  Or if you want to kick out of fascism, how about communism?  You don't have good answers.  The was not a defense of the Bible, FYI.  The argument was the horrors happen due to non-religious ideals, just as well.  Aren't you in a war on religion?  Just as bad.

You then say:  I am NOT claiming that without religion there would be no horror.

LIES!  That is exactly what you initially said.  Your argument has been that religion is the basis of all horror, oppression, and domination.  Listen, this argument is BS.  People kill for Klondike bars, religion, politics, and money.  Bad things happen.  BAD THINGS ARE NOT UNIQUE TO RELIGION.  That's my entire point.  To be honest, I know that this e-mail has been spotty, but I'm elbow deep in a 50 page paper due on Monday and I'm too tired to keep bantering with someone I'm not going to convince.  Forgive my undercoverage, but your arguments are not convincing because you don't approach the subject honestly.  Reply if you want to, but I'm not.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20080410/57324ede/attachment.htm 

More information about the Mailman mailing list