Possibly, but I think when confronted by rank idiocy it would be pathetic not to take a stance for what is rational.

Oh, I agree with you, take a stance, but not to the point of equal idiocy. This has been going on for yonks. Not the slightest inkling of progress.

Sorry, I really will keep my nose out.....it isn't mandatory to join the idiocy, I know that.

i am not interested in keeping stahrwe, or anybody else for that matter, from believing anything they want to believe. Feel free to believe there is magic in the world or that a invisible dragon lives in a nest on top of your house. As you say he has the right to believe it.

That does not mean that i am obligated to sit here and smile, say nothing, and let outright idiocy pass for coherent thoughts. He has come to this forum to communicate ideas. To speak his own and receive from others, just as i have.

I offer up my own ideas to the interrogation of others on this site just as he does. I have disagreed with many on this site on a number of topics, and where there is a reasonable argument to be had on the other side, i respect it.

For instance, i have had lengthy discussions with Robert Tulip on his particular brand of religion, which i disagree with, but see his side of the story perfectly well. I have disagreed with Frank and Chris on political issues. All topics potentially as heated as anything else we can talk about on this forum, but i esteem all three of these guys as intellectual heavyweights.

The issue at hand with a young earth creationist as indoctrinated as Stahrwe is that there can never be any real communication of ideas with him. His belief system is such that from the outset there is no amount of reasoning that could convince him his position is even deserving of a critical examination, much less that it stands in opposition to the truth. He has steadfastly refused to admit to any problems with his arguments or philosophy even when they have been patiently and painstakingly outlined to him in detail from posters such as Interbane, Tat Tvam Asi, Frank, Robert Tulip, Dexter, Dwill, Geo, Camacho, Vishnu and many more, all of which have responded to him with detailed arguments that apparently go completely un-heeded and it would seem un-read, judging from the conclusions he gets from them.

He commits audacious frauds of reasoning, states falsehood as authoritative facts and claims his biggest failings as his greatest strengths. His ineptitude is staggering in the very fields of discussion that he seems to take pride in and it has become abundantly clear that he has no intention of finding the errors in his thought processes and correcting them.

His behavior on this forum amounts to a straw man caricature of young earth creationism, worse than i had expected was possible, and a paradigm of thought that i would never have tried to convince someone that a person was capable of holding in the face of withering, conclusive, devastating refutation at every turn and as soon as it is brought to bear. Despite having all of his baseless assertions refuted with well-reasoned, demonstrably, empirically verifiable proofs he continues to use the same tired, well-slaughtered arguments without any shred of evidence that he has learned anything, and often seems to tout some of the most horrendous evidence of his defeats as trophies of conquest.

The only thing i find impressive about the situation is that a person can be so wrong for so long, about everything, on every point, on so many consecutive issues and still assert that he speaks on behalf of the ultimate truth.

That is why i find it hard to take what he says seriously, and that is why i have come to dismiss his opinion entirely. An opinion, which you rightly point out, he is entitled to.

You can have any belief you want so long as you admit that it is a belief not on equal footing as objective evidence but when you assert otherwise then you are obligated to defend such claims with proof.

Well, Penelope you will not be unpopular with me if you share your opinion about something, nor obviously with others.

Of course Stahrwe is entitled to his opinion and his belief system and we are entitled to ours. Frankly it would never occur to me to be concerned with what a stray observer may think of our posts here. It is not my responsibility to create any other than an honest expression of my opinion. This is a debate, not a tea party. The reason I come here is to learn and to be honest. We have enough instances (at least I do) of listening, and reading and observing what I consider ridiculous expressions of piety and having to keep our lips zipped.

The thing is if Stahrwe drives all of us from this field of discussion we will in effect have let the darkness win again. We do not need anymore of this in our lifetimes. You speak yourself of concerns with fundamental Islam (a concern I share) we do not need to encourage it in Christianity.

johnson:

That does not mean that i am obligated to sit here and smile, say nothing, and let outright idiocy pass for coherent thoughts. He has come to this forum to communicate ideas. To speak his own and receive from others, just as i have.

But don't you think there is a limit to the amount of futile argument? Well, no, not if you enjoy it, but it just seems a shame when people get so frustrated that they start to verbally abuse the propagator. I do understand and I have opted out several times but it is a shame when you see a previously rational discussion sink to little more than name-calling.

It makes me wonder if we are playing into Stahrwe's hand and I wonder if he is deliberately sabotaging our debates.

This is what I think, honestly, Lady of Shallot, I am not being pious.

Trust me, the name calling is incapable of somehow boosting Stahrwe's positions. Let's look at an example and See what sense it makes.

Stahrwe: The bible is true and the sheer numbers of people who believe that it's true verify the truth of it.

Logical thinker: You're wrong, that's an obvious fallacy.

Stahrwe: I'm not wrong, you're wrong, the numbers prove it.

Logical thinker: That's just plain idiocy. Are you thick? What sort of retard reasoning are you pushing here?

Now does the name calling make Stahrwe's position magically valid? Of course not. And anyone reading this thread can see how bloody ignorant his arguments are and how intellectually dishonest he's been about the video series the entire time. And go read through the early critics of Christianity. What did they have to say about Chritstians and how different is what they wrote about in comparison to what we've been witnessing first hand here with Stahrwe? There are a lot of apologists like Stahrwe on the web, many of which find there way to the FTN forums to tangle with Murdock and her fans. The more ill logic and fallacious reason I witness the more I understand what must have been going on in the early years when this idiocy was pushed on the public by fools every bit as blind as our token apologist Stahrwe here.

Penelope wrote:It makes me wonder if we are playing into Stahrwe's hand and I wonder if he is deliberately sabotaging our debates.

Indeed. I wonder who is paying him. Some one like Pat Robertson might be game if they could be bothered. It would not take much.

Instead of a debate about the implications of GodAlmighty's observation that the New Testament was written in the second century we have a debate about Stahrwe. This thread is a perfect case study of how a proselytising troll can disrupt and derail discussion. This is why freethought discussion boards ban trolls and preaching.

It is not about tolerance for free speech, but about the right of a troll who has no interest in learning to disrupt the discussions of others who are interested in learning, sabotaging a platform that some one has established at considerable effort and expense.

None of us get to write op-eds for the New York Times, but that does not mean we lack freedom of speech. Why should Stahrwe be able to break Booktalk's rules with impunity? I think the amazement and entertainment value has reached its use-by date.

Forum Rules (at the top of this page):

One-sided communication will be considered preaching and this is strictly prohibited in this forum and every other forum on BookTalk.org.

It's completely one sided preaching and it always turns out that way. I was in the cult of apologetics myself, of the literalistic / fundamentalist flavor. It's always been one sided preaching. You people who were raised with more liberal Christian views are seen as God cursed apostate Christians, no better than the atheist's when it comes to being deceived by Satan and his lot. Not accepting the gospel tale as entirely true = Satan's influence to these fundies. You probably can't understand the minds of these people because your own liberal oriented upbringing's ate so foreign to it. I'm hammering on Starhwe as one his own, sort of like Jews busting Jew jokes. I have every right to call it like I see it. Stahrwe is completely brainwashed and I'm someone who was just as brainwashed and entrenched, just as blind to anything contrary to the faith, and I pulled out of it. I'm shakng him around yelling "wake up man!!!" This is all delusory idiocy pushed by people with an agenda focusing on social control. People wake up from this delusion all the time. It is more than possible to do so.

The truth hurts and it can come as savagely harsh at times, but the truth is what it is. And the truth is that the Bible is not absolutely true, it is not absolutely historically sound and accurate, and it is not inspired by an infallible all knowing mind. It is a collection contradictive ancient thoughts ranging from love to pure hatred. There's no proof to confirm that the NT was written at any time during first century and the contemporary historical record is silent about any Jesus of Nazareth and his disciples. The truth is that nothing is for certain, we just don't know. And the one who comes claiming that we do know with concrete certainty is the deceptive liar working opposite the truth! Wake up Stahrwe. You can do it...

tav wrote:

People wake up from this delusion all the time. It is more than possible to do so.

OK - I stand corrected. I will keep my suspicions to myself. And...thank you Tav....you have gone a long way towards explaining what was happening on this thread....because it seems cruel and was beginning to prey on my mind.

I totally see your concern Penelope, it does look harsh to click on this thread and see people calling Stahrwe an idiot and so on. But he really is. It's that bad. And he's not a kind hearted idiot with no stake in the game who's being bullied. He tried to bully around GodAlmighty's video series without even watching it first. He tried to suggest that I delete the series on the first page. He has no interest in two way commication, or at least he hasn't shown any. We've said maybe he's right several times already. There may have been an historical Jesus at the bottom of this myth, but we just don't know for certain. The evidence to conclude with certainty is lacking. That's completely fair and honest. But at what point has Stahrwe admitted that we may be right? I haven't heard him that we just know for sure. He's been preaching a one sided message of hard fact and certainty, the very opposite of what's true about this ordeal. We're not the bad guys here. Are the bad guys interested in upholding the truth? We battling here on behalf of keeping it real, and that's just what we're doing. We've been handed some of the most idiotic, retarded, stupid, and ignorant apologies that I've heard throughout this thread and fear that we'll be subject to much more of it as this one sided preaching of Stahrwe's continues...

Oh, dear Penelope how did you conclude from my post that I was saying you were pious? I thought I said the exact opposite, that I came to this forum for an absence of such nonsense!

Maybe because I have been so entrenched in these two threads, the one about the sermon by Joe Coffey and this about the new testament, but I simply and truthfully do not have the same read on Stahrwe as you have I think if there is anyone who is bullying it is he. All the long posts which are simply repeats of earlier posts, two or three in a row interspersed with posts by others, is in itself a bullying tactic. He himself also says he engages in sarcasm, he also twists the words that one uses and concludes from that twisting what he declares one really meant to say!

Tat, I did grow up in a more liberal and tolerant religious atmosphere (Episcopalianism) other than being taught to say night time prayers, there was little mention of God or the Bible or any of the rest of it. On holidays we probably said grace. That was it. My husband though met a "Stahrwe" in school and this boy was basically stalking him in his proselytizing and when I was quite young (like 9) a woman ensnared me into some kind of a religious thing where I was promised to win a Bible. My mother put a quick stop to that!

T.V. teaches me about these fundamentalist families. Like the Duggers (whom I really do like) but think the messages they give their kids are dreadful. Home schooling etc, no dancing. The one saving grace for that family though is the sheer number of children. I doubt very much they will all stick to their teachings.

Also the Morman families who practice polygamy. I could cry when I hear those wives berating themselves because they resent their husbands attention to the other wives. And when the husband says love is meant to multiply but not divide. However that only applies to men! Not to women!