Were there any disciples at Ishua's trial?

[kAHANyAH]

Me thinks 1dell is saying Derek got some BEEF wit him. I think thats what he is saying but i've been wrong before .

SatiyaH said:

What the hell is this 1Dell? And you say you don't babble...this statement is just total nonsense.

[1dell]

nah dude, what I am saying is that dude aint reading what I am typing yet he is asking questions for things I have already ansaared which shows sloppy scholarship and if he cant be trusted to some simple post, then how can he be trusted to be so thorough in his own studies? hmmm?

I am also saying he is trying to manipulate this debate to make it easier for him using tactics like "I don't have to ansaar because I don't feel like ansaaring." I innerstand the man is busy, just say that instead of trying to make it seem like I am inadequate. Because if I was such an unworthy opponent, then why is he wasting what LITTLE time he has on me but keep beggin for a stalemate?

All those sorts of tactics are just pride gambits. Illusions to appear as if one has their wits about them. False appearances of leverage. Same ole same ole.

All I know ilz, I'm having a blast, this is the most fun I had in Illuminopolis in a minute.

[kAHANyAH]

i guess IM WRONG AGAIN!

[1dell]

I just hope courty court aint gonna be mad at us for defiling her christian section with all that rowdiness

[CoUrTnEy]

naw dawlin.. im not.. just try to keep the cursing to a minimum and im straight I can say i have learned a lot out of this thread.. u still haven't lost me 1dell.. im hangin on and payin attention.. i have certainly learned some history that i wasn't familiar with prior to this thread.. i was also wondering how in the world we jumped from one topic to another..

1dell said:

I just hope courty court aint gonna be mad at us for defiling her christian section with all that rowdiness

[1dell]

It's called follow the bouncing heretic.

It's like tennis depending on where you hit the ball it will fly to another direction and come back from a different angle, so you have to move to hit the ball and then it will go in another direction different angle.

I mean, whenever dude is proven wrong on something, he will go into a tyrade about my debating methods, then act like he hasn't read what was typed. Make several demands like he still has leverage, then come back with an entirely different subject issue to mask the fact that he hasn't truly dealt with the last issue. The new topic that surfaces is just a smoke screen so he doesn't have to deal with the last bit of info.

CoUrTnEy said:

naw dawlin.. im not.. just try to keep the cursing to a minimum and im straight I can say i have learned a lot out of this thread.. u still haven't lost me 1dell.. im hangin on and payin attention.. i have certainly learned some history that i wasn't familiar with prior to this thread.. i was also wondering how in the world we jumped from one topic to another..

[1dell]

Does anyone else have difficulty innerstanding the argument against derek's latest attempt to degrade the bible? The one concerning the "appearant" contradiction between the birth Messiah as recorded by Mattheo and Luke? If so please let me know.

I merely just cut and pasted thorough scholarly response from an actualy research center. The only reason for that was if you have an opponent who likes to use excuses like "your babbling" "your ignorant" (I missed spelled You're as your on purpose to keep true to the quote of said opponent) and it seems like nothing you type is getting thru to them and they want to try and make your own words seem uncredible, then I just reached for a CONFIRMING source whose response is replete with a plethora of references you figure this would satisfy your opponent. lol Only to have them ask you to put things in your own words. LOLOL First my own words weren't good enough and when I provide someone elses argument on it who inlaces historical proof, that aint good enough, they want my own words again. LOL

Anyway, I am making an offer to anyone where who doesn't innerstand the information I posted because it argues con then pro then con again then pro again the argument. I can condense it for anyone so they can be equipped with a proper response should they encounter this weak argument again.

Just let a bruva know.

[CoUrTnEy]

could you summarize it for me dear heart??

1dell said:

Does anyone else have difficulty innerstanding the argument against derek's latest attempt to degrade the bible? The one concerning the "appearant" contradiction between the birth Messiah as recorded by Mattheo and Luke? If so please let me know.

I merely just cut and pasted thorough scholarly response from an actualy research center. The only reason for that was if you have an opponent who likes to use excuses like "your babbling" "your ignorant" (I missed spelled You're as your on purpose to keep true to the quote of said opponent) and it seems like nothing you type is getting thru to them and they want to try and make your own words seem uncredible, then I just reached for a CONFIRMING source whose response is replete with a plethora of references you figure this would satisfy your opponent. lol Only to have them ask you to put things in your own words. LOLOL First my own words weren't good enough and when I provide someone elses argument on it who inlaces historical proof, that aint good enough, they want my own words again. LOL

Anyway, I am making an offer to anyone where who doesn't innerstand the information I posted because it argues con then pro then con again then pro again the argument. I can condense it for anyone so they can be equipped with a proper response should they encounter this weak argument again.

Just let a bruva know.

[1dell]

Is this where I am supposed to explain the supposed contradiction about that guy being governor? I just rememberthat I never did that. I am still trying to find it