Debate user BoxerShorts47 on "strawmans" and logical fallacies, definitions of ephebophilia, how to MAGA, religion, Sailor Moon and more

[SIGSEGV]

You don't understand, man; he has 100 tabs open and is using 18GB of RAM so we should probably take him, like, seriously, or something. Really, we should be thanking him for the opportunity to be the oilstone that sharpens his devastating debate skills. Remember us when you get to the top, @BoxerShorts47 , eh?

The only "top" that @BoxerShorts47 will get to is the top of a building. And then he'll do a flip lol

 

[Stilgar of Troon]

The only "top" that @BoxerShorts47 will get to is the top of a building. And then he'll do a flip lol

His dumb ass would pick a bungalow, let's be real.

 

[SIGSEGV]

His dumb ass would pick a bungalow, let's be real.

And he'd try to jump from the front door, too.

 

[BoxerShorts47]

1. Half correct. Yes, we Christian expect a better life beyond his one, but we are commanded to act as best we can for ourselves and our fellow man in gratitude for that better life beyond this one. We do expect better than this world, but we are supposed to make good use of our time here as well.

2. The Jewish specific parts were obviated with Jesus' sacrifice, following them anyway effectively amounts to optional extra credit for the Gentiles. Otherwise, Christians build off whatever was NOT repudiated by the new covenant established by Jesus and refined by Paul. All the universal moral laws that would apply equally (i.e. - The Ten Commandments) to Jews and Gentiles are still in effect.

3. Fair enough, said hypocrites gall me too, but cursing all believers for those that embarrass the group is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

1. Where does Jesus tell you to fight to protect your people? Or to start families? This quote specifically tells you to allow your enemies to win. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew 5:43-48&version=NIV
2. Here we go, you still need parts of the Old Testament to remain moral like the 10C. Very contradictory. From my exp, the Christians that are the most moral in society, i.e. Conservatives, tend to cite the old Testament the most. It's the liberals that cite the new Testament more.
3. They got subverted because the more they read the Bible, the more liberal they got and less they could fight in the culture war. E.g.https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+8%3A7&version=KJV = don't judge.

@BoxerShorts47 Why exactly are you fighting randoms on an internet forum?

Considering the time you probably spent on the internet, you should've realized that honor and e-points on the internet is meaningless and so is shitting lightyears of rage on an internet forum, right?

Experience. This is the 1st time I've ever argued lowering the age of consent. I know this has to be done and it's actually over-all good for society and most /pol/ agree but it's hard getting the talking points, developing the rhetorical skills, to argue this position confidently. Politics is trial and error and it takes 100s of hours of exp. to get good.

 

[GethN7]

1. Where does Jesus tell you to fight to protect your people? Or to start families? This quote specifically tells you to allow your enemies to win. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew 5:43-48&version=NIV
2. Here we go, you still need parts of the Old Testament to remain moral like the 10C. Very contradictory. From my exp, the Christians that are the most moral in society, i.e. Conservatives, tend to cite the old Testament the most. It's the liberals that cite the new Testament more.
3. They got subverted because the more they read the Bible, the more liberal they got and less they could fight in the culture war. E.g.https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+8%3A7&version=KJV = don't judge.

1. That's the point. It's easy to be cruel, vicious, and petty. It's harder to resist that urge and show decency, compassion, and forgiveness, even when it gets spat upon for when you try. If you think for a moment, Christians, to use a video game analogy, play life on Hard Mode on purpose, because that's what God wants us to do, and we believe in Him, hence we do so. Anyone can harm and kill their brother, but we are supposed to refrain from the temptation because that's the whole point of being Christian, or Christ-like. If Jesus wouldn't do it, neither should you is the tl;dr version,

2. No, it's not. Quoth Jesus on this:

Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 5:17 - New International Version

The Fulfillment of the Law - “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

www.biblegateway.com

Matthew 5:17 New International Version (NIV)
The Fulfillment of the Law
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Basically, if it could apply to Jews and non-Jews alike, it's still valid and Jesus never rescinded it. All he did was make all the Jewish specific parts optional.

3. Which is good advice. Those who have sinned should not be so willing to cast judgment without acknowledging they are sinners as well. In the context cited, several men were going to kill a woman accused of adultery without a proper trial, putting her to death with no ability by her to defend herself properly and face her accusers would have made those who killed her no better than who they wanted to judge.

It's not about capitulating, it's about acknowledging: "Hey, maybe I should make sure I'm not going to be just as bad as what I point fingers at before I make any judgment myself".

 

[BoxerShorts47]

1. That's the point. It's easy to be cruel, vicious, and petty. It's harder to resist that urge and show decency, compassion, and forgiveness, even when it gets spat upon for when you try. If you think for a moment, Christians, to use a video game analogy, play life on Hard Mode on purpose, because that's what God wants us to do, and we believe in Him, hence we do so. Anyone can harm and kill their brother, but we are supposed to refrain from the temptation because that's the whole point of being Christian, or Christ-like. If Jesus wouldn't do it, neither should you is the tl;dr version,

Exactly, so your strategy to deal with life is to allow others to abuse you and just die. Just like I said, you don't have to make your community or world a better place because you have the keys to the kingdom of heaven.
Love your friends, hate your enemies and kill those that have come to kill you = fairness. That is treating people fairly. Jesus is telling you the opposite, love everyone, even if they abuse you. Clearly this is bad advice, result in you being in abusive mentally harmful relationships or physically dying. We see this mentality in some of the families that have a son or daughter killed by Muslim terrorists. They say love the terrorist and the result is more people die. So this advice to love those that hate you is unethical/immoral so I refuse to accept Christ as my lord. I think he is a false prophet, he is the internet contrarian of 2000 years ago, probably because he grew up without his father.

2. No, it's not. Quoth Jesus on this:
Basically, if it could apply to Jews and non-Jews alike, it's still valid and Jesus never rescinded it. All he did was make all the Jewish specific parts optional.

Exactly, you cannot tell which parts of the old Testament must be kept and which can be forgotten.

3. Which is good advice. Those who have sinned should not be so willing to cast judgment without acknowledging they are sinners as well. In the context cited, several men were going to kill a woman accused of adultery without a proper trial, putting her to death with no ability by her to defend herself properly and face her accusers would have made those who killed her no better than who they wanted to judge.

It's not about capitulating, it's about acknowledging: "Hey, maybe I should make sure I'm not going to be just as bad as what I point fingers at before I make any judgment myself".

This is a moral fallacy. Just because I make mistakes doesn't mean I cannot have standards. No one is perfect 100% of the time and by this ethic, we would have 0 laws. You're reinterpreting the situation change the meaning of Jesus's quote. This is a common tactic by Christians. You have to constantly reinterpret the bible to fit your narrative.

 

[MarineTrainedTard]

I don't even read his posts anymore, just hit him with dat Islamic Content rating because I know it's going to be accurate

 

[Stilgar of Troon]

Exactly, so your strategy to deal with life is to allow others to abuse you and just die. Just like I said, you don't have to make your community or world a better place because you have the keys to the kingdom of heaven.
Love your friends, hate your enemies and kill those that have come to kill you = fairness. That is treating people fairly. Jesus is telling you the opposite, love everyone, even if they abuse you. Clearly this is bad advice, result in you being in abusive mentally harmful relationships or physically dying. We see this mentality in some of the families that have a son or daughter killed by Muslim terrorists. They say love the terrorist and the result is more people die. So this advice to love those that hate you is unethical/immoral so I refuse to accept Christ as my lord. I think he is a false prophet, he is the internet contrarian of 2000 years ago, probably because he grew up without his father.


Exactly, you cannot tell which parts of the old Testament must be kept and which can be forgotten.



This is a moral fallacy. Just because I make mistakes doesn't mean I cannot have standards. No one is perfect 100% of the time and by this ethic, we would have 0 laws. You're reinterpreting the situation change the meaning of Jesus's quote. This is a common tactic by Christians. You have to constantly reinterpret the bible to fit your narrative.

Well, guys, we probably don't have to worry about Box o' Sharts shooting the place up. Given how often he apparently can miss the point, he probably needs both hands and a map to find his own ass.

 

[AnOminous]

I hate Christians because you lack MORAL character.

A child molester like you has no moral standing.

 

[Foghot]

Experience. This is the 1st time I've ever argued lowering the age of consent. I know this has to be done and it's actually over-all good for society and most /pol/ agree but it's hard getting the talking points, developing the rhetorical skills, to argue this position confidently. Politics is trial and error and it takes 100s of hours of exp. to get good.

Trying to prove your (frankly fucking disgusting) fetish is justified to a forum meant to laugh at bizzare and nasty pepole for 191 pages isn't training, it's denial.

I'f you're looking for talking points over why legally diddling kids is 100% trad or whatever because /pol/ told you so, then sanity is what you need instead of arguments.

Time for you to go outside and live life.

faggot

 

[BoxerShorts47]

Trying to prove your (frankly fucking disgusting) fetish is justified to a forum meant to laugh at bizzare and nasty pepole for 191 pages isn't training, it's denial.

I'f you're looking for talking points over why legally diddling kids is 100% trad or whatever because /pol/ told you so, then sanity is what you need instead of arguments.

Time for you to go outside and live life.

faggot

Not a fetish you retard. Normal human sexual behavior before feminism. Age of consent was 12 historically in USA. Clearly the society was much more healthy back then so the only thing raising the age of consent has caused is less marriagable relationships.

 

[Stilgar of Troon]

Time for you to go outside and live life.

faggot

He's not gonna do that, though. I suspect he subscribes to the Lucas Werner school of romance. "Here's some chicken tendies and a list of 11 reasons that's it's only logical and fair for you to have sex with me. Once you get home from school, I mean..."

 

[SIGSEGV]

Not a fetish you retard. Normal human sexual behavior before feminism. Age of consent was 12 historically in USA. Clearly the society was much more healthy back then so the only thing raising the age of consent has caused is less marriagable relationships.

Jesus fucking Christ just do a flip already you disgusting retard.

 

[BoxerShorts47]

Trying to prove your (frankly fucking disgusting) fetish is justified to a forum meant to laugh at bizzare and nasty pepole for 191 pages isn't training, it's denial.

I'f you're looking for talking points over why legally diddling kids is 100% trad or whatever because /pol/ told you so, then sanity is what you need instead of arguments.

Time for you to go outside and live life.

faggot

Yes or No.
1. Do you acknowledge that age of consent was historically 12 before feminism?
2. Society was much more healthier back then the age of consent was lower?
3. Even today, people (specifically 18-22 yr olds) regularly break the age of consent? "omg dude she told me she was 18."
Just answer my questions.

 

[SIGSEGV]

1. Do you acknowledge that age of consent was historically 12 before feminism?

No way fag

2. Society was much more healthier back then the age of consent was lower?

lolno

3. Even today, people (specifically 18-22 yr olds) regularly break the age of consent? "omg dude she told me she was 18."

Maybe, but that doesn't make it right you fucking degenerate.

4. Should I do a flip off of the highest building I can find?

Yes.

 

[Stilgar of Troon]

Not a fetish you retard. Normal human sexual behavior before feminism. Age of consent was 12 historically in USA. Clearly the society was much more healthy back then so the only thing raising the age of consent has caused is less marriagable relationships.

Once over, normal human behaviour would have been to nail people like you to a tree or toss your ass in an oubliette. How hypocritical to reap the benefits (to yourself) of a progressing society whilst bemoaning the parts you don't approve of.

 

[GethN7]

Exactly, so your strategy to deal with life is to allow others to abuse you and just die. Just like I said, you don't have to make your community or world a better place because you have the keys to the kingdom of heaven.
Love your friends, hate your enemies and kill those that have come to kill you = fairness. That is treating people fairly. Jesus is telling you the opposite, love everyone, even if they abuse you. Clearly this is bad advice, result in you being in abusive mentally harmful relationships or physically dying. We see this mentality in some of the families that have a son or daughter killed by Muslim terrorists. They say love the terrorist and the result is more people die. So this advice to love those that hate you is unethical/immoral so I refuse to accept Christ as my lord. I think he is a false prophet, he is the internet contrarian of 2000 years ago, probably because he grew up without his father.


Exactly, you cannot tell which parts of the old Testament must be kept and which can be forgotten.



This is a moral fallacy. Just because I make mistakes doesn't mean I cannot have standards. No one is perfect 100% of the time and by this ethic, we would have 0 laws. You're reinterpreting the situation change the meaning of Jesus's quote. This is a common tactic by Christians. You have to constantly reinterpret the bible to fit your narrative.

Well, I'm sorry you disagree with me. I merely pray that you eventually come to realize you've come to the wrong impression of what I believe and the intense anger you seem to have will come to pass, because it's clearly doing you no favors.

 

[MarineTrainedTard]

Well, I'm sorry you disagree with me. I merely pray that you eventually come to realize you've come to the wrong impression of what I believe and the intense anger you seem to have will come to pass, because it's clearly doing you no favors.

Whereas I hope he gets raped to death by niggers

 

[Looney Troons]

Damn. I haven’t checked this thread since Monday when I baited this dude into admitting he’s a hebe/pedo on his profile and it grew by 50 pages. This is truly one of the greatest (see: saddest) cautionary tales on this website.

 

[Foghot]

Yes or No.
1. Do you acknowledge that age of consent was historically 12 before feminism?
2. Society was much more healthier back then the age of consent was lower?
3. Even today, people (specifically 18-22 yr olds) regularly break the age of consent? "omg dude she told me she was 18."
Just answer my questions.

1: "Do you agree that pepole validated my fetish back then?"

2: Childhood STDs and emotionally damaging kids are as healthy as chewing pure lead, stop doing the latter.

3: "Why can't pepole let me fuck pre-teens in peace?"

Something something not a fetish, eh?