quote:

Originally posted by WhoaNellie1487 what if I didn't want to learn about evolution in schools?

And that summarizes your whole argument, essentially. You've chosen to remain in complete ignorance because you just don't WANT to learn anything that might contradict your stubbornly backwards beliefs.

You can't educate yourself properly, and you definitely can't debate. If you've won any debates in the past, it can only be because your opponents got so irritated with you that they started to get violent and ended up disqualified.

When you decide that you "want" to learn about evolution, from a real source like a biology textbook, instead of from your daddy or a crackpot religious fanatic's web site or a book you haven't even read, then come back to debate the issue. Until then, nobody cares about your "contributions."

Edit: to MisterOpus and occrider, a search on amazon does turn up a book called the Case for Faith, apparently written by the same nut who wrote the Case for Christianity. Discuss...

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

quote:

Originally posted by WhoaNellie1487 If you see it fit for you,go ahead. No, My mom has that book and "the case for faith". There's two books,I'm sure of it. If I have very little skills for debating,how have I won 13 debates? ( Maybe not here,but I've debated elsewhere about politics and such. Let me tell you,these people weren't half as stubborn as you here,and these people were adults.) No, I didn't refuse to. I told you to go look it up in a history book,that's the easiest way to look it up. That's a personal attack.I'm going to have to ask you to stop. I have no other choice but to homeschool.You don't understand,and I don't want you picking on that subject. I used to attend public school,there's a reason I don't anymore. I don't believe in evolution,Macro evolution because it is false. No question asked. My parents make the decision they think is correct. I wouldn't be pushing it on that subject if I were you. Right now, I'm not physically able to attend public anything, I'd rather not discuss why. Nicaea? That doesn't have anything to do with Catholocism,does it?http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum01.htm

Ive been reading this thread, witout posting until now. I would just like to say that Whoahnellie reminds me of that ignorant lawyer, in the book "Inherit the wind" who tries to pathetically defend his religious stance in the courtroom, subsequently dying of an anyerism becuase he couldnt take the truth that he was proven wrong countless times.

Poor Nellie... you are a dying bunch.

Your sacred pope, who has been appointed by "GOD" even admits that evolution has and is happening.

For fuk sake, its 2004 and we still have iditos preaching this shite.

___________________
"This place isn't big enough for me to blow it up."
-MARCO V

quote:

Originally posted by WhoaNellie1487 No, My mom has that book and "the case for faith". There's two books,I'm sure of it.

I haven't kept up with Strobel's works since I read that book a couple of years ago, so I stand corrected about "The
Case for Faith". It is his sequel somewhat to his "Case for Christ" book, and a more or less watered-down version for younger adults as it seems:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...=glance&s=books

So you were correct, and I sincerely apologize for my misconception. Since it is the same material, however, my criticisms of the book stands, and you have yet to rebute those criticisms.

quote:

If I have very little skills for debating,how have I won 13 debates? ( Maybe not here,but I've debated elsewhere about politics and such. Let me tell you,these people weren't half as stubborn as you here,and these people were adults.)

Stubborn? You mean I ask for specific evidence to support your assertions, other than what you claim you believe in or claim you've read "somewhere"? If you debated in the same fashion with these other adults without any support for your assertions, my guess is they became just as frustrated as I with your lack of rationale and circular reasoning and most likely threw in the towel, just as I have. If you actually did "win" those arguments, I highly question the guidelines followed with those debates.

quote:

No, I didn't refuse to. I told you to go look it up in a history book,that's the easiest way to look it up.

Debate 101 rule:

-When the debator makes an assertion on a given subject, the onus is on the debator to support such claims with evidence, not his/her opponent. It was therefore up to you to support your assertion by presenting evidence to the similarities between the war, NOT up to me. Do you understand this simple rule? A yes or no will do.

quote:

That's a personal attack.I'm going to have to ask you to stop. I have no other choice but to homeschool.You don't understand,and I don't want you picking on that subject.

My intention was not meant as a personal attack, hence the part of a "personal note". It was meant as a personal reflection on how I personally feel on homeschooling with my brother's family. But I can see how this can be offensive, and it was also off topic, so I do extend my apologies again.

quote:

I used to attend public school,there's a reason I don't anymore. I don't believe in evolution,Macro evolution because it is false. No question asked.

Evolution will not be discussed further for the reasons mentioned previously. I stand by those reasons. But I will give you the following response:

I believe in the giant cookie monster from the planet Zoinks who created all life. I have a book that's been passed down for generations that says as much. Your Christian God whom you believe in is false, and my cookie monster beliefs are true. It's just what I believe, therefore it must be true, and you cannot prove otherwise.

Now, what's wrong with that statement (and don't play games, I know it's "not true", by why?)

quote:

My parents make the decision they think is correct. I wouldn't be pushing it on that subject if I were you. Right now, I'm not physically able to attend public anything, I'd rather not discuss why.

Actually I believe you've already discussed your physical ailment in another thread, and quite honestly it's not my concern. My statement was another personal feeling from experience, and I'll retract it as well, regardless if it pertains to you or not.

quote:

Nicaea? That doesn't have anything to do with Catholocism,does it?http://www.piar.hu/councils/ecum01.htm

Try again. Looking at the first or second hit on the Google search engine won't do. And as you may eventually notice, it has everything to do with Catholicism, as well as all of Christianity for that matter. Much was decided by Constantine's Council in 325 that shaped all Christian beliefs, as well as much was merged with other religious "holidays", and of course much was thrown out (ever heard of the Gnostics?).

So why do you think I'm asking that? My point in the question pertains to what you seem to believe as the "word of God" was merely a decision by a group of people (and an emperor) to be able to control a population, merging beliefs, adding words that make a religious doctrine more powerful (Jesus being the Son of God), and throwing out gospels that disagreed with the 4 gospels of the NT known today (i.e. Gnostics). In truth, it was a real stroke of pure genious by Constantine. You really should study the history of your beliefs a little more. You might find the history quite enlightening.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut And that summarizes your whole argument, essentially. You've chosen to remain in complete ignorance because you just don't WANT to learn anything that might contradict your stubbornly backwards beliefs. You can't educate yourself properly, and you definitely can't debate. If you've won any debates in the past, it can only be because your opponents got so irritated with you that they started to get violent and ended up disqualified. When you decide that you "want" to learn about evolution, from a real source like a biology textbook, instead of from your daddy or a crackpot religious fanatic's web site or a book you haven't even read, then come back to debate the issue. Until then, nobody cares about your "contributions." Edit: to MisterOpus and occrider, a search on amazon does turn up a book called the Case for Faith, apparently written by the same nut who wrote the Case for Christianity. Discuss...

I choose not to follow it, My right. I don't believe in it because of the studying I've done. You all can go on about your missing links being found,but it's still not true. It's not physically possible. I've studied it. I have my proof,and you can believe what you want. But, I'm not about to follow a lie. I don't call him " daddy " Alright? I learn a lot from my parents. That's how every person should be,afterall they are your parents. Further more,my dad is an extremely intelligent man.

Lee Strobel(sp?) Isn't a nut. If you would give him a chance, you'd understand my point of view.

quote:

So you were correct, and I sincerely apologize for my misconception. Since it is the same material, however, my criticisms of the book stands, and you have yet to rebute those criticisms.

I understand, I don't always keep up with some authors.

quote:

Stubborn? You mean I ask for specific evidence to support your assertions, other than what you claim you believe in or claim you've read "somewhere"? If you debated in the same fashion with these other adults without any support for your assertions, my guess is they became just as frustrated as I with your lack of rationale and circular reasoning and most likely threw in the towel, just as I have. If you actually did "win" those arguments, I highly question the guidelines followed with those debates.

Yes, Stubborn. Example..Micro and macro. I've discussed it,I've shown links about what I was explaining.There is a difference between micro and macro, and you still refuse to see it.
Why would it be written in a science book if it weren't true? That isn't the only reason. I will go no further with this subject.

This forum was more in the style of politics. Not so much religious beliefs, we all understood each other when it came to that,and for that I was very thankful. Question all you like, It doesn't bother me.

quote:

Debate 101 rule: -When the debator makes an assertion on a given subject, the onus is on the debator to support such claims with evidence, not his/her opponent. It was therefore up to you to support your assertion by presenting evidence to the similarities between the war, NOT up to me. Do you understand this simple rule? A yes or no will do.

So, where'd you pull this up?

quote:

My intention was not meant as a personal attack, hence the part of a "personal note". It was meant as a personal reflection on how I personally feel on homeschooling with my brother's family. But I can see how this can be offensive, and it was also off topic, so I do extend my apologies again.

Even if it wasn't it still hurt. but, it's alright.

quote:

Evolution will not be discussed further for the reasons mentioned previously. I stand by those reasons. But I will give you the following response: I believe in the giant cookie monster from the planet Zoinks who created all life. I have a book that's been passed down for generations that says as much. Your Christian God whom you believe in is false, and my cookie monster beliefs are true. It's just what I believe, therefore it must be true, and you cannot prove otherwise. Now, what's wrong with that statement (and don't play games, I know it's "not true", by why?)

It's not logical, cookie monsters from the planet Zoinks. But,God is logical. So,really... there is no comparison.

quote:

Actually I believe you've already discussed your physical ailment in another thread, and quite honestly it's not my concern. My statement was another personal feeling from experience, and I'll retract it as well, regardless if it pertains to you or not.

Yea, well let me tell you.It's important to me.

quote:

Try again. Looking at the first or second hit on the Google search engine won't do. And as you may eventually notice, it has everything to do with Catholicism, as well as all of Christianity for that matter. Much was decided by Constantine's Council in 325 that shaped all Christian beliefs, as well as much was merged with other religious "holidays", and of course much was thrown out (ever heard of the Gnostics?). So why do you think I'm asking that? My point in the question pertains to what you seem to believe as the "word of God" was merely a decision by a group of people (and an emperor) to be able to control a population, merging beliefs, adding words that make a religious doctrine more powerful (Jesus being the Son of God), and throwing out gospels that disagreed with the 4 gospels of the NT known today (i.e. Gnostics). In truth, it was a real stroke of pure genious by Constantine. You really should study the history of your beliefs a little more. You might find the history quite enlightening.

I don't search with Google.(but I do know what you're saying.) But,when I searched it I saw something about catholocism so I assumed. But, I don't have much time to finish reading the rest of it.. ( But, let me repeat it once again. I don't believe in catholocism, I know you're saying it's about Christianity.But,when it comes to catholocism,I don't mess with it.)

___________________
~Nessa

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 ... But I will give you the following response: I believe in the giant cookie monster from the planet Zoinks who created all life. I have a book that's been passed down for generations that says as much. Your Christian God whom you believe in is false, and my cookie monster beliefs are true. It's just what I believe, therefore it must be true, and you cannot prove otherwise. ....

Sing along kids :

If moon was cookie me think me would be
Happiest monster you ever see.
Me put on a space suit then up through the night
Me ride in a rocket to go take a bite.

Me take bite from here. Me take bite from there.
And pretty soon, me bite everywhere.
Me eat with both hands. No need fork or spoon.
Me chew it all up until there no moon.

If moon was cookie it wouldn't be fine
Because if me ate it then it wouldn't shine.
Me come to the window and look up at night
But no little moonbeams would give me their light.

So me not like to say it, but it clear to me
It lucky the moon is not a cookie.




MrS

___________________
Click the sig to see MrSquirrel

-"Reality" is the only word in the language that should always be used in quotes.

quote:

Originally posted by WhoaNellie1487 Why would it be written in a science book if it weren't true?

doesn't this contradict your whole argument?

quote:

Originally posted by WhoaNellie1487

Nessa, you talk much, but say little. Take off your rose-tinted glasses and have a good look at all the new colours. You may find that life offers more to those who are less picky about what they'll accept.

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

quote:

Originally posted by WhoaNellie1487 Now how are Chapter 2 verses 5-7 contraditing each other? You,my friend aren't making any sense.

They are not, but they are contradicting verses 1:11 and 1:27.

quote:

They weren't " Mythological stories " They were historical happenings.

Well, how come fossil record and archeological findings portray a largely different picture? Besides, how can you expect a book that's been transcribed several times and mixed up over the centuries to still contain 100% unspoiled historical happenings? You can't. Every time it gets rewritten, something is lost and something new is added. It's simply how those things work.

quote:

Adam's first wife was not Lilith. Adam's wife was Eve. They weren't banned from the garden because "she" was so evil. They were banned from the garden because they had sinned. She never mated with demons,and she didn't become a demon herself. God can defeat anyone, so that's also very off. I don't know where you got that from,but that's not even in the Bible.

No, it is not in the bible because the biblical version contains only the shortened version of the creation, one where the part about Lilith was thrown out. I just mentioned this story as an example that the stories in bible are often not complete but are lacking some details. After looking up a bit, you're right that god could have defeated her but didn't. She fled the garden because she wanted equal rights with Adam, she didn't want to be his helper. God sent her 3 angels to get her back to the garden, but she refused. She mated with Samael and gave birth to a huge amount of demons. She agreed with god that she can stay in the outside world if he kills 100 of her demons each day, and if she's unable to attack circumcised children.

quote:

There is only one God.

Aside from the Genesis 3:22 I mentioned earlier, I'll add a few more to the list:

Exodus 12:12
"And against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment."

Exodus 23:32
"Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor with their gods."

Numbers 33:4
"Upon their gods also the LORD executed judgments."

The list more or less goes on, but the christian god mentiones other gods quite often.

quote:

There aren't any contradictions in the Bible,at all. Believe what you will,but it's the truth.

Since you failed to read the verses I mentioned, I'll point out a contradiction for you. First it says god created plants before humans, and then later on it says god created humans before plants. I have plenty more of those if you are really interested. It would be easier to redirect you to www.skepticsannotatedbible.com, but since you don't want to read it (or don't have time), than I'll keep bringing here contradiction after contradiction. This was the first one. Care for more?

quote:

I'm not lazy. I'm just busy.Huge difference.

I'm sorry if it offended you. The point was I presented a few key pages if you don't have time to read it all.

quote:

So,you'd put your faith in some Egyptian religion, that doesn't even make sense?

No, I don't believe in the cult of Osiris or Horus either. But they make as much sense as christianity itself. Infact they even make more sense since they are not a religion that is conjured up of several opposing philosophies.

quote:

Unlike the Egyptian "gods",we only have one God.

Yet the christian god often mentions other gods in the bible, and sometimes uses a plural form for himself (themselves?). Besides, there have been monotheistic periods in the egyptian history. Where all the faith was put into one god and the other god was declared as evil (hint satan, hint baal).

quote:

He sent his son, who died for our sins on the cross,he rose again. No competition there. Which Egyptian god died for everyones sins?

Osiris died and then rose again. After that happened, he ensured human passage into the afterlife. Sounds familiar? The dying on a cross part is basically an adaptation of the story for the more modern times under roman occupation. It is interesting to note, however, that at the Nicaea council some of the books thrown out of the bible suggest that the whole resurrection deal was a scheme staged in Lasarus's backyard and that Pontius Pilatus was a corrupt roman official who took part in that scheme and infact allowed it to happen. It is also interesting to note that the whole virgin birth story is false as well, because the greeks, from whom the bible was translated to other languages, used the same word for a virgin and for a young woman. In the original, Mary was just a young woman and not a virgin.

quote:

There is no comparison between Egyptian gods,and God.

It depends. In the old testament the jewish god is pretty similar to the egyptian ones. In the new testament it became a bit different, more like some sort of a vague entity, but his son, Jesus, had a hell of a lot in common with Horus and Osiris.

quote:

Eve was deceived,by Satan.

No she wasn't. She was decieved by a serpent. At a time serpents could walk and talk.

quote:

She ate the fruit,and brought it back to Adam..Adam knew that it was a sin to eat from the tree,but because he loved her so much he ate the fruit. thus the first sin. No, he didn't mean " Right after you eat it you will die! " He's talking about sin. You obviously don't understand.. God didn't lie. When he said " you will surely die " He's talking about the seperation from him. God didn't let them eat from the tree of life,because he didn't want them living forever in that state of Sin. Make sense now?

I thought the bible should be taken literally. Now I'm confused. Anyway, what you are saying are just vague speculations, because it isn't written in the bible. I guess it's because you're a woman. The bible clearly states women are men's helpers, not equal partners.

quote:

Adam and Eve sinned. God told them not to do it, Technically he told Adam not to do it. But,they both did it. They disobeyed.

It's interesting how god created a man in his own image yet didn't allow him the ability to separate good from evil. What was so special about men in the first place? If it was speech and intelligence, it is clear that the serpents had those abilities as well.

quote:

You didn't put the full verse. But,there aren't any contradictions there either.

Umm, it is a full verse. The very next letter is already verse 3:23. I never said there were any contradictions in that verse. I posted that verse to show that for some reason god did not want a man to become as powerful as he is and instead doomed him to a miserable short life. My first guess is fear.

quote:

Horses and Donkeys are related, That's micro evolution I do believe.

Yes, they are related. Yet they can't have any fertile offspring. It is only a step from being seperate species. Isn't it odd how they are just a tiny step away from becoming fully separate species? Isn't it odd how there are some related species who can have offspring, and yet there are some related ones that can't? Isn't it odd how the fossile evidence shows that related species diverged from the same ancestor and were able to procreate in the past?

quote:

I'm not catholic,and I don't follow religion.

Religion:
Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

Are you saying that none of the above apllies to you?

quote:

But yes, God said he created birds,fish,land animals,plants,and humans. But, they cannot evolve,not the way you are thinking.

Why? Does it say so in the bible? No. Therefore it is possible. Even from your side of the argument, evolution is not impossible.

quote:

Even those who have an illness?

I suppose you have an illness that does not enable you to go to a public school, right? Well, in that case kids should be allowed to be taught at home, but the standards by which they are taught should be firmly set. This way pretty much every parent can impose his views upon his child.

quote:

They shouldn't be obligated. That would be denying one of our rights here. What if I didn't want to learn about homosexuality in schools? what if I didn't want to learn about evolution in schools? Home education is much better,because it's more in depth. It's just you,and the teacher..and the schooling is much easier on ones schedule.

Really, this is totally ignorant of you and it pretty much sums up your problems. If you don't want to accept something, it doesn't mean those things are not there. Schools should teach kids actual facts, not what the kids want to hear. Standardized public schooling is an institution whose purpose is to give young people equal chances in life and the knowledge necessary for future advancement. Now, don't take this as an attack on you personally, but when I see how flawed your views on established scientific theories and logic itself are, it is clear that some norms should be established even for kids who are attending "home schools".

Anyway, I must point out how you conviniently missed to respond on many of my points, especially the ones painted in red.

___________________
1+1=10

i know your argument is falling on deaf ears, but i'm learning a lot on the history of religion, thanks tito

quote:

Originally posted by WhoaNellie1487 I choose not to follow it, My right. I don't believe in it because of the studying I've done. You all can go on about your missing links being found,but it's still not true. It's not physically possible. I've studied it. I have my proof,and you can believe what you want. But, I'm not about to follow a lie. I don't call him " daddy " Alright? I learn a lot from my parents. That's how every person should be,afterall they are your parents. Further more,my dad is an extremely intelligent man.

You keep saying that you have proof, yet you fail to present it. I'm sorry but that's simply not going to make us believe you.

quote:

Yes, Stubborn. Example..Micro and macro. I've discussed it,I've shown links about what I was explaining.There is a difference between micro and macro, and you still refuse to see it.

So basically what you are saying is that macro evolution is speciation? Well, if there was no fossil evidence and if there was no similar yet distinct species, then your point of view may be argued. That is not the case, however, and your point of view is flawed because it doesn't take into account all the variables.

quote:

Why would it be written in a science book if it weren't true?

LOL. As someone said earlier, this pretty much destroys your whole argument. Evolution is written in all serious biological science books. Creationism is not.

quote:

That isn't the only reason. I will go no further with this subject.

Hard to perpetuate an impossible theory, eh?

quote:

It's not logical, cookie monsters from the planet Zoinks. But,God is logical. So,really... there is no comparison.

You haven't proved anything. You have just shown that your dogmatic views don't allow you to think about the subject. Instead you immediately dismiss it as an illogical one. Now, about christian god being logical...he created day and night on the first day. Where's the logic in that?

quote:

I don't search with Google.(but I do know what you're saying.) But,when I searched it I saw something about catholocism so I assumed. But, I don't have much time to finish reading the rest of it.. ( But, let me repeat it once again. I don't believe in catholocism, I know you're saying it's about Christianity.But,when it comes to catholocism,I don't mess with it.)

During the Nicaea summits, christianity was a single faith. Basically the summit decided on which religious scriptures should be thrown out of the bible and which should be put in. So the bible you have in your home is basically dating back to that time. Some stories were thrown out, some were shortened. Something like what happened earlier, when the story of Lilith and many others were thrown out of the old testament.

___________________
1+1=10

quote:

Originally posted by WhoaNellie1487 I choose not to follow it, My right. I don't believe in it because of the studying I've done. You all can go on about your missing links being found,but it's still not true. It's not physically possible. I've studied it. I have my proof,and you can believe what you want. But, I'm not about to follow a lie.

Show your proof. Put up or shut up.

quote:

Lee Strobel(sp?) Isn't a nut. If you would give him a chance, you'd understand my point of view.

Is this your counterargument to my criticism as well as the other criticisms I posted? Like all your posts, your rebuttals merely come down to a "no it isin't because I say so" form.

Nessa, can you grasp the concept that this is not credible evidence to support your arguments? Just because you say so simply doesn't work. If you can understand this simple concept, you will have taken a big leap in debating.

quote:

Yes, Stubborn. Example..Micro and macro. I've discussed it,I've shown links about what I was explaining.There is a difference between micro and macro, and you still refuse to see it.

Incorrect, Nessa. I've shown you why there's no scientific difference between the two concepts by first explaining, then showing you credible evidence to support my assertions. That website link was also refuted earlier, but yet you say nothing. So since I've shown there's no difference between the two with my evidence given, do you have anything to show to refute that evidence which I presented? That is the next logical step in this debate, and I expect you to follow it if you wish to talk further about evolution. Otherwise, this conversation on this topic will continue to go nowhere at your expense.

So is this how you "win" your debates?

quote:

Why would it be written in a science book if it weren't true?

Do you not see the irony in your statement?

Besides, what is the science book you are reading? Please cite so I can study your source further.

quote:

That isn't the only reason.

Praytell what are the others?

quote:

I will go no further with this subject.

That is the wisest thing you've said so far.

quote:

This forum was more in the style of politics. Not so much religious beliefs, we all understood each other when it came to that,and for that I was very thankful. Question all you like, It doesn't bother me.

This forum is about beliefs. Those beliefs in politics are often related to other belief systems, which are often religious in nature. As you may have noticed, there are many religious threads here. If you do not wish to discuss religion, kindly cease posting in those given areas.

Otherwise, put up or shut up.

quote:

So, where'd you pull this up?

I made it up, of course. Does it not make logical sense in the context, however? Do you honestly want me to dig a source up to back this logical statement? Are you that desparate?

quote:

It's not logical, cookie monsters from the planet Zoinks. But,God is logical. So,really... there is no comparison.

Good, you see that my statement is not logical. Now we're getting somewhere. Next step - tell me the difference between what I said and what you said about God. What makes God logical?

quote:

I don't search with Google.(but I do know what you're saying.) But,when I searched it I saw something about catholocism so I assumed. But, I don't have much time to finish reading the rest of it.. ( But, let me repeat it once again. I don't believe in catholocism, I know you're saying it's about Christianity.But,when it comes to catholocism,I don't mess with it.)

I would like to ask you once again to read more on Council of Nicaea. It is quite fascinating.

Oh, BTW, please tell me which 13 debates you won here. I would like to see them.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...