Last Post

[Burning one]

Peace and Blessings,

In the past, I was very fond of arguing here. For more than a decade, I have been an ardent supporter of this forum. It helped me realize that I enjoy argumentation and should pursue a career thereof. But unfortunately, I have grown bored of it for two reasons:

a) When I presented strong arguments against Aramaic Primacy, the forum decided not to respond in order to save face; it wouldn't even, at least, compliment me for my researches. But when I presented weaker arguments, such as "the scribe's slip," the forum surrounded it like a heap of ants on a cube of sugar. Consequently, I am bored.

b) I can no longer relate to the topic. I feel like I am arguing for the sake of arguing now. I also feel like I am debating certain individuals who would not debate well outside the comfort of their home computer screens.

Finally, I am disappointed with Paul Younan. Over the years, he has grown weak, narrow-minded, and cold as both a debater and person; for example, I cried for his immediate help in regards to my business and he sat there, doing nothing, like Pharoah. What I expected upon my return was a curly-bearded king who hunts lions for sport. What I found was a pelican, feebly hiding in the shadow of his fathers' traditions and hatred for Muslims. He has become the Pharisee who stoned Stephen. What is hilarious is that as he reads this, he still thinks he is guaranteed Paradise!

Please expunge my account.

Kevin, some things to consider:

a) you have brought interesting ideas to the table here concerning the primacy issues. some have been weaker than others, at least, in what was immediately evident. let me explain: the "weak" one of which you speak was weak in that you brought the textual evidence necessary for us to all examine. the "strong" ones were just you stating the opinions of others without the textual evidence brought to the table for people to examine. if you've been around here for as long as you have, then you know how important it is to show the evidence as it stands and not just espouse an opinion, because we've all see how much opinions, as sincere as they may be, can be colored by tradition and any number of outside influences. i think you should really consider these factors in this point.

b) if you can't relate to the topic, then of course you would be best not engaging in debate. it will be fruitless for both, and a waste of time for all. so yes, better to bow out if this is the issue.

if you've been around Christianity for so long, you should know that the proper way to confront personal issues with another individual is to contact them privately first, and if no response is made, then to take other believers with you. if you haven't done that in this case, then you really should. i don't know what exactly you expect out of Paul or why, but that should be the way you handle this personal situation.
judging a man's eternal destiny based on your sole interaction with him over the web is a hugely mistaken route, in my opinion. i've disagreed heatedly with individuals before over the web, but who are we to judge another's acceptance into Paradise based on our sole interaction over the web? you don't know the factors that bear on each individual with whom you interact. you can disagree until you're blue in the face, but judging one's salvation based on your sole interaction is not mature, and, i would venture to surmise, a gutsy action before the Holy One.


Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy