Posted on 12/26/2017 4:27:32 PM PST by ealgeone
“I see the Rules are in play again.”
In other words, you can’t answer my questions, can’t refute what I said, and can’t make an argument so you’re back to taking your ball and going home.
“Do you ever wonder why it seems I’m about the only one who will engage you in conversation on these threads?”
1) You are not the only one.
2) You do not engage in conversation. You routinely refuse to answer questions and respond to points, you create straw men, you don’t post any discernible argument, you even post things that are flat out untrue and you deny reality. That’s not a conversation. That’s just how anti-Catholics act.
In other words, you can’t answer my questions, can’t refute what I said, and can’t make an argument so you’re back to taking your ball and going home.
No. Just recognizing the facts of how you "debate" and when you fail to see the errors you make. When pointed out to you you ignore them.
“Do you ever wonder why it seems I’m about the only one who will engage you in conversation on these threads?”
1) You are not the only one. 2) You do not engage in conversation. You routinely refuse to answer questions and respond to points, you create straw men, you don’t post any discernible argument, you even post things that are flat out untrue and you deny reality. That’s not a conversation. That’s just how anti-Catholics act.
And your post sums up why I came up with the Rules.
There is no conversation with you as there is with other Roman Catholics. It's all about scoring points with you.
If everything doesn't line up with your worldview it's anti-Catholic...or maybe anti-vlad....or both.
You seem to view everything as an attack.
I've seen how you respond on other threads. People just walk away from discussions with you.
You've a persecution complex, Vlad...in addition to the narcissistic tendencies. Get some help somewhere.
I’ve heard tell that it’s not only Catholics who follow this practice. It’s certainly not something I would do.
“No. Just recognizing the facts of how you “debate” and when you fail to see the errors you make.”
I made no errors and you didn’t even show that I did. The fact that I disagree with your erroneous beliefs does not mean I made an error.
“When pointed out to you you ignore them.”
I didn’t make any errors so you didn’t point any out. Look, in post 77 you wrote: “A table of contents has nothing to do with salvation...” Now, was I talking about salvation? No. Were you previously talking about salvation? NO. If you were, would you not have mentioned it at least? Yes. But you didn’t mention it until post 60 and you certainly didn’t mention it in the same regard as in post 77. You always do this. You always resort to posting falsehoods. Why do you insist on resorting to falsehoods???
“And your post sums up why I came up with the Rules.”
I don’t think that’s the case at all. I think it’s just the pattern of falsehood you embrace in post after post. In order to avoid debate you post “Rules”. In order to avoid debate you post falsehoods. In order to avoid debate you refuse to answer questions. This is what you do. Every time.
“There is no conversation with you as there is with other Roman Catholics. It’s all about scoring points with you.”
You say that in the same post in which you posted outright falsehoods and can’t see the irony or hypocrisy of what you’re doing?
“If everything doesn’t line up with your worldview it’s anti-Catholic...or maybe anti-vlad....or both.”
Anti-Catholics always resort to falsehoods. They have to. You keep doing it. You do it all the time. You have to. You can’t actually make an argument apparently.
“You seem to view everything as an attack.”
If that “everything” is based upon falsehoods being repeatedly used in thread after thread, what else could it be but an anti-Catholic attack? If someone lies about you, is that not an attack? Of course you probably won’t answer that question like so many others.
“I’ve seen how you respond on other threads. People just walk away from discussions with you.”
So that’s why you resort to posting falsehoods? Really?
“You’ve a persecution complex, Vlad...in addition to the narcissistic tendencies. Get some help somewhere.”
Stop posting falsehoods. Make an actual argument for once. Try.
I made no errors and you didn’t even show that I did. The fact that I disagree with your erroneous beliefs does not mean I made an error.
I'm not just referring to this thread. That's the error as you presumed it was just this thread.
“And your post sums up why I came up with the Rules.”
I don’t think that’s the case at all.
See...you just did it again though you won't recognize it.
I think it’s just the pattern of falsehood you embrace in post after post. In order to avoid debate you post “Rules”. In order to avoid debate you post falsehoods. In order to avoid debate you refuse to answer questions. This is what you do. Every time.
If I was going to avoid the debate I would even bother replying to you in the first place. However, as it always does with you, you think you score points by majoring in the minors.
Another rule I'm going to have to add is to get your definitions of the words used in the debate...but that may be a variation of an existing rule.
“If everything doesn’t line up with your worldview it’s anti-Catholic...or maybe anti-vlad....or both.” Anti-Catholics always resort to falsehoods. They have to. You keep doing it. You do it all the time. You have to. You can’t actually make an argument apparently.
You really can't see your narcissism can you?
“You’ve a persecution complex, Vlad...in addition to the narcissistic tendencies. Get some help somewhere.”
Stop posting falsehoods. Make an actual argument for once. Try.
I have made the argument....again, you can't/won't see it. It's not uncommon for narcissists.
“I’m not just referring to this thread.”
I never said you were. You error is presuming that I thought you meant only this thread.
“That’s the error as you presumed it was just this thread.”
I made no such presumption. That’s your error - yet another one. I also made no error in this thread or any error of any significance whatsoever in any thread in which you and I have ever exchanged posts. I’m not perfect, but I’m not posting the rolling carts laden with errors that your posts are. I just don’t do that. I choose to get the facts right from the beginning. You apparently don’t.
“See...you just did it again though you won’t recognize it.”
I stated a fact. I don’t think what you posted was the real reason precisely because of what you do. Quite frankly someone who deliberately chooses to post falsehoods as you do cannot be trusted in his explanations of why he chose to do that.
“If I was going to avoid the debate I would even bother replying to you in the first place.”
No, I don’t think that’s the case. After all why would someone say they are not avoiding debate and then do everything that would normally constitute avoiding debate such as refusing to answer questions (as you do), refusing to make arguments (as you always do), resorting to posting outright falsehoods (as you always do), and posting straw men (as you do so often)? It’s how you act all the time ...and not some sentences you just posted claiming otherwise that matter.
“However, as it always does with you, you think you score points by majoring in the minors.”
And there we see what I was just talking about. You’re almost always wrong on the facts. When this is shown what do you do? You claim that the facts are really just “minors”. Again, you’re not making an actual argument here. You’re just avoiding debate by de facto claiming that the facts are just minors. This is what you do.
“Another rule I’m going to have to add is to get your definitions of the words used in the debate...but that may be a variation of an existing rule.”
And, again, you’re still not making an argument. You’re avoiding debate and going for “Rules”. You have to. You can’t make an argument so you have to shift to something else apparently. And then you deny you’re doing it. . . right after you’ve done it. Classic.
“You really can’t see your narcissism can you?”
My narcissism - real or imagined on your part - doesn’t help or hinder you from making an argument. It doesn’t make you post falsehoods instead of the truth. The fact that you post outright falsehoods DOES hinder your argument. The fact that you refuse to answer questions DOES show you avoid debate. Even if I were a terrible narcissist that in itself would not increase or decrease the correctness or accuracy of what I post when we have a one-sided debate on something Catholic (one-sided because you’ve run away to your “Rules” and empty charges of narcissism). My supposed narcissism doesn’t have anything to do with your inability to debate or make an argument. This apparently is just more avoidance on your part - not to mention making it personal to say the least. It also shows a far too serious reliance on feelings (and I’m not talking about mine!) because a logical man would realize that a supposedly narcissistic person could in no way stop another man from being able to make an argument merely because he is narcissistic. The only way that could happen is if the other person is so ruled by their “hurt little girl” feelings that they emotionally collapse when faced with the “narcissistic” person. Is that the case with you? Sure seems that way.
“I have made the argument....again, you can’t/won’t see it.
No one can see what isn’t there.
“It’s not uncommon for narcissists.”
There are those hurt little girl feelings again apparently. Time for you to grow up eagleone.
“According to transubstantiation, he is re-sacrificed at every mass. So that’s 10s of thousands of times every day.”
No, according to transubstantiation, His sacrifice is re-presented in an unbloody way in the Mass under the accidents of bread and wine. So that’s one sacrifice.
Maybe you should learn more about what the word transubstantiation means: https://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/eucha4.htm
Get some help vlad.
I'm out before the thread gets locked.
You might want to get out before you're banned.....again.
“Yep...you’ve got the clear signs of a narcissist.”
You’ve got the clear signs of avoiding debate. Again.
“Get some help vlad.”
Get an argument and make it, eagleone.
“I’m out before the thread gets locked.”
You were out from the beginning. As usual.
“You might want to get out before you’re banned.....again.”
I’ve never been banned. I was suspended. You’re wrong yet again. Nothing new there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.