Fallout Continues - Tons of members leaving AFF

[rrford]

Originally Posted by Steadfast

Should I repent for saying that Marvin Hicks was a great debater? That was the absolute truth!

nah. The man was a great debater. He could be somewhat acidic, but always made his point.

[Dimples]

Fine line?

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

of course, it is much more appealing to insult a man who can't defend himself.

Especially if that man has handed your rear end to you a time or two in various debates.

Coonskinner
Resident Redneck Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,148

There is a saying among coon hunters regarding old hounds that have passed over the western slope--"The deader the better."

When the coffee and the stories get to flowing, and you start reminiscing about the greatness of old Sounder or old Queen, it's easy to forget about the nights they kept you out late running fox, or the possums they treed.

Our fondness for them has a way of editing the memories we have.

Dan is a smart guy and pretty glib.

But in just a few hours, he is suddenly becoming a theological genius that no one could stand against, a sort of liberal Rob Roy/William Wallace who vanquished all the evil, perpetually angry and theologically ignorant cons until they finally schemed a way to do him in.

I will miss Dan. We had some nice communications via PM's.

I wish him well.

But he is neither innocent, nor quite worthy of the mythical status he is attaining here.

Originally Posted by rrford

nah. The man was a great debater. He could be somewhat acidic, but always made his point.

And, as I stated before, he could be almost brutal but NEVER lose his grip on the point he was trying to point attention to.

Wasn't it Reynolds that he told, "If you don't come to this debate and answer that one single question I'm leaving! I'm not here to fellowship; I'm here to express truth!"

The only one I saw who was, hands down, more brutal than Hicks while debating was S. C. Johnson. He could be downright demeaning to those who refused to admit truth when cornered.

Ever heard one of Johnson's debates? He refused to place certain rules of debate in place because he didn't want to 'go on' until each question was answered.

[Jekyll]

I think Unregistered misses WWOD

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by rrford

nah. The man was a great debater. He could be somewhat acidic, but always made his point.

From experience I personally think the "acidic" part is what does us in....the only people I ever see patting someone like that on the back are the ones already in his or her corner....What is the point in debating if not to show the other side both what we believe is biblical and that we can have our different views and still be Christ like? I never seen Trinitarians or Oneness be convinced by an acidic debater or a debater that is able to rile up his opponent with insults and pejoratives or for that matter consistantly misrepresenting what the other person believes over and over (like how they believe in three gods)...

[Jekyll]

Originally Posted by Blue Waters

Fine line?




Coonskinner
Resident Redneck Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,148

There is a saying among coon hunters regarding old hounds that have passed over the western slope--"The deader the better."

When the coffee and the stories get to flowing, and you start reminiscing about the greatness of old Sounder or old Queen, it's easy to forget about the nights they kept you out late running fox, or the possums they treed.

Our fondness for them has a way of editing the memories we have.

Dan is a smart guy and pretty glib.

But in just a few hours, he is suddenly becoming a theological genius that no one could stand against, a sort of liberal Rob Roy/William Wallace who vanquished all the evil, perpetually angry and theologically ignorant cons until they finally schemed a way to do him in.

I will miss Dan. We had some nice communications via PM's.

I wish him well.

But he is neither innocent, nor quite worthy of the mythical status he is attaining here.

And your problem with this post is...?

[rrford]

Originally Posted by Steadfast

And, as I stated before, he could be almost brutal but NEVER lose his grip on the point he was trying to point attention to.

Wasn't it Reynolds that he told, "If you don't come to this debate and answer that one single question I'm leaving! I'm not here to fellowship; I'm here to express truth!"

The only one I saw who was, hands down, more brutal than Hicks while debating was S. C. Johnson. He could be downright demeaning to those who refused to admit truth when cornered.

Ever heard one of Johnson's debates? He refused to place certain rules of debate in place because he didn't want to 'go on' until each question was answered.

I have never heard S. C. Johnson debate. I did hear the Hicks-Ramsey debates as a young BC student.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Jekyll

I think Unregistered misses WWOD

This I can say....I don't miss Caston Smith

Originally Posted by Jekyll

I think Unregistered misses WWOD

Huh? How do you get that?

[rrford]

Jekyll seems to be enamored of the "insert the posters name" option on every thread.