Polycarp did you forget to take you pills?

The BBQ Pit
561

Why is this so freakin complicated? You get exactly the same “pass” that Polycarp is getting in this case: I will consider any statements preceding by “I have a hunch” as containing zero persuasive value and as useful and interesting only inasmuch as they tell me something about you.

If you want me to engage your ideas in an intellectual debate, or to offer you constructive feedback, don’t call them hunches – and especially don’t make them about nonfalsifiable matters such as the capacity for divinity of an unnamed person.

But if you do that, then I’ll consider your posts to tell me about you and about your life and view of the world, and about little else.

That’s what Poly has done. His description of the youth in question is interesting, but not even remotely convincing to me. THAT’S OKAY. I don’t need to be convinced in order to appreciate his post. It’s not the kind of post that tries to convince.

Badchad has a serious case of the stalker blues here. He’s failed to grasp the very basic idea that nonfalsifiable ideas cannot be falsified, and that as long as the person posting them isn’t claiming otherwise, it’s very, very stupid to try to falsify them.

Daniel

562

I’m not sure I see how this could be called stalking. If you pit someone more than once, are you stalking them?

563

Funny. I never thought the first person to go in my List-Forbidden-To-Be-Named would be a fellow nonbeliever…

Oh, and blush to punha… :smiley:

564

Good point. Word choice retracted; badchad, I apologize. I mean, I still think you’re being a total asshole about this, and very stupid to boot, but calling you a stalker was out of line.

Daniel

565

If Poly (or any other poster) simply wants to pass along little tidbits about his life, fine, but can we agree that a Great Debates thread probably isn’t the place to do so? It was a GD thread in which Poly tossed out the particular bit of drivel that gave rise to this Pit thread. If you don’t expect to be challenged on what you say, stick to MPSIMS.

566

I didn’t read the germinating thread, and I won’t comment on that. People’s behavior toward him here has been incredibly rude and boorish, however, and is unjustifiable no matter how out of place he was in Great Debates.

If his anecdote failed to make a point in GD, it would have been appropriate to say, “That’s not an argument,” and leave it at that. A pitting that said, “Poly, quit making non-arguments in Great Debates” would have been acceptable.

Calling him a lunatic and insulting him over and over for his beliefs is inexcusable and inappropriate.

Daniel

567

What if this character Adam takes on the role because of support such as this from Polycarp?

Would badchad be Barnabas to Polycarp’s Paul?

568

The underlined shit makes me laugh. The second statment is overdone and forgets we are currently in the Pit.

“boorish” ferkrissake. la deefuckin’ da.

PS- I fear a multibillionaire college kid is born with kidnap concerns that I’m sure dwarf “anti-christ” assassin concerns.

569

What sort of absurdity is that, CarnalK? I’ve kept my comments toward people’s behavior in this thread, which I’m qualified to comment on. Laugh away, but I’m not required to read another thread in order to comment on this one.

As for behavior in the Pit: you’re allowed to be rude in the Pit. That doesn’t always mean your rudeness is justified.

…

Huh. I’ve just read the original thread (it’s not a twelve-page monstrosity like this one); in light of that, this thread is even more inappropriate.

His only post to that thread was divisible into two sections:

  1. The first six paragraphs, which contained a joke, an explanation of another joke, and an analysis of a theological viewpoint.
  2. The last three paragraphs, beginning with “IMHO”, an admission of his own inability to predict things accurately, a description of a hunch, the qualifier of “if I am correct,” and the word “probably.”

The last three paragraphs are obviously, obviously, OBVIOUSLY matters of opinion which he’s not advancing as serious argument: the meat of his post is in the second through sixth paragraphs.

There’s absolutely no rule saying that personal tidbits are verboten in Great Debates. His post consists of some interesting historical and theological information, along with a pet theory of his which he qualifies out the yinyang as something he doesn’t consider evidentiary or persuasive.

Badchad was being a colossal dick to Pit Poly for it.

Daniel

570

Right. Poly said:

“Chance favors the prepared mind.”

Now, when I stumble across something on the Internet that I think is particularly insightful, my first thought is not, “Wow, I wonder if that might be Jesus come to Earth again?” I just think, “Wow, that person sure does know how to put things.” This is because I personally am not looking for any Messiahs to come back again.

However, I am assuming, by the way Poly came to the conclusion that he did, that was looking for a Messiah, in some way, at some level.

Not a deliberate and painstaking Messiah-hunt, no, but just something that he’d had in the back of his mind, and when he saw the website, something clicked and he said, “Ah ha!”

In Luke 7, John the Baptist sent some of his own followers to ask Jesus, “Are you the one who was to come, or should we expect someone else?” They were expecting someone. So, I believe, was Poly.
P.S. Jesus’ response was: "Go back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the poor. "

I’d be very interested to find out what this kid has done by way of actually spreading any good news around. What has he done so far to make the world a better place, other than run a website for gay teens for a little while?

Or are we supposed to wait until he’s 30 years old before we can expect to hear any preaching and teaching?

(I’ll give him a pass on the miraculous healings, otherwise we’d have to go over to the JREF boards to discuss this. :smiley: )

571

I’ve been thinking about this while the board was down and trying to figure out why I’ve been so defensive of Poly when I haven’t exactly held back from slicing up other “kooky” beliefs.

Some of it is just a natural inclination to defend a poster that I like. some of it is just annoyance with what I perceive as hypocrisy by some Christian posters but those reasons can’t be all of it.

badchad has often implied that Poly is really a secular humanist masquerading as a Christian, and there may be something to that but that’s also what I like about Poly. I think that he tries to reconcile his faith to his own innate sense of values, compassion and decency rather than changing his values to fit a doctrine. Maybe this makes for rationalization in scriptural interpretation but let’s face it. There really is no way to make the Bible a consistently humane compilation of books without some rationalization.

I usually take the tack that Jesus was a great ethical teacher whose original message has been largely encumbered by unnecessary mythology and a soteriological doctrine which I have never been able to buy into. I do not share but I also understand and do not object to a view that Jesus was a divine prophet whose message has been similarly obscured. This position still requires some cherry-picking of verses to locate what one believes to be the “true” voice of God but the cherry-picking is not completely arbitrary if one uses some critical strategies. This is pretty much the position that I’ve always perceived that Poly takes and I think that it’s more sensible than a completely literalist approach even it starts from a supposition of a deity. Because I don’t think it’s a crazy or irrational approach I’ve tried to defend it against the likes of badchad who mock it. I’m much more bothered by those who want to teach creationism in schools than I am by someone who doesn’t want to believe that God hates homosexuals and interprets certain passages in a way that may be caled heterodox. I defend Poly because I find him thoughtful and earnest in trying to construct a faith which is intuitively satisfying without requiring enormous gaps in logic, or bald assertions or hostility towards those with different beliefs.

Now, with this latest revelation (no pun intended), I can see Poly searching for a manner in which his God may interact with humanity and a person he feels may be capable of being that vehicle. These are not crazy assertions in themselves and I defend them to that extent.

However, I would recommend that Poly leave it at that for the time being and not try to make any further case for this kid’s messiahship. The discussion is not going to get any better and I think it has the potential to really go down hill and create ill-feelings that could be difficult to resolve.

Congratulations, Chad. You caught Poly in a whacky speculation. Good for you. Has anyone changed their mind and decided to become an atheist now?

572

A better question is how many people will now take Polycarp’s biblical scholarship/opinions with a larger grain of salt.

I agree that Poly should probably just drop it. If that quote was a measure of the hunch’s foundation then this “conversation” is not going to improve.

573

Carnal, why should anyone take his scholarship with a larger grain of salt, unless they’re incapable of recognizing qualifiers such as “IMHO,” “probably,” “hunch,” and so forth?

When you see such qualifiers, you should ALREADY be taking the qualified text with a larger grain of salt than normal.

Daniel

574

You leave us no alternative because you write nothing of significane that can be discussed.I dealt with your “points” in the very first Pit Thread I made for you. You continue to make the same attack - you bash Polycarp because his version of Christianity isn’t the Fundamentalist version that you prefer. That is the extent of this thread and a large portion of your posting here. Your badgering him doesn’t merit praise.

Your posts are irrefutable because they are pointless. You have yet to explain how his version of Christianity, which you believe is a modification of Secular Humanism, is more absurd than the Fundamentalist version.

You just can’t wrap your mind around it can you, DDG? Something in this kid’s website make Polycarp believe he could have a significant affect on the world around him, that he could be the means by which God works wonders in the world. That view is closer to the original usage of Messiah as a vessel of God than is the modern Christian idea of Messiah being a Divine incarnation of God. Polycarp doesn’t seem to be Messiah hunting, just speculating that if this kids lives up to his dreams and potential, future generations may regard him as such. For my money it’s irrational; but no more so than you being sure that you’re getting into Heaven when you die. (Hint: there ain’t one.)

575

If this kid is the messiah, he must be the 1 millionth coming, because I can think of about that many people before him who tried to teach people to be kind to each other. Martin Luther King comes to mind…I mean, honestly…does anyone here actually think Poly’s on to something big here?

All Badchad has done here is amplify the absurdity of Poly’s statement. It’s about time. Poly continually speaks in flowery language, using a tone of authority, almost as if “The Big Guy” personally asked him to come down and show us poor non-believing saps the TruthTM . It’s high time someone had the balls to mention that the emperor is naked.

576

This is too weird. Kalhoun, you’re telling me Polycarp is analogous to the emperor?

Look: if you put him on a pedestal as one Who Could Speak No Wrong, that’s not his problem: it’s your problem. He has never, not that I’ve seen, claimed to have all the answers, or to be smarter or wiser than me or you.

Are you jealous of the respect he gets? Too bad: he’s earned that respect by being thoughtful and humble and nice and educated. If you’re those things, you might get the same respect: you certainly won’t remove my respect for him by being rude to him.

His unconventional (and admittedly unsupported) ideas about a potential messiah in no way change his thoughtfulness, his humility, his niceness, his education. That’s what he’s earned respect for, and he’s still got it.

Daniel

577

Left Hand, I don’t put him on a pedestal…not by a long shot. I don’t need to put him on a pedestal. I don’t think I can find one higher than the one he and this board have already put him on. I’ve never believed that his scholarly musings were anything more than folklore gone terribly wrong.

And yes, his tone makes him come off as “knowing” the truth, based on circular reasoning. Yes, he’s said this is his OPINION, but he witnesses regularly.

Humble? YOUGOTTABEKIDDINGME!!! Jeez…he’s said he’s had a couple contacts with god. I’d say that puts him in the “special” column, or have other people around here talked with the Big Guy too? Now he claims to know that the messiah is a gay kid (who stands to inherit beaucoup bucks), based on a website quote that could have been written by Miss USA? C’mon…

578

Kalhoun, given how often it’s been pointed out that he DOESN’T claim to know that the messiah is a gay kid, I can only assume you’re repeating a lie in hopes that people will eventually believe it.

As for humility not being compatible with having had a couple contacts with God, are you really that ignorant about Protestant Christianity?

As for his tone, that’s nonfalsifiable and is therefore, by the standards of this thread, evidence of your own looniness :).

Daniel

579

If my experience is any indication, yeah, you would. Holding few if any actual deep beliefs has made me the King of Qualifiers and I have found people here quite tolerant of my lack of commitment. Even in Great Debates. The only time I was Pitted (as an individual) was in response to a joking dig at Canada, ferchrissake. Rarely has anybody commented on, much less complained about, my Handyesque driveby posting style. The people who DO NOT get passes are people who make absolute assertions–I suppose because it’s easier to argue with somebody who actually says something.

Therefore, I do not believe Poly got a pass entirely because he is a nice guy whom a lot of people respect, though I am sure that helped encourage people to give him a listen. But I believe that had a poster like me, less well known, less well liked, and less respected, had made the same vague statements about a hunch most posters would roll their eyes and go on to the next post. It is only because Badchad has his hardon for Poly that this has gone beyond patting Poly on the head and telling him to come back when he has something to say.

Of course, had he been a newbie we’d’ve ripped him a new asshole. :wink: There are advantages to having built up a reputation, be it of being wise and thoughtful or just ineffectual.

580

Left Hand, he laid out a disclaimer (“I have a hunch”), but why would a person even post something that ridiculous unless he felt pretty passionate about it? We all know what he said. I think his only reason for posting it is in hopes “people will eventually believe it”.

And I don’t know much about Protestant Christianity (except that Poly follows it so loosely that he has, for all intents and purposes, created his own religion), nor do I need to. He’s claimed at least two direct communications with god. What’s your point?

By the way, I’m not the only one who has taken notice of his “tone”. You’re right…nonfalsifiable, but quite evident nonetheless.