No Suprises
Aaron Kinney Permalink
17 comments
Well, Manata closed off his comments. He had this to say:
The reason comments are not allowed is because "Pressing the Antithesis" (PTA) is not a babysitting blog. PTA is not around for the purpose of allowing stupid comments. PTA is not around so that atheists can try out their philosophically inept arguments on my blog.
Manata clearly has no interest in apologetics or trying to convert anyone. He is only interested in spouting off his ideas and having Christians read them and agree with him. He has made himself as inaccessible as possible to those who don't believe in his Christian superstition. What's his major in college again?
Manata continues:
So, I tried to allow comments here but atheists (who hate God's law) hated my laws and so they had to rebel. Anyway, comments are now removed. Any complaining atheist only has himself to blame now.
Well, as soon as Manata put in rule #6, I stopped posting sarcastic comments. As soon as Manata put in rule #7, I stopped posting about the FSM. I then posted one question about the scriptural support for his claim that sin makes people stupid, then I decided that I it wouldn't be worth it posting in his comments anymore. But that wasn't enough for Paul. After some dialogue between him and I on this blog, he decided to close the comments. As far as I know, the last atheist post on his comments was my question about scripture. I guess that legitimate, on topic question was the straw that broke the camel's back.
Manata finishes off with:
Remember, this is a free country and if some atheist wishes to respond that bad then he can start a free blog and do so.
Looks like he is missing the point I was trying to make. Manata, in this quote, clearly wants the non-believers to leave him alone. My question about scripture wasn't "bad," or in violation of any of his rules. It was nothing but a relevant question. Oh well.
Manata has no interest in converting anyone to Christianity. Manata's only interest is feeding his ego by having like-minded people clap every time he makes a post insulting his own faith by calling evolution a religion and other such ridiculousness. I guess that's fine, but maybe he should change his college major, because he obviously hates duking it out in the battle of ideas (apologetics), and sucks at it anyway.
I think it's fair to say that my actions have shown that I am more interested in winning over "hearts and minds" than he is!
One more thing: Manata talks about atheists hating God's law, but he obviously needs to spend less time reading van Til and more time reading his Bible. In the Bible, 1 Peter 3:15 says "but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence," I haven't seen Manata do this once, and now he is basically saying that he has no interest in following this particular word of God! He may not hate God's law, but he sure as hell isn't following it. I think Paul would be better suited to just become a minister and preach to an ever-shrinking flock, because he doesn't know how to interact with, and win over, non-believers whatsoever.
Reminder: Theists are allowed to post comments and their badly formed arguments in here, even if they contain sarcasm, mention the FSM, Jesus, or even contain insults. I am officially against the removal of any and all comments except for spam, and I am against the banning of any and all commenters except for spammers. That's what a good apologetic/evangelist should do, right Paul?
Post a Comment
17 Comments:
Now this here is spam. And its the only thing I will ever push for deletion. Ever.
Hey, spammers: I like to watch you all disappear when your ISP pulls the plug. You're giving me a chance to do just that.
Aaron: There's a new option that forces post verification. Turn it on and this shouldn't happen.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
LibertarianDefender,
Why do you make the assumption that all blogs are designed for debates?
Masturbatory, new word for my vocabulary. Probably because I don't hang with those still in the third grade. What part of speach is this word and how does it relate to blogs?
Thanks,
Aaron: “Manata clearly has no interest in apologetics or trying to convert anyone.”
That’s a good thing – he’s quite miserable as an apologist. I’m sure he attracts a lot more flies than converts.
Aaron: “He is only interested in spouting off his ideas and having Christians read them and agree with him.”
As I’ve pointed out before, Paul is desperate for approval and validation from outside sources. Since, in keeping with the Christian commandment that he “deny himself” (cf. Mt. 16:24) and the stipulation that the believer must “hate his own life” (cf. Lk. 14:26), he has abandoned himself, he has little choice but to seek approval and validation from those who pretend to be able to offer it. And boy, have they taken him for a ride!
Aaron: “He has made himself as inaccessible as possible to those who don't believe in his Christian superstition.”
Indeed, a very fickle, even double-minded man. Like the wind, he blows one way one day, then another way another day. And what’s curious is that he finds that he has to close his comments down, and yet still come over to other blogs and posts his putrid debris in their comments section. Seems rather childish, no? It brings up the age-old question which apologists don’t like to face:
“Why be born again when you can just grow up?
Aaron: “What's his major in college again?”
Why would someone who is capable of thinking the thoughts of an omniscient and infallible magic being “after Him” have to trouble himself with going to college? It seems that it would be quite superfluous.
you don't even get what I did, do you Aaron?
LD: "As far as I'm concerned, any blog that doesn't allow comments is masturbatory."
That's probably the most succinct summary of Paul Manata's blog that I've seen yet.
Jeff Downs asked: "Why do you make the assumption that all blogs are designed for debates?"
I don't think anyone has affirmed or even assumed that "all blogs are designed for debates." Many blogs are for more or less personal interest, such as a "thought of the day" blog, a diary, or even a photo journal.
But blogs which post controversial content are in jeopardy of losing all interest to potential readers when exchange of ideas in the form of debate offers intellectual value to those who are interested in seeing more than one side of an issue. Goose the Antithesis, for instance, is a good case in point: it allows comments, and disputers need not worry that their comments will be deleted simply because they don't go along party lines. And indeed, even though it was once pronounced dead, this blog is very lively, with new people participating quite regularly, indicating that the interest level is high. Manata's blog, on the other hand, is like watching grass grow: it's utterly uninteresting.
But, so be it, according to your question here, it seems you're agreeing with the essence of what Aaron has been pointing out: that Paul Manata is fleeing debate.
Jeff Downs: "Masturbatory, new word for my vocabulary."
Is it now?
Jeff Downs: "Probably because I don't hang with those still in the third grade."
If the term in question is new to you, how do you come to associate it with "those still in the third grade" (whoever that may be)?
Jeff Downs: "What part of speach is this word and how does it relate to blogs?"
The part of speech to which the term 'masturbatory' belongs is called the adjective. It is a term which qualifies nouns. And I think LD explained his use of the term quite sufficiently. If you can't figure it out from there on your own, perhaps you need to go back in from the playground and join the rest of the class so you can learn something. (Oh, that's right... since you "think God's thoughts after Him," you shouldn't need to bother trying to learn anything.)
Manata proves himself monotonous manatee yet more once again proves enemy of the true god greatest whore beast of the Jesus christ and deceptor in chief of the monkey hordes. this fool in the christ of the satanic fool is the greatest fool and the greatest christ. Manata I am the vast and greedy vagina dentata and I will devour you in my eternal slave pits of all christian blackguards and fool christs. You are the greatest enemy of hashishan prophecy in the world today! your blog is a shock and a shame to the Lord God of Hosts! Manata you are damn fool like your bugger boy of satan christ and you shall reveal your roguish tricks and heresies of the monkey christ! damned manata you are proven evil and fool by the monkey christ ape actions of your hanuman league. Manata you are revealed blimp and warplane of the nazochristian briggand squads. you are evil capitialist heretic and foul beast. you are proven a joy to satan and his beasties. why dost thous breakest counsel with words sans wisdom? You are no wise monkey you are damn fool monkey yank mormon. repent silly christolator repent!
If the term in question is new to you, how do you come to associate it with "those still in the third grade" (whoever that may be)?
Because this is term that only third graders would use.
LD stated that blog with no comments are masturbatory. Yeah, that clears things up.
(Oh, that's right... since you "think God's thoughts after Him," you shouldn't need to bother trying to learn anything.)
And we are supposed to take you serious when you make comments such as this.
hashishan prophet had a real good, huh!
So, it would be the blogger, not the blog that is masturbatory.
I asked: "If the term in question is new to you, how do you come to associate it with "those still in the third grade" (whoever that may be)?"
Jeff Downs: "Because this is term that only third graders would use."
I see. So the term is not new to you after all. Why then did you say it is new to you?
I wrote: "(Oh, that's right... since you "think God's thoughts after Him," you shouldn't need to bother trying to learn anything.)"
Jeff: "And we are supposed to take you serious when you make comments such as this."
If you have no answer to such statements, then why not just admit it?
I wrote: "(Oh, that's right... since you "think God's thoughts after Him," you shouldn't need to bother trying to learn anything.)"
Jeff: "And we are supposed to take you serious when you make comments such as this."
If you have no answer to such statements, then why not just admit it?
I have an answer. The point is, to make such a statement, indicates you are not familiar with Christian theology. Can you tell me where sanctification is not taught.
Actually, from my perspective, this exactly why I try to stay away from these blogs, groups, etc. I have not seen comments from anyone who is open to discussion. You just want to throw your weight around. In that case, while your comments section is open...it is pointless.
Thanks for your time.
I'm sorry, but this will be my last post.
Jeff: "Actually, from my perspective, this exactly why I try to stay away from these blogs, groups, etc."
I see, you try so hard "to stay away from these blogs," that you come and post your opinions and then get offended and disband. Well, so be it. Yes, you must be pretty sorry.
Manata: you don't even get what I did, do you Aaron?
Yes I do get it, unless you were lying in your post. I comprehended your post and quoted you at length and responded to your post directly. Did you read this blog post or what, Manata? You dont even get what I did, do you Manata? Quit embarrasing yourself, Manata! Sound familiar? Come up with a new ad hominem Paul. Youve beaten your current ones to death long ago.
You dont want your blog to be a place for Christian-atheist debate, and you admitted it, and that is the point that you are missing. You are such a control freak that you cant let one comments post remain on your blog that doesnt stroke your ego or kiss your ass, and youre not interested in spending the time it takes to MAINTAIN that freakish level of control (who is?), so your only answer is to close comments completely. Would you like it if our atheist blogs had the same rules your blog had? Do you even think that honest meaningful dialogue between ahteists and theists would be possible under such conditions? You cant see the forest for the trees, Paul. The problem is you dont even get the irony of your own actions.
Raving Atheist, Evangelical Atheist, Goose, etc... all have Christians that post all kinds of crazy shit in the comments. These bloggers dont have a problem with it. They arent neurotic control freaks who have to babysit their comments like you Paul, and they dont mind having a few bad, sarcastic, or off topic Christian comments in them. Whats the problem that you have that they dont have? If all these blogs can do it, why cant you? Because you arent interested in doing what these blogs do...you said so yourself! (what do you have to say about that 1 Peter verse I quoted?) You arent even a part of this atheist/theist dialoge community. So why dont you just admit it? Why be a faker?
Im not even gonna read your blog anymore. Do you think any atheist would want to? Oh thats right, you dont even care if any atheists read it! All you care about is if your fellow Jesus-eating cultists read it.
You are the worst apologist ever, Paul. Matt Slick, Jason Gastrich, even Hashishan Prophet are all far superior apologists to you. Memorizing van Til books does not a good evangelical make.
You drove me further away from Christianity than Ive even been before Paul. For your own sake, and for the sake of your impaled, putrid, homosexual Jesus, stay away from ALL non-believers. You cant communicate with them; all you do is piss them off, even the nice ones. You are doing more harm to the membership of your religion than any atheist could ever do.
Im only going to spend time communicating with Christians who actually want to communicate. Its way more productive, and they are much more fun than you.
Let me summarize what Aaron just said. Paul Manata is a VanTillbot and an intellectual coward. Paul Manata couldn't argue his way out of a paper syllogism and the energy spent in his empty-headed posturing shines like the Sun itself.
Thanx Franc,
You said in 1 paragraph what took me 7.
I just noticed that Paul took the time to insult me recently. And here I thought he didn't love me anymore!
I think he's trying to keep his crush on me a secret by not mentioning my name.
<< Home