FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Mark of the Beast
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
(12-03-2009, 10:14 PM)John C Wrote: [ -> ]There seems to be an almost inexplicable breakdown in communication/understanding of my arguments - that i am saying that barcode is the Revelation 666, which i am not. I will certainly not explain it again and i am having much trouble in believing the sincerity of this misunderstanding. And that is the strawman that is being used YET AGAIN.

So then what is your point? Please post it in your own words, with no links.

You are not stating your position very well, if at all.
(11-30-2009, 10:44 PM)John C Wrote: [ -> ]The fact is the barcode does have a '6' '6' '6' in it and the barcode is universally used for buying and selling. The similarity between the prophecy and that fact are far too great to be a coincidence. As the site says - the barcode is not the mark but is preparing the way; that sounds reasonable to me.

Ok, after sifting through the accusations of being a liar, I found this.

* The barcode is not used universally for buying and selling anywhere. That is a fact.
* The similarity between the rather meaningless connection could only be a coincidence. That is very far fetched to be otherwise. No one would know about it if they weren't looking for it specifically and wanted to to see it.

The barcode is not the mark but preparing the way? That makes no sense. No one knows about this "666" in barcodes and it isn't obvious at all. People in general have no clue how the scanners know which way the barcode is meant to be read (they can be scanned backwards), let alone how to find these sixes in them.

If this is the extent of your believes, then they are still ridiculous. First the barcode is "universally" used for buying and selling and has "666" in it, but it is not the mark? So the Bible is wrong? How can it fulfill the prophecy, yet not be the mark?
666 = June 6, 2006.  06/06/06  the number of his name:  the birthday of anti-Christ.
(12-03-2009, 09:29 PM)Rosarium Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-03-2009, 09:17 PM)INPEFESS Wrote: [ -> ]Ok, as are all of us, but I don't have to tell you why that is not a good enough reason to justify unpleasant behavior.
I think we all have our moments online.

Quote:By the way, why the German?
Sounds more intimidating.

Quote:Then you posted a rather insulting (in my opinion) mockery of John C’s logic.
Lack of logic, yes.

Quote:Things seemed to deteriorate on both ends from there.

Well, I don't think it did. It was merely a logical progression from the beginning, which I recognised quite rapidly as being not logical. My statements fit the situation.

Quote:I just think these little discourses look very bad and, in a word, scandalous, to all those reading (which could be anyone). You were simply the first of the two posters I addressed to see my post (I think).
Maybe, but I did not think that when I wrote it nor do I think that now. I'll be more mindful of it though.

Well then you are blameless and faultless in this discussion. I apologize for interfering.
(12-03-2009, 10:14 PM)John C Wrote: [ -> ]Cowboy said:
Quote:What you said is not logical.  What I said is logical.  I said it was a protestant tactic.  You extended my statement by adding the word exclusively

If by "sophister" you mean someone who cares about the words he and others use, then I'll take it as a compliment.  But, of course, if you mean it in the literal sense, you've once again shown a gross lack of maturity, as you can't come up with a better refutation of what I said that to resort to name-calling.

Ok, kid, I'm going to stop arguing with you, for a few reasons.

1.)  All I get in return for my explanations are personal insults and lectures on how to use the English language (and from someone who can't even spell 'you' and 'before').
2.)  You're obviously not open to opposing viewpoints, as you label them all as ridiculous, straw men, or unworthy of a response.
3.)  I have much better things to do with my time, like chatting with people that actually want to have a conversation, rather than just hear themselves talk.

God bless.
(12-03-2009, 10:32 PM)Rosarium Wrote: [ -> ]Ok, after sifting through the accusations of being a liar,

So much for starting over Rosarium. Ur desire for victim status is embarrassing. I called u a liar because u lied - u blatantly thought i was calling u Satan but then denied that u had such thoughts. U sound like a banker complaining about having to sort through accusations of being usurious. U don't merit for nailing urself to a cross Rosarium - someone else has to do it. Nor can u pretend someone else is doing it.

Quote:The barcode is not the mark but preparing the way? That makes no sense
Only to u Rosarium, any reasonable person who has read the posts will find it very easy to understand. When u claim not to understand, I sincerely doubt ur sincerity. I said i'm not going to explain it again and i meant it - if someone doesn't understand that 2 plus 2 = 4 pretty quickly then there's obviously something wrong with their understanding.

For the benefit of those who may be misled by ur odd reasoning. Saying the barcode is universally used, in this context, simply means it is used the world over, it is very predominant but it is not used necessarily absolutely everywhere. For example - If i say that barcodes are ubiquitous i don't mean literally - the decor in my home is not made of barcodes and the roads around this part of the country don't have barcodes printed on them. i don't even mean they are printed on every last single item in the shop. It's an expression. Even when the true mark appears, I'm sure not absolutely everything will be bought and sold using it - undoubtedly there will be a certain amount of black market trading for example.

Quote:The barcode is not the mark but preparing the way? That makes no sense. No one knows about this "666" in barcodes and it isn't obvious at all. People in general have no clue how the scanners know which way the barcode is meant to be read
It is obvious to anyone who is looking for the truth. Very few people knew about John the baptist and yet he prepared the way. Billions of people don't know that Jesus is God, does that mean that it is impossible for today to be judgment day?

Quote:First the barcode is "universally" used for buying and selling and has "666" in it, but it is not the mark? So the Bible is wrong? How can it fulfill the prophecy, yet not be the mark?
U remind of Charlton Heston, Rosarium. I can just hear u now...    'u can have my straw man... when u pry him from my cold; dead; hands'.

If this is the extent of ur arguments, then they are still ridiculous.

(12-04-2009, 12:52 AM)IrishCowboy Wrote: [ -> ]Ok, kid, I'm going to stop arguing with you


(12-03-2009, 01:28 PM)IrishCowboy Wrote: [ -> ]What you said is not logical.  What I said is logical.  I said it was a protestant tactic.  You extended my statement by adding the word exclusively.  That's a straw man.  You accuse others of using straw men, but you do it quite frequently yourself. 

Cowboy, u've used so many sophisms in the little u've said (and even less that makes sense) that any educated person will percieve it without demonstration. i never extended ur statement, i showed how it was meaningless which u then claimed was an extension of ur words. What i said was perfectly true (and 'logical' - get over urself wiseman), and ur inference that i was using protestant tactics was completely groundless (quoting from the bible? please. An openmindedness that these may well be the end times? If that seems silly to u - then ur obviously an ignorant fellow).

And then the amazing 'OK the bible wasn't ur leading tactic, but it was against me'. U might as well focus in on this:
(12-02-2009, 11:30 PM)John C Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-02-2009, 10:18 PM)Rosarium Wrote: [ -> ]You are so smart

and then say my main argument was 'shucks'. Talk about picking and choosing what suits.

Ur inability to argue without using strawmen and sophisms is telling.

Do us all a favour and do as u say, and go off and enjoy urself in sophist heaven.
And don't whinge about not being coddled when ur insulting and underhand tactics have been exposed

God bless

the emotional investment in these issues is clouding and obscuring any relative objectivity. I have a persecution complex, JohnC, and I'm not insinuating that you share in this affliction, but the only way I can see most of what you refer to as being overt in the other poster's comments, would be if you were thinking like I do.
This is why I persist in reiterating my original message.

(12-02-2009, 06:55 PM)Arun Wrote: [ -> ]John. open your eyes dude. Approach this question open-mindedly, as one should with all questions, initially. Remove personal sentiment from the equation (i'm right you're wrong etc) as it will only get in the way. Allow the evidence and logical conclusions to form the correct bias, and pursue the greater Truth.

Pax, brother.

Have you tried this yet? If you do, you risk nothing to gain everything. For after engaging in such an exercise, the pursuit of clarity and Truth, you either confirm what was already true, or expose what is deceit. Either way, you win. For you are left with the Truth.
Now, the primary reason for me personally to dismiss the barcode theory, after having been through this process and approach, is the manner and method of its presentation. The source is not reputable or reliable, and the manner in which the matter has been researched appears to utilise selective truths, and omit certain relevant information, in order to support a particular theory or preconceived notion. This is unscientific, and stands against the manner in which the Church usually presents an argument.
I myself learned this same lesson recently; and in my case, as potentially in yours, what I believed was correct. However, the sources I drew from were disreputable and clouded the issue with a veil of obscurity and prejudice. Also the unscientific method of argument resulted in the issue being written off by most as "fringe theory".
However, once I began to argue the same issue from Catholic sources, with well formulated and reliable argument and apologetic, people began to accept it.
People listen to the voice of reason. Seek reasonable arguments for your position. If it is indeed a justifiable position on some level, you will find some. If it is not, you will not.

Also, I truly believe that continued emotional investment in this issue could ultimately prove to be to your detriment, personally. It may do you a world of good to take a step back and examine it objectively and scientifically. Emotional investment is taxing, and leads to second and third stage general adaptation syndrome (2nd stage being adaptive response, and third being exhaustion). Severe health problems can arise out of these responsory stages.

(12-03-2009, 10:26 PM)Louis_Martin Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-03-2009, 10:14 PM)John C Wrote: [ -> ]In a murder trial, in the absence of something like video evidence of the murder actually taking place, the judge/jury will rely on a series of coincidences to arrive at their decision of guilty or not.
Just wanted to point out there's the whole issue of "beyond a reasonable doubt"

Thank u Louis, what u say is true, but also superfluous to the point i'm making. U only need so many coincidences b4 u have proof beyond all reasonable doubt. That's why i said  'any reasonable person will see that u only need so many coincidences b4 u have proof'.

Thank u Arun,

I don't intend wasting much more time here, i'm quite happy with my objectivity, my arguments are straightforward, clear and very easy to understand despite the best efforts of others to cloud the issue with 'misunderstandings'. Rosarium and the Cowboy have been entertaining if nothing else. I'm happy that their arguments and objections have been soundly beaten. It's not necessary for u to agree with me - the evidence is in the posts.

I'm happy that the average, honest person will readily percieve that reasonableness of what i've said, not get overly excited either way, and simply register the warning with all the other warnings, and get on with their salvation.

I'm sorry to hear about ur persecution complex Arun, u should probably talk to Rosarium 'the righteous victim' about it. Perhaps u could help him. Thankfully it's not something i suffer from myself.

Pax    :)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11