chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing
 
Chessgames.com User Profile Chessforum

Big Pawn
Member since Dec-10-05
Some topics for debate:

1. God does not exist

2. Evolution is science

3. Atheists believe it rained on the rocks and the rocks came to life

4. Democracy favors liberalism

5. In America, only landowners should be allowed to vote.

6. It was better when women weren't allowed to vote.

7. God exists in time.

8. The moral argument:
1. If God does not exist then OMV do not exist 2. OMV exist
3. Therefore God exists.

9. Racism does not exist

10. America shouldn't have jails.

11. Is the constitution a "living" document?

12. Nobody is entitled to a living wage.

13. The government should be able to tell you how to spend your money.

14. You can't be saved without being baptized.

15. Forced integration is immoral.

Rules of Engagement at the Free Speech Zone (Non PC). UPDATED for 2021

Elite Posters engage in top-level debates. Bottom feeders do not. In this forum, you are either an Elite Poster or a Bottom Feeder.

***************

How To Be an Elite Poster

The Elite Posters will demonstrate by way of top-level debate exactly who they are. No need to name names. The Elite Posters recognize one another.

************

HOW TO LOSE A TOP-LEVEL DEBATE IN THE FREE SPEECH ZONE

If you fail to respond to a debate post at the top two levels of Grahams Hierarchy, then you forfeit the debate right there and then.

If any post during a debate fails to meet the top two levels of Graham's Hierarchy, then you forfeit the debate.

So if we include anything that is less than top level in our posts, it’s a loss.

*************
TOP TWO LEVELS OF GRAHAM'S HIERARCHY

Q: The top three levels are good quality responses according to Graham's Hierarchy. Why do the Elite Posters have to post only in the top two levels?

A: The second level requires you to <identify the mistake> and respond to it. This forces us to constantly be engaged with the <central points> and it makes the arguments more clear, since the mistake is being identified in every post. Further, this will cut down on the number of posts, thus reducing the "noise".

##########################

From Graham's Website - The Top Two Levels

Level DH6 (Top Level)

<DH6. Refuting the Central Point.

The force of a refutation depends on what you refute. The most powerful form of disagreement is to refute someone's central point.

Even as high as DH5 we still sometimes see deliberate dishonesty, as when someone picks out minor points of an argument and refutes those. Sometimes the spirit in which this is done makes it more of a sophisticated form of ad hominem than actual refutation. For example, correcting someone's grammar, or harping on minor mistakes in names or numbers. Unless the opposing argument actually depends on such things, the only purpose of correcting them is to discredit one's opponent.

Truly refuting something requires one to refute its central point, or at least one of them. And that means one has to commit explicitly to what the central point is. So a truly effective refutation would look like:

The author's main point seems to be x. As he says:

<quotation>

But this is wrong for the following reasons...

The quotation you point out as mistaken need not be the actual statement of the author's main point. It's enough to refute something it depends upon.>

From Paul Graham's website. Now the next acceptable level of response.

<DH5. Refutation.

The most convincing form of disagreement is refutation. It's also the rarest, because it's the most work. Indeed, the disagreement hierarchy forms a kind of pyramid, in the sense that the higher you go the fewer instances you find.

To refute someone you probably have to quote them. You have to find a "smoking gun," a passage in whatever you disagree with that you feel is mistaken, and then explain why it's mistaken. If you can't find an actual quote to disagree with, you may be arguing with a straw man.

While refutation generally entails quoting, quoting doesn't necessarily imply refutation. Some writers quote parts of things they disagree with to give the appearance of legitimate refutation, then follow with a response as low as DH3 or even DH0.>

##########################

ARE BOTTOM FEEDERS WELCOME IN THE FSZ?

Yes, you can debate at your level, of course, but you will get no respect.

##########################

WHAT EXACTLY IS A TROLL?

A troll is one who tries to derail a TOP-LEVEL debate by continuous interrupting.

A troll is someone who fails to respond to relevant question during a debate.

A troll is someone who posts but does not engage i.e. sh-t posting.

<Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement>

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...

SCOREBOARD

Here we will keep track of the debates won and lost, but only top-level debates. The name of the debate will be recorded, the start date and the result, plus the two participants.

>> Click here to see Big Pawn's game collections.

Chessgames.com Full Member

   Big Pawn has kibitzed 26798 times to chessgames   [more...]
   Apr-17-21 Big Pawn chessforum (replies)
 
Big Pawn: < OhioChessFan: I think we're in agreement, but to clarify for others, "the gospel was for____" means "to be preached to _____". If you don't agree, we'll have to back up a step.> Yes, it gospel of the Kingdom was for Israel and was to be preached only to Israel. But, it is ...
 
(replies) indicates a reply to the comment.

Free Speech Zone (Non PC)

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 237 OF 237 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Mar-26-21  I like ya cut g: Just saying, you've got to admit that god's probably not real.
Mar-26-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  Big Pawn: <I like ya cut g: Just saying, you've got to admit that god's probably not real.>

There are no good reasons to think that's true.

If you have good reasons, then feel free to state them and see if they stand up to scrutiny.

Mar-26-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  George Wallace: Catholic Cormier posts this:

<cormier: <<March 27, 2021> “I intercede before God for each of you until your joy in Him is complete.”>>

Any Catholics want to tell me who this quote is attributed to? <Cormier> doesn't leave link and doesn't respond when I ask him.

Thanks Catholics.

Mar-27-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: <OCF: While I agree with much of what you said in your last couple posts, I reject this. If you wish to affirm in debate, I'll be happy to deny.>

<BP: Ok, agreed.

I’ll start by making this point: >

Is this your first affirmative?

Mar-27-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  Big Pawn: < OhioChessFan: <OCF: While I agree with much of what you said in your last couple posts, I reject this. If you wish to affirm in debate, I'll be happy to deny.>

<BP: Ok, agreed.

I’ll start by making this point: >

Is this your first affirmative?>

I'm defending the following contention:

The gospel that Jesus preached during his earthly ministry is not the same gospel for us today.

My first supporting argument for this is:

<The resurrection is an essential part of the Christian gospel today. The gospel preached by Jesus that he gave to his apostles did not include the resurrection.>

Mar-27-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: Okay. We may reach a point where a precise definition of "gospel" becomes important, but for now I think we can proceed.

<The resurrection is an essential part of the Christian gospel today. The gospel preached by Jesus that he gave to his apostles did not include the resurrection.>

I'll try to limit my responses as typically each iteration gets longer. Jesus gave the apostles so much as they and their hearers could understand. It clearly took until the resurrection occurred for that to happen. But immediately after the resurrection, the apostles began teaching it.

<The apostles didn’t even know about the resurrection and were slow to believe when it was reported that Christ had risen.>

They knew, but didn't understand. They were told, but didn't comprehend. Their inability to understand that doesn't de facto mean it wasn't part of the message.

<Jesus preached the Gospel of the Kingdom to the Jews. He said he came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it.>

I agree. I don't think this is a point in favor of your position.

<Paul was given the gospel of grace to the gentiles. See 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, which includes the resurrection. Paul said the law is dead.>

Paul's gospel was the one gospel, given by Jesus. Ezra 7:6 references the law of Moses, given by God. Nehemiah 10:29 references God's law, given by Moses.Those are the same law. You'd think I was playing semantical games if I claimed otherwise. I think you're playing semantical games in this case.

<We are saved by the gospel of grace and not the gospel preached by Christ during his earthly ministry.>

There is one gospel. It is the power of salvation for all who believe, both the Jew and the Gentile, according to Romans 1:16. One gospel, for all people.

Mar-27-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  diceman: <COVID Lockdown In Miami Beach -

The national media will tell you #MiamiBeach issued a state of emergency and shut down because of the crowds and some will lie and say it's because of Covid. That's only half the story. Here are some videos of what is really going on. This happened TWICE at the same Resturant >

https://newtube.app/TonyHeller/2KYm...

Apr-02-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  gezafan: The liberals in the basement really, really don't like me posting examples of non-white on white violent crime.

Apparently, in their world, you're not supposed to say or do anything that makes non-whites look bad, even if they murder white people.

It also conflicts with their deranged and bigoted worldview that whites, and only whites, are bad and that all non-whites are good.

Apr-02-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  Big Pawn: <ohio: Jesus gave the apostles so much as they and their hearers could understand>

Christ's gospel on earth did not include the resurrection and belief in it, as is made clear in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4.

His gospel was for the Jew only. The Jews were to accept Him as their prophesied Messiah.

That's not the gospel to the gentiles.

Apr-02-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  Big Pawn: < gezafan: The liberals in the basement really, really don't like me posting examples of non-white on white violent crime.

Apparently, in their world, you're not supposed to say or do anything that makes non-whites look bad, even if they murder white people.

It also conflicts with their deranged and bigoted worldview that whites, and only whites, are bad and that all non-whites are good.>

And it's great that you keep posting those facts. It's lots of fun to watch them run for cover, like so many beetles under a log when it gets turned over.

Apr-04-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  gezafan: Happy Easter to my friends on Chessgames.com!
Apr-04-21  Keyser Soze: Happy Easter everyone!
Apr-04-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  thegoodanarchist: <gezafan: Happy Easter to my friends on Chessgames.com!>

<Keyser Soze: Happy Easter everyone!>

Happy Easter, guys.

<geza> why don't you open your forum?

Apr-04-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  Big Pawn: Happy Easter everyone!
Apr-05-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  diceman: <In a recent news article (not an opinion piece) about South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem’s executive orders on fairness in women’s sports, CNN reporter Devan Cole stated that, “It’s not possible to know a person’s gender identity at birth, and there is no consensus criteria for assigning sex at birth.”

It’s a bold claim. Millions of babies are born and assigned a sex at birth every single year, which undermines the idea that there is “no consensus criteria” for it.

Even with that inconvenient truth aside, CNN itself was assigning sex at birth in its own articles just days prior to claiming that it’s impossible to do so. Jack Crowe of the National Review pointed out that on March 28, CNN published an article about Hillary Duff welcoming her third child. In the article, CNN identifies the baby as a girl.

From the article: “Hilary Duff welcomed her third child, a girl named Mae James Bair. The former Disney Channel star shared a photo of her newborn daughter on Instagram.” The article then goes on to explain that Duff even published a book about her experience as a mother, titled “My Brave Little Girl.”

Just a day before that, CNN published an article about Bindi Irwin giving birth to her first child, wherein they also identify the baby’s gender. “The ‘Crikey! It’s the Irwins’ star and her husband, Chandler Powell, announced the arrival of their first child together, daughter Grace Warrior Irwin Powell, on Instagram.”

How can CNN justify publishing back-to-back articles announcing the births of baby girls, then publish a news piece stating that it’s impossible to know a person’s gender identity at birth? If that claim was simply the author’s opinion, then it should not have appeared in a news piece. Passing off opinion as fact is misleading and disingenuous.>

Apr-05-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  diceman: <gezafan: Happy Easter>

<Keyser Soze: Happy Easter everyone!>

<thegoodanarchist: Happy Easter, guys.>

<Big Pawn: Happy Easter everyone!>

I'll say, "Happy Easter" on Dec 24th.

(My Easter "identifies" as Christmas eve)

Apr-07-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: <BP: Christ's gospel on earth did not include the resurrection and belief in it, as is made clear in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4.>

Here's that passage:

<Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures>

I don't see any nexus between your claim and that passage.

<His gospel was for the Jew only. The Jews were to accept Him as their prophesied Messiah.>

His gospel was for the Jews only during his lifetime.

<That's not the gospel to the gentiles.>

When the apostles went to teach groups, did they have to take a show of hands to know which gospel to preach?

Apr-10-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  Big Pawn: <Ohio: His gospel was for the Jews only during his lifetime.>

Yes, now we are finding common ground.

This is the Gospel of the Kingdom. It’s what we find in the Four Gospels.

This is not the Gospel of Grace given to the Gentiles.

I’ll have time to expand on the differences between the two in my next post.

Apr-11-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: I think we're in agreement, but to clarify for others, "the gospel was for____" means "to be preached to _____". If you don't agree, we'll have to back up a step.
Apr-12-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  diceman: The acid test comes when they test
HeMateMe next month.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsC...

Apr-15-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  gezafan: No matter how much proof you show a liberal they'll still deny everything.
Apr-15-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  gezafan: An interesting article.

https://www.takimag.com/article/the...

Apr-15-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: Wow, what a read.
Apr-17-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  Big Pawn: < OhioChessFan: I think we're in agreement, but to clarify for others, "the gospel was for____" means "to be preached to _____". If you don't agree, we'll have to back up a step.>

Yes, it gospel of the Kingdom was for Israel and was to be preached only to Israel.

But, it is not the Christian gospel, the gospel of grace, which was given to the gentiles by Paul.

There are key differences.

The gospel of the Kingdom was a gospel under the law to the people of the law, Israel, while the gospel of grace is of course free of the law and was given to the gentile (people not of the law).

Apr-18-21
Premium Chessgames Member
  OhioChessFan: <BP: Christ's gospel on earth did not include the resurrection and belief in it, as is made clear in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4.>

Here's that passage:

<Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures>

I don't see any nexus between your claim and that passage.

<His gospel was for the Jew only. The Jews were to accept Him as their prophesied Messiah.>

His gospel was for the Jews only during his lifetime.

<That's not the gospel to the gentiles.>

When the apostles went to teach groups, did they have to take a show of hands to know which gospel to preach?

Jump to page #   (enter # from 1 to 237)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 237 OF 237 ·  Later Kibitzing>

from the Chessgames Store

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.


NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific user only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

You are not logged in to chessgames.com.
If you need an account, register now;
it's quick, anonymous, and free!
If you already have an account, click here to sign-in.

View another user profile:
   
Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | Profile | Preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | New Kibitzing | Chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | Privacy Notice | Contact Us

Copyright 2001-2021, Chessgames Services LLC