"Why not consider [his] opinion?"
"If you're unfamiliar with the Quran, maybe a good place to start would be reading it"
"Why do you think it is 'angry' to have a different POV? Why is it 'unfair' of me to point out the obvious implications of the original post?"
I expect people to read the source, make up their own minds. Not have their opinion coloured on the matter prior."
"You are mistaken if you think I have recommended (as the original post did about Warraq) that anything *not* be consulted."
Did I say that somewhere? At this point I reread my entire list of posts. I certainly didn't intend to. All I want is the order changed. Read it with an open mind then consult whatever additional material you want. Turns out I didn't. Well...I guess another hone... ok, you know what, at this point I doubt his sincerity. Is he doing this on purpose to make a point? I specifically said "Not have their opinion coloured on the matter prior". In other words an order of events is suggested.
What follows is a series of verbal barbs and repetition, followed by:
"So you do believe in consulting the source before consulting material about a source"
"You continue to make the false claim that I have told anyone to not read the koran."
What the hell? Is someone writing things on my account waiting for him to reply then deleting them? Obviously he is honestly mistak... oh for f*** sake, he's lying. This is some cheap debate tactic he's employing... no.. no.. stay calm, maybe he has some condition. Natural human psychology. Confirmation bias. I dunno something that makes this guy not reprehensible.
Ok, how about this, lets see if he answers any of my questions.
"The original poster claimed the only 'proper way' to understand islam is to accept it"
"Please, once, demonstrate where the poster makes that claim."
No response... maybe he missed it... could be an honest mistake. (Anyone keeping track at home?)
You know what... maybe it's me. Maybe I was too rude initially that he just wanted to get back at me for that and therefore didn't see the points I was making. Well, I suppose that's... wait what is he saying over here...
"Many people seem to be offended by the suggestion that mental growth is possible".
I proceed to read the entire 2 years of posts to try to find one person who has made such a claim. It seems he thinks anyone who disagrees with him is now disagreeing with "mental growth".
I offer this:
"I will take back every word I have written to you on the topic if you can find someone who you claim is "offended by the suggestion that mental growth is possible" who will say so themselves, without you inserting words in their mouth."
Isn't that fair?
Hey, a new player:
"If you subtract Ibn Warrik's book it would not effet Islam at all but if you subtract the Quran there is no Islam as we know it. Explain to me why we should read his book before we read the book that launched the faith?"
Hey look, it seems he agrees with me on the topic. That was pretty straightforward.
"I am not trying to 'subtract' the koran - never said such a thing! So long as folks like you float such false accusations it is hard to take you seriously at all."
What a surprise. Another honest mistake from proud.
So! In the interest of fair play, I'm fascinated by what Proud's take on the series of events was and have invited him to comment. It could very well be that over the course of 3 days and with... 42 posts, he has yet to address my initial concern at all. (Nor incidentally, any other concern).
I have questioned the other two posters regarding his assumptions about them, and if they respond I will post them.
If you've read this far I applaud you!