Why did I post that all up? Well, you invited me to look over past posts where you were accused of lying. I have short memory so I couldn't remember them offhand. But when I did look, voila! And still your accusations are false.
(Does that mean I'm calling you a liar, too? More about that later.)
I didn't put the posters next to the posts because anybody who wants to confirm this can simply check with the post numbers. Italicized anything that could be construed as offensive or insulting, and bolded specific accusations of lying. Let's look at the trends.
1. There was one accusation of lying way back in #101. But it wasn't followed up.
2. The only person who has ever accused you of lying is ebia. Any other allegations were made against unnamed creationist organizations.
3. It picked up again in #123, and persisted all the way through #179.
Having done that, let's look at the claims you are making.
#175 said:
The surest way to cease a civil discussion is not to discuss the issues being posted, but attack the poster(s) themselves as well as read whatever is taken as part of the discussion as personal attacks. Those here who are much more interested in parroting the mantra "saying the Genesis 6 day creation and the global flood as historical events are lying" is a very good example of that.
#176 said:
I invite you to look over past posts when it was stated I was lying when I said the Genesis global flood took place and there was evidence for it. At that point I did not state what kind of evidence, only that it existed and those who belived the flood either didn't happen, or did happen but was local, saw the evidence in a completly differant way
Sir, that is not disscussion. That is hostility. That is outright attacking a poster and labling them as a liar simply because they do not hold to the same world-views, nor see the evidence in the same light.
In other words, you say you are being called a liar for promoting the Genesis 6 day creation and the global flood, right? But the truth is very different. #101:
On the other hand,
if people choose to put up ideas as scientifically plausible when they are not, then their are (either intentionally or unintentionally misleading). The former amounts to lying.
Ebia was saying that to say something is scientific, when it is not, is misleading. And to deliberately mislead is lying. Note that at this point he never accused you of
deliberately misleading. There is of course a difference between saying something is scientific and saying something is historical. No Christian would say that Jesus' resurrection was scientific, but all Christians would say that Jesus' resurrection was historical. And he was not blasting you for saying something was historical, but for saying it was scientific.
Same in #122.
In #147, ebia was responding to what you had said in #146:
#146 said:
All I'm reading is one group trying to force their world-views on another so they don't have to deal with the Biblical accounts as they were written. They'll tolerate a person confessing not only is ithe Bible illogical, but that it's untrue and did not take place---but that the person can stil personally believe it as long as it doesn't offend others. However, they won't tolerate someone who believes the Bible means what it says, that God does indeed work through human history to bring about his purposes, or that His word is all that important. After all, whether one is a thiest evolutionist or any other other type of evolutionist, to allow for a god means that god would have had to have been far removed since in the beginning.
(emphasis in original)
Ebia called this a lie. And frankly, it is. Remember, your allegations are that you are being called a liar for promoting Genesis' 6 day creation and the global flood. But what you were actually being called a liar for was saying something about TEs that isn't true. You have said here that TEs believe that:
-the Bible doesn't mean what it says
-that God doesn't work through human history
-that the Bible is not important
-and that God has been far removed since in the beginning.
and that is simply untrue. Why and how this is untrue, if you are interested to know, you can open new threads asking us just what we believe on Origins instead of presuming to know. Hearing myself described like this I'd wonder if I'm really Christian! (I
am really Christian. Making a point.)
Again he is referring to this in posts #154, #157, and #161. This time it's slightly different and he's referring to what you said here which is representative:
Which is another way of saying "stop declaring the Gesesis world-wide flood which destroyed all life on earth save one family and a repersentation of every species is because it doesn't agree with I interpret of the evidence left behind.
You do not support your position well by bullying others into a force acceptance of the your view of the world or how God works or does not work within it.
Have we really bullied you? We have not told you, for example, that:
-if you are not a TE you are less Christian than a true TE.
-if you do not stop believing in a global flood, your faith will be shaken.
-once you read Genesis 1-11 literally you have to read the whole Bible literally. [Undeniably this has been implied elsewhere on the forum, but as I recall not on this thread and not to you.]
Whereas you and other YECs have periodically implied that:
-if you are not a YEC you are less Christian than a true YEC.
-if you do not start believing in a global flood, your faith will be shaken.
-once you read Genesis 1-11 mythically you have to read the whole Bible mythically.
Who's bullying?
And finally, in #179, he was referring back again to the old issue of whether the Flood was scientific or not.
Am I upset? Yes. Was it wrong to call you a liar? Maybe. But if it was wrong to call you a liar then it was equally wrong for you to call us bullies, oppressors, liars and varieties of other names which you have demonstrably called us.
I'm not going to ask for an apology. I'm too sick and tired of these disputes to bother. All I ask is that all parties will quietly and simply drop these past few pages of mudslinging and never mention them again. That would already be a miracle.