Dust1n
Its sort of complex what happened. But I will explain. I can also give you the link to read as well if you want it, just request it, but there is a lot to read. But I will try to condense it here. Basically the forum policy on the other board I was on said that you were allowed to debate (obviously, its a forum), but you were not allowed to judged peoples motives or deny that someone is a Christian IF they claimed they were one. Also the rules said that if someone says they are not a Christian, and dont wish to be one, you cannot cram Jesus down there throat. There was a few other rules, but these ones that will suffice for my case. I was banned by one moderator because he claimed I was IMPLYING that someone was NOT a Christian and that I was also attacking other peoples character and motives which could not be farther from the truth. The only TRUTH to what he was saying is that YES I did IMPLY that someone was NOT a Christian, but I did NOT attack anyones character or motives, quite the opposite actually, it was me that got my motives mostly attacked. I just stuck to debating the subject and when I got my motives attacked, I exposed there attack as an ad hominem and then told them to come back to debating the subject at hand. By me doing this a lot, the moderators got after me and singled me out instead of them. I did not think that was too fair. I told them that too. Now what about me implying the other person was not a Christian? Why did I do that? Well, it comes down to this, I believe in using the law of consistency in debating. For example, me and this other person were debating Calvanism vs open theism. I happen to be more on the open theism side and not at all on the Calvin side. So, me and him were debating whether or not free will exists. Then because of using consistent arguments, he made the point that how could God KNOW the future if we have free will? I told him that God could NOT know it, he chooses NOT to know. He designed the will in such a way that it becomes truly free or unpredictable. Then our debate BRANCHED OFF from whether free will existed or not into the attributes of God. He was saying I was denying Gods omniscience and thus I had a FALSE god (he also IMPLIED I was not a Christian) and likewise I called his god a false god (thus implying he was not a Christian). Yet I got singled out and he did not, perhaps because the moderator agreed with his position and not mine? I dont think that was fair, but what can I do. Anyway, I did not call his god a false god out of retaliation because he called mine a false god, not at all. I called his god a false god because of the arguments he made and how he explained his god to me. For instance, he made the argument that his god was eternal, and therefore he is outside of time, therefore he can know the future choices of man because he is outside of time and man is inside of time. Anyway, I made the statement that time was a none entity, so therefore its not there to be in or out of. Time is not a MOVIE TAPE sort of speak, that God forwards or goes backward in. Anyway, he described his God to me as being simple and eternal. I told him my God is infinite in space and eternal, which is an eternal amount of TIME. He has no beginning IN TIME. Eternity is time without end. He was saying that eternity is NOT time at all. I told him that God has a mind, and a consciousness. He called that NONE SIMPLE. Anyway, I asked him these questions to which he did not answer them, nor did he even try. I asked this
1: if God is eternal and eternity is NOT time without end, then what is eternity? He said God to which I said what is God? to which he said eternity, then I said that is circular reasoning to which he said nothing.
2: My next question was to him, if God is SIMPLE, then how does he have a mind or consciousness or motion to him or a will or anything? How does your God EXIST if he is SIMPLE? To which he said nothing.
3: After I made the argument that TRUE knowledge of the future makes something happen. He argued against that and said that is not the case. Then a few days later, he makes a new thread and states the opposite to those who believe we have free will, yet God knows what we will choose at the same time. Then I pointed out the contradiction to him, to which he said nothing.
For me it was not about whether he was a Christian or not. I was not DIRECTLY saying he was not a Christian, nor did I CARE AT that moment about that, I cared to get my arguments and questions answered by him.
To which then I get singled out and banned.
The other cases someone was telling me that DISAGREEING and being divided is BAD, and debating and arguing is BAD. I could not believe what I was hearing. I told him that I agree that there is a BAD kind of debating, which is denial or ad hominem or unrelated type of arguing. But debating is not bad in itself, if that were so, court rooms would not exist. He told me I was being divisive and then one of them even called me mentally challenged get that! He even tried to give me some prooftexts from the bible that disagreeing and debating is bad. I told him ok, if disagreeing is bad, why then are you disagreeing with me on the issue of debating? That is a double standard. Who should be agreeing here, I with you or you with me? To which he says nothing. Then I gave him tons of bible texts that show debating is GOOD, even Jesus did it, I gave him that very passage as well.
Anyway, many times they shoot back and keep repeating that I am being divisive, to which I keep restating they ignored my questions and arguments. Then I am the one that gets singled out.
I find that to be very strange.
) 
