This user may have left Wikipedia. Christknight has not edited Wikipedia since 18 December 2006. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Welcome to my talk page! Feel free to leave any comments or questions you have. I'd be happy to talk about whatever you'd like. Thank you, Christknight

WARRIORS OF CHRIST, UNITE

Yo!

I would love to play WoW, it would beat the hell out of watching my friends play it incessantly whenever I see them (they're 18 too!), but I am a cheapskate student. First I would need to upgrade my broadband, which at my halls would cost about £150 upfront, then buy the game, then pay the subscription... plus I have a disgustingly short attention span when it comes to games and I'd probably get bored of it before long and it would be a bit of a waste. Oh, yeah, and um, I've got to study, ahem... can't forget that. Dragonfly888 00:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't tempt me... I just got three assignments set this week - I have to work!

Why I am not a Christian

You ask why, if I know so much about Christianity, I am not a Christian. There are plenty of people who know a lot about Christianity yet believe none of it. Personally, I don't trust faith. Here's my take on faith, since you asked. The doctrine of hell is a particular sticking point of mine. Here's my take on this doctrine. I could ask you, "If you know so much about Christianity, why haven't you renounced it?" But that would be presumptuous and pointless. Jonathan Tweet 02:48, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reading my web site and posting on my talk page. Our conversation has now spilled pretty far over from Wikipedia content. I'd like to continue this conversation on my discussion boards, where I discuss the content of my web site and often have discussions with Christians on such issues. Would you please repost your message there, and I'd be happy to keep the conversation going. Jonathan Tweet 14:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Folks are asking me if you're going to reply to my last post in our discussion on my discussion boards. I'm telling them probably not. Would you like to rejoin the discussion, sign off with some last words, or just drop it? Jonathan Tweet 14:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dragons

I am sorry about my lapse of ignorance for the past few days on our topic, but it was my birthday so I stayed with my family for a little bit. Anyway, I look foward to seeing your comment!Solon Olrek 19:18, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have, but the account that I play on is my brother's. And since he barely ever gets off the computer, I don't have much of a chance to play. Have you ever heard of Magic: The Gathering? That is a game that I LOVE to play.Solon Olrek 18:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yu-Gi-Oh oridinally was derived from Magic. Magic was the very first trading card game. It was made in 1993 and has been popular ever since. I have two Yu-Gi-Oh decks. One is a Yugi evolution deck and the other is the Dragon structure deck. In magic I have three different decks. One custom and two pro built decks. If you are really interested in it, (which I highly hope you are) I suggest going to Magic online, and downloading it. For 10 dollars (only pay one time), you can become a member of the online clientell server and have duals with paople all over the world. The only downside is that you have to buy your own cards online. But you can also trade them.Solon Olrek 19:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When you say that Yu-Gi-Oh was around before magic, do you have the actual date. Because if your correct, then my sources for Magic (which started in the US, but is now world-wide) is incorrect, therefor giving me a bad source.

And I think that the fact that the artwork is more serious is a good thing. Its one of the few TCG's that is America-based.Solon Olrek 19:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity

Hello, this is not related to anything encyclopedic, but I'd like to respond to something you said on the talk page of Christian. You claim that there is proof that the Bible is true. There is indeed proof that the Bible was written over many years and that Jesus of Nazareth existed and claimed to be the one prophesied in the Hebrew Scriptures. There is not, however, proof that he was indeed the Son of God. As a Jew, Jesus was familiar with said scriptures, and just because he claimed to be fulfilling them doesn't mean he actually was. There is only evidence that he lived and said certain things; how can one possibly prove divinity? Also, you say that even the Bible says it is true many times. Well, isn't that the point of the Bible, to say that the things in the Bible are true? A work calling itself true is not exactly hard evidence. I object to your trying to make User:Lonelyboy look stupid, while using reasoning yourself that could be seen through by a child. You basically said that Jesus was divine because he said so and the Bible is true because it said so. No offense, you have proven nothing. --Tractorkingsfan 02:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But I don't believe it either? You have no idea what I believe, so don't condescend me. The only thing that I'm saying is that believing that what the Bible says is true is a matter of faith. Sure, we believe that the name printed on the cover of a book in the library is the one who wrote the book. But those books are usually written by people who exist in the real world or temporal reality or whatever you want to call it. We can see them. To believe in God, we must believe in what we can't see. Also, do you now claim that God directly wrote the Bible? Humans wrote it, and they, like it or not, could be wrong. The only proof you've given me, still, is that the Bible claims that the word of God is infallible. But the infallibility of the Bible, I have yet to see the proof of. There are plenty of books in the library that have incorrect facts in them, and there are plenty that are works of pure fiction. The Bible could conceivably be pure fiction. L Ron Hubbard's books claim that everything in them are true, multiple times. So they must be true, according to your logic. QUOTING SCRIPTURE TO PROVE THE VALIDITY OF SCRIPTURE IS CIRCULAR REASONING. Ever read Descartes? He said that God existed because the idea of God existed in his mind. And how could he trust his mind? Because God would not put a false idea there. So God exists because God would not lie. According to philosophical rigor, the argument is clearly flawed, and your argument relies on the same principle. Secondly, historical innaccuracies? Interpreted literally, how old does the Bible have the earth being? Why are there fossils that are hundreds of millions of years older? Belief in God requires a leap of faith. I studied theology at the university level, and any professor I had would say the same thing. That's all I'm saying, and I'm surprised you dispute it. --Tractorkingsfan 21:48, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And you know what, some more things about your argument irritate me. To say that the Qu'ran and the Book of Mormon are two of the only other books to claim to reveal the word of God is ignorant and eurocentric. There are hundreds of religions, all over the world, that have oral and written traditions trying to explain the unique spirtuality of their culture. Groups of people in Africa and the Amazon have religious traditions too (some of them written) that reveal a deep and rich spiritual tradition different from Christianity. And I'm not sure how you could say that they all contain historical innaccuracy, and I'd like to see you tell them that you're religion is better than theirs. The spiritual books of Hinduism also depict the actions and words of the gods. Confucianism, Taoism, indigenous spiritualities in Southeast Asia that go back thousands of years, one could go on and on. So how can you say that your book is correct when theirs is not? All of those books claim authority based solely on what is written within said books. WHY SHOULD ANYBODY BELIEVE YOU? No, wait, let me guess, because God said so, and what he says is right according to the Bible, and what the Bible says is right because God inspired it, and we know there is a God because the Bible says so, and what the Bible says . . . Do you see the problem here? Sadly, probably not. Further, to combat the argument you make on Lonelyboy's talk page (the part that isn't ver batim what you said on mine) I know the first Emperor of Rome existed. I also know that Jesus existed. I am not disputing that Jesus existed, so don't confuse the issue. Rasputin also existed. But I dispute Rasputin's claims to be a psychic and a magical being, just like you may or may not. I also dispute Jesus's claims to be the Son of God. Just because someone was alive doesn't mean they weren't a liar. We have ability and reason to doubt claims that are far-fetched, and a man being the Son of God and rising from the dead seems exactly so. --Tractorkingsfan 22:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to comment on what you said on Lonelyboy's talk page. The reason we should question the Bible and not other things is because the Bible makes outrageous claims. It isn't outrageous to say that Dr. Phil wrote Family First, and their isn't a reason to question whether or not he wrote it because it doesn't matter in the long run if he didn't. When someone comes along claiming to be the son of God and the only way to heaven, however, then it does matter and only a fool wouldn't question it. -- T H L^CCD 22:36, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes to eternal fate, one source just isn't good enough. -- T H L^CCD 23:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's end it

And forgive me for doing the same to you. I don't think you lack intelligence; we just disagree, and that's perfectly fine. The only thing I would say in closing is you may want to look into some other religions more closely before labeling them or their books "inferior" which is a very touchy word in religious and anthropological circles. I would also maybe look into some geology, because fossil technology, based on the scientific method, is much more sound than you give it credit for. A lot of people have studied fossil decay, and there is a lot more evidence for the age of the Earth. But I would rather not argue, because I respect your beliefs. Just trying to see if you might want to open your doors a little, because the strongest faith is made so by the strongest doubt, and it is important to look seriously at the viewpoint of people who think or believe differently. So let's end it on good terms, you seem like a nice enough person. Thanks for the debate! --Tractorkingsfan 23:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote: Lonelyboy, I'm just going to end this. But I wanted to leave you with this, and I hope you'll consider it: It is better to live your life believing and find out in the end that you were wrong, than to live your life not believing and find out that you were wrong.

No, no, no, no, no! It is better to spend your life (the one life you might have) having fun and not being bound by a bunch of rules than to end up doing all that praising of God, limiting your self to rules, etc., for a bunch of veeery far-fetched stuff that any Joe Schmo may have written. Then when you're old and there is proof that the bible is wrong, you may be like; ahhh there goes my life. I could have done other things that the bible influenced me not to. Lonelyboy 00:46, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously you are sure about your beliefs, and that is something that I can admire in any person; whether or not we share the same beliefs. Cheers, -- T H L R^CCD 01:00, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many people are passionate about beliefs that they know nothing about (sometimes because of that), or they use passion to hide their uncertainties. You are one of the people that I have run into that those descriptions don't apply to. Whether I agree with you or not, I can respect you because you made your decision through knowledge. While learning made me an atheist, it just made you a stronger Christian. While we reached separate destinations, we took the same road to get there (oooh that's deep), and I can respect you for walking down that road. Cheers, -- T H L R^CCD 01:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a christian and i have never been involved with or committed a crime. I am a great kid and I don't follow the rules of the Bible. think up something else. On second thought, don't! Lonelyboy 01:44, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lonelyboy

It has been established by confession that Lonelyboy is an abusive sockpuppet of a previously banned user, specifically User:Twentyboy.[1] As such, his IP address has been banned for six months. I thought that it would be fair to let you know this seeing as he trolled you fairly heavily during our discussion. Cheers, -- T H L R^CCD 22:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Final Statement

What's up man, just wanted to take this opportunity to sincerely apologize for coming at you in such a way. Anybody who knows me in the "real world" will tell you that I just like to get into arguments sometimes, the intent is never to be mean-spirited. But since you don't know me, you probably thought I was just trying to be an ass for no reason. Quite the contrary, I like an intellectual debate with a smart person, and it's a sign of respect if I get way into it, because that means you have challenging ideas. When I said "thanks for the debate" that's what I meant. I hope there are no hard feelings and that you are doing well, and your opinions and beliefs have my full respect. Cheers, --Tractorkingsfan 22:46, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks, I'm over my illness. It was some kind of respiratory flu. User:Yandman, another user who has feuded with him, and I have decided to not have the actual Lonelyboy account blocked. His IP is blocked, however, preventing him from using sockpuppets for the next 6 months to avoid it. We decided that it would be much easier knowing what account he will be using when he comes back; rather than having to watch and wait for someone who knows about him to stumble across the sock randomly like I did. The good news is that the next IP block after he returns will be permanent. You aren't the one who caused this trollish behavior. He hated me long before he ever met you. He lashed out not because of what I said, but because it was me. Don't feel guilty about any of this; like I said it wasn't your fault. I don’t know how long ago you left me a message, so if it was a while ago I apologize for not seeing it for so long. Until next time, cheers. -- T H L R^CCD 22:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mepps

I will not be able to talk on topics like Christianity on Wednesday the 13th, or Thursday the 14th because I am going to a Military entry program. I just wanted to let you know that way you don't think that I ditched our discussions. Anyway, I will see you on the Talk pages.Solon Olrek 18:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was originally going to be in the air force, but I am going to transfer there from the army national guard. I am joining the guard for only one reason...money. My brother gets 2000 dollars for signing me up. And i get 20000 lol.Solon Olrek 18:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After I sign up, I am commited to the Guard for 6 years. During that time, I will get checks that help support me. After the six years are up, I can either re-up and get more money, or quit. I can even switch branches if I want to. The major downside is that I DO have a chance of getting sent to Iraq. But I think that it is worth it.Solon Olrek 18:37, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I will. I consider you one of my freinds, and I wouldn't go out to a place I could die without having someone back here praying to keep my fool hardy self alive. I'm sorry about not being on lately, but I was held over at Mepps. Appereantly they needed not only my brother's signature, but my old adoptive mom and my real parents to boot. I guess they wanted to be thourough because I technically have no LEGAL gaurdian. Anyway, MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!!(Have you donated to Wikipedia...I'm thinking about it, but I have to put money on my card first.)Solon Olrek 14:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. Its been almsot a year since I have talked to you, but that isn't because of lack of interest in you. I got out of basic a while back and am headed to AIT in a few months. After that I head to Iraq. I didn't forget my promise to tell you that I am going over there. Like I said before; I consider you a friend. I hope to hear back from you pretty soon. Anyway, I just wanted to say hello and that I am finally back and that I will be in Iraq within a year. Good talking to you again. Solon Olrek 19:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Holiday Wishes

Tractorkingsfan would like to wish all of his Wikipedian friends, of which you are one, safe and happy holidays. Cheers, --Tractorkingsfan 06:13, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My sig should say it all. -- The Hybrid wishes you a Merry Christmas 07:00, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ChristKnight I would really like to talk to you, you seem like a nice person how about the 31st of dicember?--Klaus Baude 123 00:12, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Back from the Dead

Hey man, I am back. Sorry about the abcence, my nephew died, and then I had a neice born. (first baby of the new year in the tri-county area) Its been very hectic.Solon Olrek 18:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The stuff on my page

Hi - sorry for the late reply - I've been away for a bit.

Don't know if I'll be able to keep the discussion going on my page - Wikipedia was taking a bit too much time away from work - but thank you for your offer. Always admire your work on the Christianity-related pages.

SparrowsWing 00:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I happened to see the "Christian" talk page and I just wanted to say that I admire your diligence in patiently defending Christianity. ^^ God bless. (ChloeSong 21:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Yu-Gi-Oh's history

Sorry to poke at an old topic, but I noticed on Solon89's Talk-page, that you said that to your knowledge "the first Yu-Gi-Oh mangas were released back in the 80's". Do you have any sources for this? I'm an avid fan of the series (the manga, not too keen on the anime and MtG is more my card-game of choice), and thought I'd read pretty much everything that's already been released, but the earliest mangas I could find were released in the mid-90's. If you have any more info on these possible earlier issues/series, I'd love to know about them. Shinmai (talk) 15:00, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]