One would suppose that a man who would make such a claim as below is either insane or pretty confident that he knows what he knows.
A guy wants to debate me.
Sadly, the guy is a little off socially, especially when something challenges his self-worth and value (ego). Unfortunately, for him, he's also a staunch believer in the LDS/Mormon religion.
The guy posted a response he received from MENSA that touted his intelligence. In response to this and his desire to debate me, (incidentally, he states he needs at least a month to prepare ... I'm always ready-on-the-spot), I wrote:
"You know what they say …
"The smarter they are, the harder they fall.
"I feel sorry for this guy. I might just cancel the debate, tell everyone that he’s too smart for me, and let it be.
"I think those who truly know him would understand.
"I do have a hard time making these types of fellow humans look bad.
"But anyways …"
I then wrote,
"I cannot deny anyone the opportunity.
"The challenge will always stand as long as I am alive*:
"Put me in a room with ANY other human being on this planet discussing reality (Real Truth™), and evidence of the Real Illuminati®'s existence and intelligence will be manifest.
"One would suppose that to stop the Real Illuminati® once and for all, someone could be found upon the earth to meet with me one-on-one** and confound me ... that's all it would take. **(Or, one-on-as many as want to try ... I say gather the LDS First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve and little 'ol me.)
"The challenge is there. It will remain.
"*Since many would like to see me 'not alive,' these meetings will always be virtually held over the Internet.
"NOTE TO SUPPORTERS: Keep the challenge going."
And I can assure anyone following what I do,
I am far from insane.
NOTE TO DEBATE ORGANIZERS, TO THIS MAN, AND TO WHOMEVER ELSE DESIRES TO DEBATE ME:
I will not respond to, or allow, any HEARSAY evidence or statements to be made during a discussion/debate with me.
If an opponent quotes someone or something that was written or said by another person other than the opponent, I will not allow the statement, and will always respond, "That is hearsay and cannot be verified as true."
However, if my opponent would like others to join in the debate/discussion to deliver their intelligence and firsthand knowledge of something, by all means. My opponent can bring as many "experts" as the opponent desires to say or present evidence that the person present desires.
If a person is not present at the debate, what the person "might" have said or written will not be accepted.
My opponents and I will be held to the strict rules that exist in courts of law, especially regarding hearsay evidence.
I would never say, "Einstein once wrote that ..." or "Stephen Hawking proposed that ..."
Unless either Einstein or Hawking is present, I have no right to quote as Real Truth™ anything that either man might have said.
So, any religious-based argument cannot be made using something that was written or supposedly said by a person who is not present at a debate with me.
If I allow a religious opponent to quote scripture or anything else someone might have written or said, then whatever I say in response to prove otherwise MUST be considered just as viable and real as what is quoted in scripture.
Religious opponent: The Bible says ...
Me: Where does the Bible say that, in what context, and who wrote what was said? Where is said author at now? Why did he write what he wrote? How do we know that what is written in the Bible is actually translated correctly from the language that the original author spoke?
I wanted to give the above disclosure before this "guy" enters a discussion/debate with me without ANY real knowledge of his own.
NOTE TO "GUY": Are you sure you still want to do this? :-)
YOU accepted the challenge??? The "great" Christopher Nemelka is the one that extended the challenge. (See pic below).
I've been trying to work out the debate format and proceedings with Tony Saiki, but he has been less than willing to cooperate over the matter, handing me over to Monica without actually setting anything up.
Also, people here are giving Mr. Nemelka far too much credit over my Mensa results. I took the physical test three weeks ago and had *just* received the acceptance by email that afternoon, for which I posted. Mr. Nemelka is one of the least of my critics, a gnat compared to the other criticisms I was trying to squelch over my research concerning the Trinity and how Constantine introduced 'homoousios' into the Nicene Creed, finalizing the apostasy. Most of the people who even know about this do not understand it.
It's rather funny, though, watching the reactions here though about people putting down the intelligent community. Smacks of jealousy on their part.
Please just set the date.
That's all they need is the date.
I'm always ready.
One who already knows the Real Truth™ does not need to prepare for it.
But PLEASE read the "NOTE TO DEBATE ORGANIZERS, TO THIS MAN, AND TO WHOMEVER ELSE DESIRES TO DEBATE ME."
Nothing you study and bring to the debate, unless it is the person who said or wrote it, will be allowed.
You must bring YOU and your high intellect only. As will I.
Do not bash "the types of people that follow Mr. Nemelka."
You accepted the challenge.
Now see it through.
Name the date and time.
Christopher Nemelka There is more than just setting a date. There is the format that we must both agree on. This ensures that both parties get equal time.
This is a debate, not a shouting match to see who can talk over the other the most.
Do you understand what a debate entails and the rules of engagement that need to occur? You are setting your demands, which is fine. I am trying to set mine. And it includes equality for both of us.
And I edited my comment to not bash. Thanks for catching that.
You can set the rules. The ONLY rule I have is hearsay evidence. Neither of us can quote someone who isn't present at the debate. Study up on the U.S. legal code on the Rules of Evidence.
Your intellect against mine.
The challenge is for you to confound me, proving that your knowledge makes more sense than mine.
The people who watch the debate/discussion are the jury. They will decide.
Come on, Robert Gurr, you can do this!
You can be the first to confound "the 'great' Christopher Nemelka." (Your words, not mine.)
Set the date.
Your rules, except the one I presented above: NOTHING THAT IS HEARSAY can be presented by either party.
Set the date!
This is the end of my involvement until you set the date.
I do not shout, nor will I talk over you, UNLESS you start quoting things that are HEARSAY.
Set the date.
We are all anxiously waiting. :-)
And for God's sake, Dude, the 'homoousios' that was introduced into the Nicene Creed was already solved by Joseph Smith's FOURTH version of the First Vision. But what about the first THREE VERSIONS that Joseph gave of the "First Vision." How do we justify the first three, versus the final version?
Can you explain the first three versions that Joseph gave of the First Vision?
I can. PERFECTLY!
Christopher Nemelka I will agree to that and will not use anything that is considered hearsay.
You don't seem to understand, in a debate, we will hardly be "discussing" anything. For an example of how a debate should go properly, please watch this debate between Ken Hamm (Creationist) vs Bill Nye (Atheist).
THAT kind of debate is what I'm trying to set up with Tony. But, he does not seem to understand.
I've seen before ... When you are losing the debate, because the JURY IS NOT BUYING your bullshit ... the person cuts down the jury, calling them incompetents who can't understand things over their heads.
Be careful. Because I would put my money on ANY of the women who follow our work to win a debate with you. Try one. Practice with a woman. See how you fare.
Christopher Nemelka And you totally did not understand my comment about 'homoousios'. It had nothing to do with Joseph Smith and everything to do with the apostasy.
You were silenced on your "Where's your witnesses" claim to confound me.
Why not engage Rebecka Franklin in that debate again?
Come on, Dude! She don't have the priesthood you have. You can beat her?
Robert Gurr Oh, For God's sake! You're way TOO intelligent for me.
Please just set the date and let's get on with this.
I am going to silence you once and for all.
PLEASE SET THE DATE!
Tell Monica Smith what the rules are, and I'll agree with them.
By the way, I have more understanding of the TRUE GOD in my little finger than either Bill Nye and Ken Ham in their entire bodies.
But there's only one way to find that out.
SET THE DATE AND TIME!
Christopher Nemelka I've already emailed her... Waiting on her response.
"Homoousios and Homoiousios. The word homoousios means 'same substance', whereas the word homoiousios means 'similar substance'. The council affirmed the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Godhead) are of the homoousious (same substance)."
EVERYTHING written about the Council of Nicea is HEARSAY. However, if you'd like to know, members of the Real Illuminati® indirectly influenced Caneaus, the unknown editor of the New Testament Gospels of Jesus. Sometimes referred to by scholars as "Q". "Q" is short for Quelle, the German word for "source"
Pissing contest has begun!
Just funning. I have to go back to work, Really!
I have to return to work. PLEASE SET THE DATE AND TIME. Got nothing else I can say to one as wise as you. (And yes, I do know that you know that I am mocking you. I PROMISE you, I will NOT mock you during the debate. I will treat with a kindness that you have never been offered by an enemy or critic. I PROMISE! :-) )
Christopher Nemelka put them in there place you got this I'm in your corner just like you are in mine
I couldn't ask for a more sincere member of the human race to be in my corner. I hope you can watch the debate and share it will all of your friends and families.
You'll finally see what became of the 1980 Senior Class President of West High School.
Oh my! who would have called it? Surely not I.
Consider our Senior Class’ Presidency:
President: Christopher Nemelka, recruited by the Real Illuminati® to confront and confound religion.
Vice President: Scott Perry, one of the kindest and artistically talented gay men from our class.
Secretary: Cindy Lutz ... not sure of her married name ... a staunch LDS mother with quite a few children.
What an eclectic bunch, representing about every facet of humanity.
We are close to setting a date and time for this debate. I’ll post once it is pinned down.
Mr. Nemelka, since you claim to be so sure of your own beliefs and standing, Why do have such a need to debate people that are a little off socially? We have mutual friends that promote you, but most of their promotion seems to be verbal boxing matches. Why? Is that what your works teach? how to contend!
Marvin Crowther this all started a few days ago when Mr. Gurr was verbally abusive to me on my own Facebook wall. I gave Robert several opportunities to let it go as nicely as I could, but he persisted in gloating and demeaning all of us involved in the conversation. That is why a debate was offered. I promise you that all of us that are following this actually feel bad for the guy, but he is doing this to himself by continuing his obnoxious condescending behavior. I know that I would be just as content letting him bow out and just letting it go and move on, but this guy has got such an ego that he is driven to prove to the world how intelligent he is. So ok we will give him that opportunity. I don’t have anything to prove and Mr. Nemelka has proven himself time and time again to anyone with an open mind and an open heart. The verbal boxing matches usually ensue when the critic of the work gets their ego bruised and they can’t fight back with logic or facts. Our job as human beings is to not contend, Chris’s job is to carry a sharp 2 edged sword which he expresses all the time that he hates doing, most of the time he does not need to use the verbal sword he carries, but when he does need to use it, watch out!! I have personally been on the receiving end of that sword and it sucked!!! But it was exactly what I needed to see how badly I was messing up and then reading more of the work was what I needed to do understand how to be a better person. If you are curious about what the work teaches exactly you can find it and study it yourself here…. https://www.realilluminati.org/books.
Please read my response to you in your conversation with Jeff Wangsgard.
You, Sir, are a mean human being.
What type of person visits another’s PERSONAL SOCIAL MEDIA PAGE and disparages their beliefs?
Do ANY of my followers do this to you?
If they do, they are WRONG!
Meet me in a personal meeting/debate or stop trolling people whose lives have never been better since finding a Marvelous Work and a Wonder®
Push this troll to meet with me. Stop arguing with these trolls.
Read my recent post.
Push them to explain WHY they won’t accept the challenge.
Christopher Nemelka got it, I just finished reading it. No more arguing! ;-)
Christopher Nemelka Your friends on my page disparage my beliefs then they can't answer my questions so they ask me to go to you direct. Thank you for calling me a mean human being, since I never disparaged your beliefs only ask why you are so ready to have verbal boxing matches with anyone that either doesn't agree with you or can't make heads or tail of what you teach. Teachers teach, bullies bully which are you?
Any day, any time, you can meet in public, as I have proposed, and discuss these things.
SHAME ON ANYONE who supports the Real Illuminati® and went to Crowther’s personal page and disparaged him.
Tell me who, Mathew Crowther, and I will block the person from following me. Name names or I will have to assume that you’re lying.
Please name the names of people who posted negative things on your page.
Marvin, So sorry you were not up to the challenge. I thought of all people You would be the one that would be willing to learn from someone who knows. History might show you as one who had a chance that very few people get, and you blew it. To have intercourse with a True Messenger is a rare occurrence. The challenge will remain if you ever want to show your stuff. Hang in there though. I am not qualified to answer anything BTW. Proud of it.
That’s the way you do it!
You hit ‘em where it counts.
You confront their”Lucifer,” where they receive answers to their prayers, and from where they received all of their inspiration and revelation … their PRIDE and EGO. … And that’s from that bully Joseph Smith’s endowment presentation.
If Marvin Crowther responds again, please push him towards a meeting with me, or challenge him to stop deflecting and making up excuses … to go away and stop his disparaging comments.
The HELL that this man is about to experience, IF he continues, will be unprecedented in his life.
Christopher Nemelka So you want to challenge them to box with you as well?
The debate has been set: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=2221465731326685&id=841580252648580