[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

In fact, the substance of calgaryborn's post is this:

"Textcritic's philosophy (which Calgaryborn has badly misunderstood, btw) leads him to read the text of the bible in a way that's different from how I do it. My way is right and leads to the right results. His is wrong because I don't like its results."

After all that fancy verbiage, it's all built on a tautology. He's put (slightly) more effort than usual into his argument, but as usual it's a house of cards. It's.... pretty boring, actually.

(edited for clarity)