Is the format for the commentary thread acceptable, Dee Dee?

n0rstar appears to be using a canned argument. The whole thing, aside from his introductory comments, smacks of the WTB&TS style and gives me a strong feeling of deja vu. I suspect that nearly all of his first post was directly culled from Watchtower sources with little or no editing of the texts. A C&P job, iow.
n0rstar should be citing his sources if he's copying or closely paraphrasing (ala grade school book report method) Watchtower publications.

Is this the sort of rhetorical style you'd expect in a debate?
"Is Jesus worthy of such obeisance? Most decidedly, yes!"
It's a little bit stilted, isn't it? I could give numerous examples of that rhetorical style from Watchtower publications--perhaps that very one among them.
The proof-texts distributed throughout is also characteristic of Watchtower publications.

Quotation marks appear around n0rstar's final two paragraphs. The last two paragraphs are from a 1950 issue of The Watchtower which is found here:
http://users.eggconnect.net/noddy3/tomany.htm
Feel free to use the link as your reference, n0rstar.

If the C&P job is indicative of n0rstar's familiarity with the topic he's trying to tackle, the spl_cadet will make short work of him in the course of the debate.
I look forward to seeing whether or not n0rstar exhibits an ability to think outside published guidelines in developing his answers.

Weeeellll, I think we need to go a bit Greek.

4716
from the base of 2476; a stake or post (as set upright), i.e. (specially), a pole or cross (as an instrument of capital punishment); figuratively, exposure to death, i.e. self-denial; by implication, the atonement of Christ:--cross.

It can mean either but specifically it referred to a cross. I think what we need to do here is to show that the JW's now reject the teaching of their second president. Judge Rutherford taught that Jesus was crucified on a lowercase t shaped cross, not nailed to an upright post.

Anyway, some ECF's noted:
Tertullian mentions this particularly: Nobis, says he, tota crux imputatur, cum antenna scilicet sua, et cum illo Sedills excessu. Advers. Nationes, lib. ii. Justin Martyr, in his dialogue with Trypho the Jew, gives precisely the same description of the cross; and it is worthy of observation that both he and Tertullian flourished before the punishment of the cross had been abolished. The cross on which our Lord suffered was of the former kind; being thus represented in all old monuments, coins, and crosses. St. Jerome compares it to a bird flying, a man swimming, or praying with his arms extended.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
Adam Clarke, LL.D., F.S.A., (1715-1832)

FYI - the debate thread has been temporarily deleted as the basic debates terms had not been worked out between Cadet and Norstar. It will be reopened once those terms are worked out.

grrrrr.. I wanted to have fun with this one. I am very inexperienced at 1 on 1 debate, and wanted a chance to practice a bit with the JW view. I'm currently having fun w/ JP's friend the Mormon on a thread.

I've two links regarding the cross on my site:

http://www.avmetro.freeservers.com/articles.html

One is geared specifically towards JWs and the other is a relevant section of JPH's critique of Dan Barker's book where it concerns the "cross."

-God bless-