mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770 
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 24, 2013 10:40:10 GMT -5
Because someone doesn't believe as you believe, snowbird, doesn't mean that person's "heart's closed". They just don't feel as you feel. To say that person's "heart's closed" is to assume you know that person's heart. You don't, and it can certainly be taken as disrespectful when you assume you do.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 28, 2024 5:34:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2013 10:44:29 GMT -5
sarah, Read post 63.  snow, Read post 17, 30, and 59. Have a good day. |
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 24, 2013 11:00:45 GMT -5
Have a great day everyone. I am very sorry you feel that way.mmhmm I don't mean to be.... *chuckle* I know you don't mean to be, snowbird. If I thought you meant it that way, I'd have been more harsh with my wording. Sometimes (especially, when it's something we feel strongly about), we are so sure we have trouble grasping how others don't see what's so obvious to us. That's why religion and politics are such contentious subjects - because people feel very strongly about them. As long as we make the effort to realize our truths may not be truths to everyone, and that's okay, we're golden. |
|
mrsdutt
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 12, 2012 7:39:38 GMT -5
Posts: 2,097
|
Post by mrsdutt on May 24, 2013 11:09:14 GMT -5
Does anyone else get fed up with religion? I know I'm Catholic, but there are other religions that have the core belief I do. I chose to stay Catholic because it is the religion Christ left behind. But Christ Himself judges on who we are, what we do, and how we treat others. Christ is not religion. He left the Mass behind for us and His teachings, but there is an enormous amount of other information He has left behind. For example, the lives of the saints. So much to learn from them. Our own Mother Teresa. (My Hero!)
Life is not to be lived between two straight lines. So much can be passed by. Each of us is on a journey. No two journeys alike. God can surely reach each of us according to the way we were designed.
I agree with the Pope. He appears to be a true man of God. What more is expected of him in his position. He seems to love humanity. Splitting hairs and zeroing in on a word or 2 is a waste of time. A way people utilize to get their own way. Life is too dang short. Just opening up to give love (Mother Teresa) is so freeing and relaxing.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 24, 2013 11:35:28 GMT -5
Lduttinger, I understand this is what you believe. However, I'm sure you're aware there are other Christians who don't believe Catholicism is "the religion Christ left behind". While it's an absolute for you, the Baptist next door may not hold that absolute. This is where the arguments come from, and where animosity develops. Statements that announce "THE TRUTH" will always find a hot button. If, on the other hand, a person states: "I believe Catholicism to be the religion Christ left behind", the statement isn't as likely to cause the average person to jump to the defense of a differing belief.
Spiritual beliefs are deeply held and are the foundations upon which many build their lives. One cannot tell another what to believe, and one cannot decide another's truth in regard to belief. When that happens, any chance at open discussion is eliminated in favor of a battle royal over THE TRUTH.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448 
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 24, 2013 11:54:25 GMT -5
My only concern is the extent to which "[my] truths" coincide with the truth. Because we don't, necessarily? Because you are not omniscient? Because we see things differently than you might see them?  It was a play on words. I can certainly respect people critiquing my posts.  Again, Virgil, YOU may find the Pope's words "to no good effect". I, on the other hand, took a wonderful "effect" from them. YOU are not the world and your "effects" may differ from mine, and those of others. Bible verses hold no meaning for me; although, I respect they hold meaning for you. Take what you will from them, but don't expect all others to do the same. I read the words of a man of religion who embraced the world with those words. He spoke those words "in the now". I'll take it with a smile, and a nod of agreement. Hypothetically , suppose the Archbishop speaks a falsehood or a half-truth. I realize you don't accept this premise, but hypothetically presume it to be the case. If this is the case, and the Archbishop's intent is to help people to come to a greater spiritual understanding of God and human existence, would you not agree that preaching a half-truth, no matter how pleasant-sounding or well-meaning, is counterproductive to this goal? And if so, would you not agree that the preaching fails to accomplish its intended goal, and is in this sense futile or 'in vain'? In point of fact I don't take grave exception with what the Archbishop said. It isn't so much a lie as it is a vagary, ripe for personal (mis)interpretation. And you might agree with me that you and others in this thread have gladly jumped at the opportunity to personalize the man's comments. This is understandable, but no different than Pres. Obama saying "You didn't build that." and having the web explode with a hundred incompatible opinions on what his statement means. I can't tell you absolutely that you've misinterpreted the Archbishop's comments. I can tell you that your interpretation is extremely unlikely if you consider the implications. And regardless of whether you and the Archbishop are on the same wavelength, that compatibility is pointless unless your common wavelength is the truth. There are not many truths. If what the Bible says is true, then the testimonies of the Qu'ran are not. If the Qu'ran speaks the truth, then many of the fundamental teachings of Siddhartha Gautama (the Buddha) are lies. If atheists are correct and God does not exist, then the Bible is a lie. But regardless of which of these sources is correct, there is a truth. We cannot all be correct. We do not live in a simultaneous quantum state where fundamentally incompatible doctrines are simultaneously true. And if there is a truth, then a man whose beliefs are consistent with this truth has knowledge of the truth. It is not arrogant or presumptuous to hold a single doctrine up as the truth, provided he has a strong, defensible basis for doing so. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 28, 2024 5:34:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2013 12:01:25 GMT -5
There are not many truths. If what the Bible says is true, then the testimonies of the Qu'ran are not. If the Qu'ran speaks the truth, then many of the fundamental teachings of Siddhartha Gautama (the Buddha) are lies. If atheists are correct and God does not exist, then the Bible is a lie. But regardless of which of these sources is correct, there is a truth. We cannot all be correct. We do not live in a simultaneous quantum state where fundamentally incompatible doctrines are simultaneously true.
And if there is a truth, then a man whose beliefs are consistent with this truth has knowledge of the truth. It is not arrogant or presumptuous to hold a single doctrine up as the truth, provided it is the truth.
fixed
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 24, 2013 12:05:32 GMT -5
No, Virgil, I don't personalize the Pope's comments. I don't believe in God, or heaven, or hell (with, or without fire). The Pope's comments, therefore, do not personalize for me. What they do, for me, is let me realize what a wonderful leader this man is, and what he brings to the Catholic church and its membership and followers. Since those folks are a part of humanity and I care deeply for humanity, his words resonated with me on a global level.
Your "the truth" is the Christian Bible, Virgil. To me, the Christian Bible is a storybook. A bit of truth here, a bit of fiction there. Cut this part out and add a little codicil over here ... yeah, that's got it. That's how I see your "truth". I agree we cannot all be correct. It is also true we cannot all be wrong but you, Virgil, and you cannot dictate my truth, or anyone's truth. This Pope has recognized that and has embraced all, regardless of whether each of that all adhere to his version of "the truth". This, as I see it, is an amazing man and worthy of hearing. I'll be watching because I think wisdom resides in this Pope. We'll see.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 28, 2024 5:34:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2013 12:06:37 GMT -5
The main point I agree with Virgil about is that there are not many truths. You can't have one person's truth say there is a God and another person's truth say there isn't have them both be truth. This whole "let's all have our own truth" thing lately is made up by some folks that want to have their cake and eat it too. Everyone might be wrong, but there is no way everyone can be right when you each say the truth is the opposite of what the other said.
|
|
mrsdutt
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 12, 2012 7:39:38 GMT -5
Posts: 2,097
|
Post by mrsdutt on May 24, 2013 12:08:12 GMT -5
Lduttinger, I understand this is what you believe. However, I'm sure you're aware there are other Christians who don't believe Catholicism is "the religion Christ left behind". While it's an absolute for you, the Baptist next door may not hold that absolute. This is where the arguments come from, and where animosity develops. Statements that announce "THE TRUTH" will always find a hot button. If, on the other hand, a person states: "I believe Catholicism to be the religion Christ left behind", the statement isn't as likely to cause the average person to jump to the defense of a differing belief. Spiritual beliefs are deeply held and are the foundations upon which many build their lives. One cannot tell another what to believe, and one cannot decide another's truth in regard to belief. When that happens, any chance at open discussion is eliminated in favor of a battle royal over THE TRUTH. |
|
mrsdutt
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 12, 2012 7:39:38 GMT -5
Posts: 2,097
|
Post by mrsdutt on May 24, 2013 12:15:38 GMT -5
'OK I just lost 2 posts. I'll answer later. |
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 24, 2013 12:16:33 GMT -5
And so let the battle royale begin. Let it begin.
If spirituality is nothing more to you than every man's belief in his own personal fiction, then why bother with discerning truth? Simply pick the doctrine you like most, practice it as you see fit, and make no effort whatsoever to controvert incompatible doctrines.
Perhaps this system seems right to you, but if this is how you define "open discussion" then to hell with open discussion. The reason so many Catholic doctrines are mangled beyond recognition today is because of the runaway syncretism of the early Catholic church. Even the great atheist philosophers acknowledge that modern Christianity doesn't have the slightest resemblance to the religion practiced by Jesus Christ, and every last concession was made because of some malcontent demanding that the church be "open-minded" to accepting false or downright Satanic doctrines.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 24, 2013 12:26:15 GMT -5
That's precisely what spirituality is to me, Virgil. It's an individual journey. YOU don't get to make up everyone's itinerary according to YOUR beliefs. Find YOUR truth and live it. Keepa yer mitts offa mine! YOU will not tell ME what to believe, and I'm not the only one here who feels that way. We have Catholic posters here, too. They don't need you ripping into their religion, either. Believe whatever you like, but don't make my decisions for me. I'm quite capable of making those on my own without your interference.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 24, 2013 12:27:19 GMT -5
'OK I just lost 2 posts. I'll answer later. Frustratin', ain't it, lduttinger?  |
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 24, 2013 12:34:42 GMT -5
No, Virgil, I don't personalize the Pope's comments. I don't believe in God, or heaven, or hell (with, or without fire). The Pope's comments, therefore, do not personalize for me. What they do, for me, is let me realize what a wonderful leader this man is, and what he brings to the Catholic church and its membership and followers. Since those folks are a part of humanity and I care deeply for humanity, his words resonated with me on a global level. Your "the truth" is the Christian Bible, Virgil. To me, the Christian Bible is a storybook. A bit of truth here, a bit of fiction there. Cut this part out and add a little codicil over here ... yeah, that's got it. That's how I see your "truth". I agree we cannot all be correct. It is also true we cannot all be wrong but you, Virgil, and you cannot dictate my truth, or anyone's truth. This Pope has recognized that and has embraced all, regardless of whether each of that all adhere to his version of "the truth". This, as I see it, is an amazing man and worthy of hearing. I'll be watching because I think wisdom resides in this Pope. We'll see. Which is a lot of words to say, "What the Archbishop said made me feel good." (first paragraph) and "You are wrong, Virgil. I am not." (second paragraph). Understandable. Reasonable. But you could save on the circuitous language by simply admitting that you, like me, have a very definite view of right and wrong, and that you are more than willing to assert it. What does this even mean? You've stated very plainly that you believe the Bible is a fiction. Is that "dictating my truth"? Does the truth cease being the truth if somebody dictates it? You've stated very plainly that "(I) cannot dictate [your] truth". But wait a minute. Is this not a statement of fact, subject to truth or falsity? Are you not "dictating my truth" by making it? Again: does it cease being true if I refuse to believe it? Do you not hold it to be true to begin with? You use "you cannot dictate my truth" like a mantra, but there is no such thing as "my truth", and regardless of what the truth is, my dictating it to you has nothing to do with whether it's true or not. If what you're trying to say is "you cannot influence my beliefs", which is clearly true, then say that. If you're trying to say "you cannot posit with absolute certainty that my beliefs are false", that is also clearly true (given I can't even posit that gravity exists with absolute certainty), and so say that. "You cannot dictate my truth" is a meaningless statement.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 28, 2024 5:34:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2013 12:35:03 GMT -5
There is no such thing as HIS truth. Just THE truth. He might not know what THE truth is, but there is not such thing as HIS truth.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 24, 2013 12:36:32 GMT -5
There is no such thing as HIS truth. Just THE truth. He might not know what THE truth is, but there is not such thing as HIS truth. Absolutely my point. |
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 24, 2013 12:42:21 GMT -5
There is no such thing as HIS truth. Just THE truth. He might not know what THE truth is, but there is not such thing as HIS truth. I understand what you're saying, laterbloomer. Thing is, we don't know what THE truth is. None of us does. We may believe we know, however. That belief is truth to the believer. That's what I mean. I'm just not able to find a good, succinct way of putting it. To each person, IMO, the truth they believe is THE truth. Who am I to say that person is wrong? I don't know. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 28, 2024 5:34:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2013 12:48:11 GMT -5
There is no such thing as HIS truth. Just THE truth. He might not know what THE truth is, but there is not such thing as HIS truth. I understand what you're saying, laterbloomer. Thing is, we don't know what THE truth is. None of us does. We may believe we know, however. That belief is truth to the believer. That's what I mean. I'm just not able to find a good, succinct way of putting it. To each person, IMO, the truth they believe is THE truth. Who am I to say that person is wrong? I don't know. To restate what Virgil already said, you have been saying people are wrong this whole thread. You wouldn't be able to argue with Virgil and tell him to shut up if you weren't saying he is wrong. You are being a little self unaware in this regard. Just to say that "denies other people's truth" to throw your own words back at you. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 28, 2024 5:34:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2013 12:50:08 GMT -5
There is no such thing as HIS truth. Just THE truth. He might not know what THE truth is, but there is not such thing as HIS truth. Absolutely my point. No, because you are unwilling to concede that you might be wrong. If I refer to "your truth" it is my shorthand for "that which you believe is THE truth" and is intended to a show of respect for your faith, which is different than my faith, which is different than later's faith. Faith feels like knowing, but it is only believing. That's why it is so hard. That is why followers of Jesus embrace the parable about the mustard seed. There is A truth. It may well be the thing that you believe to be true. If that is the case, and it is possible, I promise to listen to 5 solid minutes of "neener neener I told you so." If you're there and I'm not, I wish you a grand time. If I am there and you are not, I hope you are somewhere equally nice. If neither of us is anywhere, we can biodegrade in ignorance that somewhere there will still be a debate raging over what THE truth is. Acknowledging that faith is about believing and not knowing doesn't have to weaken that faith. |
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 24, 2013 12:52:41 GMT -5
Personally, if somebody can "rip into my religion" in an informed, defensible way (which presumes they know what I believe in the first place), rip away.
That's not to say I'll engage any criticism, in the same way that most scientists would refuse to debate the existence of gravity. There comes a point where certain things become fundamental and there is no profit in debating them. For example, debating atheists on the existence of God is a "low-level" debate in the sense that we can't agree on the most fundamental issue: does God exist? I dabble in those once in a while, but I largely prefer debates where the Bible is treated as doctrinally sound a priori so that we can get into the real meat of the issues. And if you make a solid scriptural argument about something, I'd like to believe that I'd have the intellectual humility to amend my worldview.
If Paul says, "Virgil, you're wrong about bankruptcy," which is a debate we recently had, then I'm not so beholden to my existing beliefs on bankruptcy that I won't amend them. To be sure, I'll defend my existing viewpoint vigorously, but this doesn't make me ipso facto"closed-minded". It means I have a reasonable foundation for my existing beliefs.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 24, 2013 12:58:53 GMT -5
No, because you are unwilling to concede that you might be wrong. If I refer to "your truth" it is my shorthand for "that which you believe is THE truth" and is intended to a show of respect for your faith, which is different than my faith, which is different than later's faith. Faith feels like knowing, but it is only believing. That's why it is so hard. That is why followers of Jesus embrace the parable about the mustard seed. There is A truth. It may well be the thing that you believe to be true. If that is the case, and it is possible, I promise to listen to 5 solid minutes of "neener neener I told you so." If you're there and I'm not, I wish you a grand time. If I am there and you are not, I hope you are somewhere equally nice. If neither of us is anywhere, we can biodegrade in ignorance that somewhere there will still be a debate raging over what THE truth is. Acknowledging that faith is about believing and not knowing doesn't have to weaken that faith. Living faith is "belief with teeth". Engaged properly, it's a stone's throw away from scientific belief. The constraints are less rigorous in some regards and more rigorous in others, but the process, methodology, and ultimate goal (discernment of the truth) are the same. I am a scientist by trade, a Christian spiritually, and my approach to both is exactly the same. Moreover, I'm not alone, and I think of myself as being among very good company. |
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 24, 2013 13:20:07 GMT -5
"Neener neener" is the exact opposite of a Christian attitude. Christ's own words (and the words of prophets and apostles) were "Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do." God the Father calls us at this time or in the general resurrection by His grace. He offers men understanding by His grace, and in fact the Bible says that those being called at this time are called because they are the weak ones of the world. It's hard to think too highly of yourself when you take what the Bible says to heart. And as I say, "neener neener" is exactly the opposite attitude from what Christians should have. True Christians should look forward to the day that the truth is revealed to everyone, and at that time is going to be one of joy, not spiteful "neener neener". Anybody who calls himself a disciple of Christ and uses that as a premise to declare "I'm intrinsically better than you" should take a good long look at what the Bible says about humility, and also study the attitude of Christ, the prophets, and the apostles towards unbelievers. That said, compromising on the truth on issues where the truth is clearly spelled out in scripture is not a good fruit of humility. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 28, 2024 5:34:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2013 13:42:35 GMT -5
There is so much wrong with that sentance.
1. It's just as fast to say your belief as your truth, so it isn't any kind of shorthand.
2. Saying "your truth" is not a sign of respect so much as an attempt to avoid having to have a serious discussion about what the truth actually is.
3. Faith is not only believing. To even say that shows the disrespect you claim not to have. Faith is the decision to make your life decisions based on a set of beliefs even when you can't prove the truth of those beliefs to others. Faith demands action. Belief doesn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by BeenThere...DoneThat... on May 24, 2013 14:37:46 GMT -5
...oh, great... four pages of discussion on this one...  |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 28, 2024 5:34:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2013 14:45:05 GMT -5
"Neener neener" is the exact opposite of a Christian attitude. as you understand it. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 28, 2024 5:34:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2013 15:01:21 GMT -5
There is so much wrong with that sentance. 1. It's just as fast to say your belief as your truth, so it isn't any kind of shorthand. 2. Saying "your truth" is not a sign of respect so much as an attempt to avoid having to have a serious discussion about what the truth actually is. 3. Faith is not only believing. To even say that shows the disrespect you claim not to have. Faith is the decision to make your life decisions based on a set of beliefs even when you can't prove the truth of those beliefs to others. Faith demands action. Belief doesn't. 1. Your point is valid, but you'll note that my actual shorthand was for the phrase "that which you believe is THE truth." And that is longer. 2. I'd love to have a serious discussion about what people believe the truth actually is. I have no interest in a discussion about what the truth actually is - because I already know what it is for me, and I believe it just as fervently as everyone else here. A discussion about what the truth is - as though we could achieve consensus about that - is a good way to get the thread locked. 3. I both agree and disagree with this point. Many people claim to have faith, but do not appear to live in accordance with their beliefs - at least as far as an outside observer can know. I think faith is hollow for a great many people. I'm not sure what benefits people get from a faith like that. Maybe it brings them comfort. Maybe that is where they have cast their chips for Pascal's wager. But whatever - that's their thing. I'm not going to take the label "faith" away from someone any more than I am going to take away the word "Christian" - I think you get to choose those labels for yourself. For my money, yes, living your beliefs does seem like a deeper and more meaningful concept of faith. So, I do get that - but I think that you also get that I was contrasting the two words "know" and "believe" and that you're trying to start an argument with me. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 28, 2024 5:34:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2013 15:11:27 GMT -5
1. I'll accept that you conceded my point is valid.
2. The fact that Virgil is stating what he believes to be the truth is self evident. To try to make him reword it to suit you is completely unfair. You are trying to make him let your statements pass unchallenged. If you don't want to argue about it, you be the one to let his statements pass unchallenged.
3. I'm not trying to start an arguement, unless you count the current discussion as an arguement and that was happening before I showed up.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on May 24, 2013 15:28:36 GMT -5
I'll buy that, Virgil. I'll reword to your liking just as soon as you stop proclaiming "THE TRUTH" to be what you believe. Thanks, but no, thanks. I'm not interested in ripping into anyone's religious beliefs. They're personal and individual. They're not for me to decide. Point one (first paragraph), correct. Point two (second paragraph), incorrect. Nowhere in my second paragraph did I say "You are wrong, Virgil. I am not." I stated how I see the Bible. I did NOT tell you how to see the Bible; nor, did I indicate you're wrong to see it as you do. I have as much right to my opinion as you have to yours. Would that "others" include you, by chance, Virgil? |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 28, 2024 5:34:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2013 15:34:53 GMT -5
I think I've found my problem and it is the "new topics" button.
In the olden days, I posted on P&M and YM. Then the Board got all chopped up.
I *just* saw that this thread was in Religious Discussion - I seriously thought this was a YMOT or Current Events thread. I challenge Virgil because he has a penchant for posting about his beliefs without regards to the beliefs of others while wearing a badge that says "moderator" on a Board that has rules about religious posts. In those places, I will continue to challenge his wording. But I don't know the rules here... I don't even know how I got here... you all do your thing.
Mea culpa.
|
|
