Go back
Satan or Jesus

Satan or Jesus

General

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by schakuhr
so thats how you get those rec's.
that's
recs

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by shavixmir
Your arrogance astounds even me.
You are like a fart in a space suit, a fly in the soup and a spoon on the floor: Slightly annoying and ever decreasingly interesting.

So, you ask us to comprehend...well, actually, it's what you are insinuating... is your rightness over that of the Oxfor online dictionary.

There you go. I've comprehended.

Now swivel.
It is incomplete as they are still "working" on it.

Comparing it with the printed version will illustrate this.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by sjeg
Good point. No, really. Very succinct.

But forgive me if I still take the Oxford as an authority over your own infinite, yet rather unique brand of 'auctoritas', Bowmann.

No offence, mind.
I have the Oxford myself. So what is your point?

Vote Up
Vote Down

God...this thread... my god!

Vote Up
Vote Down

JESUS

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Bowmann
I have the Oxford myself. So what is your point?
Oh wait...

You say the online version isn't complete and with that you mean they're busy adding extra terms to the words they've already included???

I envy your drug supply.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by shavixmir
You say the online version isn't complete and with that you mean they're busy adding extra terms to the words they've already included???
You've almost got it.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Bowmann
You've almost got it.
Yadda, yadda, yadda...

Seriously dude.
I can understand your reluctance to admit defeat, but lost you have.

Go sodomise yourself!

But that just doesn't sound quite right, does it?

Vote Up
Vote Down
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by sjeg
Then you should read it. In making my point, I posted a concise definition from the OED. You said 'rubbish'! Yet you accept the Oxford as a dictionary. You added nothing to that insightful comment. So, really the question is, where on earth did your point end up?

I've no gripe with you, B.. I know you're just being argumentative for the sake of it, but try that shite on with someone else, as I'm having none of it.
You emphasized the OED's "Copulation between male persons".

This is what provoked my response.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by shavixmir
Go sodomise yourself!
The Oxford prefers sodomize.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Bowmann
You emphasized the OED's "Copulation between male persons".

This is what provoked my response.
The OED I grabbed was a concise edition from the sixties. That was the definition it gave, which I too found surprising, but which I contrasted with a recent Collins definition. I also suggested that that point were also open for debate, and maybe a more interesting one at that.

As for this argument, I still stand by my previous post, which I felt was clear enough.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by sjeg
As for this argument, I still stand by my previous post, which I felt was clear enough.
As I do mine, which I feel is clearer.


You know, the OED isn't a very good dictionary in the first place.

Vote Up
Vote Down

That's your informed opinion. Whether people might prefer your personal definitions of a word, or those of top modern scholars compiled in what has been considered the authoritative dictionary of the English language for the last hundred-and-fifty years is another question.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Crowley
665

I live next to the devil.
But surely next to the devil would be 664 or 668? 😕