26 Sep 11
Originally posted by Green PaladinYou may attempt to appropriate the term "society" for your own mysterious use, by all means, Green Paladin. It means nothing to me that you choose to do so. In what way does your particular "knowledge" and "rhetoric" have any bearing on, say, the "society" I live in? 😀
Since the question is rhetorical and the "we" refers to society, in what way does your and my particular knowledge statuses have any bearing on the matter? In fact the only "intimacy" and "sheer presumption" seems to rest with you, FMF.
26 Sep 11
1 edit
Originally posted by Green PaladinYour question "When will we ever learn...?" has no meaning or substance as far as I am concerned. Your suggestion that I have an "agenda" with regard to people being stoned to death for adultery is a figment of your imagination. 😀
I was trying to imagine a possible world in which it might be appropriate to respond to my rhetorical question "When will we ever learn...?"
26 Sep 11
Originally posted by DasaDasa you are right about some things concerning the Holy Bible.
Errors in false religion.
I have never attributed falsity to Jesus Christ for the man that he truly is - preacher, compassionate, and knowledgeable.
Evidence for my comments can be easily acquired if true spirituality is embraced and the consciousness is raised to the transcendental platform – because with higher knowledge comes the ability to determine ...[text shortened]... have and never will.
However I am very passionate towards false authorities misguiding mankind.
However, I think you need to read it yourself, because some of
the things you have been misinformed on. I believe I know you
enough to know that you haven't read it all yourself because you
are an honest man and would not deliberately make false statements.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
26 Sep 11
Originally posted by RJHindsBarring the name, do you think that the stars you see on a dark night are physically
There is nothing wrong with your statement, except for calling the stars
out there suns. There is only one sun and it gives heat and light to the
earth. It has been specially placed where it is for a special purpose by
God. I doubt if you were to start saying "the rising star" instead of
"the rising sun" anyone would understand you without you explaining it
to them. Then they would probably think you weird.
different types of objects from the star in the centre of our solar system?
(obviously there are different classes of star, but they all share the common characteristic
of being huge balls of collapsing gas held up by fusion in their cores.)
In other words are you claiming anything different about the sun other than the fact it's a lot
closer than any other star.
26 Sep 11
Originally posted by FMFDo you know what a rhetorical question is? (Hint: this isn't one.)
Your question "When will we ever learn...?" has no meaning or substance as far as I am concerned. Your suggestion that I have an "agenda" with regard to people being stoned to death for adultery is a figment of your imagination. 😀
Your "agenda" relates to certain posters in this thread whom you initially sought to disparage: "There are people pressing ahosyney who do not emerge from those threads with too much credit either."
26 Sep 11
Originally posted by FMFSince the question is rhetorical and the "we" refers to society, in what way does your and my particular knowledge statuses have any bearing on the matter?
You may attempt to appropriate the term "society" for your own mysterious use, by all means, Green Paladin. It means nothing to me that you choose to do so. In what way does your particular "knowledge" and "rhetoric" have any bearing on, say, the "society" I live in? 😀
26 Sep 11
3 edits
Originally posted by Green PaladinYes. If you attempt a presumptuous "rhetorical question", you're going to get called on it.
Do you know what a rhetorical question is? (Hint: this isn't one.)
Your "agenda" relates to certain posters in this thread whom you initially sought to disparage: "There are people pressing ahosyney who do not emerge from those threads with too much credit either."
It's a pity if you feel I sought to "disparage" you. Why have you picked yourself out?
Since the question is rhetorical and the "we" refers to society, in what way does your and my particular knowledge statuses have any bearing on the matter?
Who is "we" and which "society" are you talking about? Your "rhetorical question" is ludicrous unless whatever "society" has yet to learn is understood by whoever it is you're referring to. Well it means nothing to me and I don't know what it is you wonder "we" will never learn.
26 Sep 11
Originally posted by googlefudgeYes, read the Holy Bible for your answer, however I doubt you will
Barring the name, do you think that the stars you see on a dark night are physically
different types of objects from the star in the centre of our solar system?
(obviously there are different classes of star, but they all share the common characteristic
of being huge balls of collapsing gas held up by fusion in their cores.)
In other words are y ...[text shortened]... g anything different about the sun other than the fact it's a lot
closer than any other star.
understand if Dasa is right about dishonest people.
26 Sep 11
Originally posted by Green PaladinForget about this FMF character. There is no reasoning with him. He is
Since the question is rhetorical and the "we" refers to society, [b]in what way does your and my particular knowledge statuses have any bearing on the matter?[/b]
another one of those dishonest persons that Dasa could not deal with.
27 Sep 11
Originally posted by FMFIf you attempt a presumptuous "rhetorical question", you're going to get called on it.
Yes. If you attempt a presumptuous "rhetorical question", you're going to get called on it.
[b]Your "agenda" relates to certain posters in this thread whom you initially sought to disparage: "There are people pressing ahosyney who do not emerge from those threads with too much credit either."
It's a pity if you feel I sought to "disparage" you. Why h ...[text shortened]... hing to me and I don't know what it is you wonder "we" will never learn.[/b]
The inference that one may reasonably draw from my rhetorical question "When will we ever learn...?" is that I dispute anybody's claim to be able to stone philanderers provided certain conditions are met. Since we've established that you share this I don't see what would warrant the response "Actually I have absolutely no idea what you consider you have learnt or still need to learn, let alone whether you will 'ever learn' it."
It's not the "call[ing] on it" that I take exception to but rather the mean-spirited and condescending attitude of your inquiry with which you choose to respond.
It's a pity if you feel I sought to "disparage" you. Why have you picked yourself out?
Maybe it is a reading problem you have after all. Since I didn't participate in "those threads" then how am I referring to myself being disparaged when I said: "Your 'agenda' relates to certain posters in this thread whom you initially sought to disparage: 'There are people pressing ahosyney who do not emerge from those threads with too much credit either. [My emphasis]'"
Who is "we" and which "society" are you talking about? Your "rhetorical question" is ludicrous unless whatever "society" has yet to learn is understood by whoever it is you're referring to. Well it means nothing to me and I don't know what it is you wonder "we" will never learn.
I was referring to (1) those sections of society that are able to justify stoning for philanderers provided certain conditions are met, and (2) those sections of society that do not think stoning for philanderers provided certain conditions are met is at all justifiable. My question "When will we ever learn...?" means when will those members of the first class become members of the second class? Since I am a member of the overarching class, society, I used the pronoun "we". All of this is implied in the context. But you know this because you're not stupid, merely a bully.
27 Sep 11
2 edits
Originally posted by Green PaladinMy question "When will we ever learn...?" means when will those members of the first class become members of the second class?
[b]If you attempt a presumptuous "rhetorical question", you're going to get called on it.
The inference that one may reasonably draw from my rhetorical question "When will we ever learn...?" is that I dispute anybody's claim to be able to stone philanderers provided certain conditions are met. Since we've established that you share this I don't se know this because you're not stupid, merely a bully.[/b]
You don't make any sense. You're using "we" is if everything you're furtively not saying is somehow common knowledge. I don't agree with stoning people. What do I need to "learn"?
When you said "When will we ever learn...?" what were you referring to? Learn WHAT? I really don't know what you have and haven't learnt. Nor do you know what I know and do not know. So your glib little "rhetorical question" is a dud.
It's not the "call[ing] on it" that I take exception to but rather the mean-spirited and condescending attitude of your inquiry with which you choose to respond.
What is it you think you have yet to learn? What is it you think I have yet to learn? What makes you think you can speak on behalf of "society"?
27 Sep 11
Originally posted by Green PaladinWell if you weren't involved in those threads, why are you worried?
Maybe it is a reading problem you have after all. Since I didn't participate in "those threads" then how am I referring to myself being disparaged when I said: "Your 'agenda' relates to certain posters in this thread whom you initially sought to disparage: 'There are people pressing ahosyney who do not emerge from [b]those threads with too much credit either. [My emphasis]'"[/b]
27 Sep 11
Originally posted by FMFYou don't make any sense. You're using "we" is if everything you're furtively not saying is somehow common knowledge. I don't agree with stoning people. What do I need to "learn"?
[b]My question "When will we ever learn...?" means when will those members of the first class become members of the second class?
You don't make any sense. You're using "we" is if everything you're furtively not saying is somehow common knowledge. I don't agree with stoning people. What do I need to "learn"?
When you said "When will we ever learn...?" ...[text shortened]... what I know and do not know. So your glib little "rhetorical question" is a dud.[/b]
It is common knowledge because it's a Pete Seeger lyric. It's also clearly a rhetorical question. Do you know what a rhetorical question is, FMF? (Hint: It's not a direct question inviting a response.) I have absolutely no interest in your particular knowledge status as I've said before.
When you said "When will we ever learn...?" what were you referring to? Learn WHAT? I really don't know what you have and haven't learnt. Nor do you know what I know and do not know. So your glib little "rhetorical question" is a dud.
I have absolutely no interest in your particular knowledge status, FMF.
27 Sep 11
1 edit
Originally posted by Green PaladinLook, you made an unfunny, presumptuous little remark and then tried to pass it off as a "rhetorical question". Calling you on it seems to have upset you. I have no idea what's inside your head. That, in my book, disqualifies you from speaking on behalf of "we" or "society".
I have absolutely no interest in your particular knowledge status, FMF.