It appears we aren't communicating effectively again. It seems you guys are missing my point, and I'd wager you think the same of me. I'll just concede that the religious method of determine truth, is not foolproof and is not universal to all religionists. I concede that if you wish to compare the methods used by religionists to those used by scientists the religionist method very much appears short. One could do a study, I'm sure, and arrive at that conclusion. Of course all of that, I'd maintain, misses my point.
Take care, chumps (meant in a nice and friendly way)
Sounds reasonable.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
It appears we aren't communicating effectively again. It seems you guys are missing my point, and I'd wager you think the same of me. I'll just concede that the religious method of determine truth, is not foolproof and is not universal to all religionists. I concede that if you wish to compare the methods used by religionists to those used by scientists the religionist method very much appears short. One could do a study, I'm sure, and arrive at that conclusion. Of course all of that, I'd maintain, misses my point.
Take care, chumps (meant in a nice and friendly way)
Sounds reasonable.
It's one of the reasons I allow the physical evidence to tell it's story.
It appears we aren't communicating effectively again. It seems you guys are missing my point, and I'd wager you think the same of me. I'll just concede that the religious method of determine truth, is not foolproof and is not universal to all religionists. I concede that if you wish to compare the methods used by religionists to those used by scientists the religionist method very much appears short. One could do a study, I'm sure, and arrive at that conclusion. Of course all of that, I'd maintain, misses my point.
Take care, chumps (meant in a nice and friendly way)
You aren't the only person that has this problem with those two. I just ignore them for the most part because it is almost impossible to carry on a meaningful discussion with them. They misrepresent things, dissemble, ignore what you say, or can't seem to comprehend your points and respond to them in any cogent manner. They also have the annoying habit of butting into other discussions you might be having with someone else or following you from thread to thread posting something bizarre and completely unrelated in response.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
Tobin wrote:... They also have the annoying habit of butting into other discussions you might be having with someone else ...
Those who want private conversations will necessarily be disappointed if they try to have them on public discussion boards. The PM facility is available for those who desire or need privacy and no interruption. Here comment is free, and I hope it will continue that way. MDDB operates other policies, of course.
Deliberate derails may of course be dealt with by using the 'report' button. I have often found that quite effective.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Tobin wrote:... They also have the annoying habit of butting into other discussions you might be having with someone else ...
Those who want private conversations will necessarily be disappointed if they try to have them on public discussion boards. The PM facility is available for those who desire or need privacy and no interruption. Here comment is free, and I hope it will continue that way. MDDB operates other policies, of course.
Deliberate derails may of course be dealt with by using the 'report' button. I have often found that quite effective.
I understand that. It is when the response is completely unrelated and bizarre - that is when I get somewhat annoyed. For me, ignore works well enough. If they were trolling me and constantly following me from thread to thread, then I would report them. However, I have seen nothing in their behavior to indicate a pattern of harrassment.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
Tobin wrote:You aren't the only person that has this problem with those two. I just ignore them for the most part because it is almost impossible to carry on a meaningful discussion with them. They misrepresent things, dissemble, ignore what you say, or can't seem to comprehend your points and respond to them in any cogent manner. They also have the annoying habit of butting into other discussions you might be having with someone else or following you from thread to thread posting something bizarre and completely unrelated in response.
Tobin, you're projecting your own inadequacies on us. You've yet to meet a strawman argument you didn't like.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
Molok wrote:You are the only person I have ever seen who would actually feel like that was something that needed to be said. You're dumber than a box of rocks.
Oh very well expressed. It'd be easier if you just whined, "I hate you".
In truth in these types of discussions and in part due to the hostile atmosphere prevalent here, simple statements are needed lest others take your words and twist them into something not intended (which will always be a problem). 'course there are very few people here who disagree with the notion that the Church is false so you guys with all your backslapping and cheering for bullying don't have to concern yourselves too much over it. I don't' think you'd understand. Perhaps others will.
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
stemelbow wrote:In truth in these types of discussions and in part due to the hostile atmosphere prevalent here, simple statements are needed lest others take your words and twist them into something not intended (which will always be a problem). 'course there are very few people here who disagree with the notion that the Church is false so you guys with all your backslapping and cheering for bullying don't have to concern yourselves too much over it. I don't' think you'd understand. Perhaps others will.
I don't hate you, you're just an incredibly easy target. You have that rare combination of stupidity and condescension. Plus it's always fun to watch you squirm when someone refuses to engage in your bull crap. You're a chump Stem, and if it weren't for the fact that you enjoy abusing all of us so much, I wouldn't talk to you at all.
Molok wrote:You are the only person I have ever seen who would actually feel like that was something that needed to be said. You're dumber than a box of rocks.
Oh very well expressed. It'd be easier if you just whined, "I hate you".
In truth in these types of discussions and in part due to the hostile atmosphere prevalent here, simple statements are needed lest others take your words and twist them into something not intended (which will always be a problem). 'course there are very few people here who disagree with the notion that the Church is false so you guys with all your backslapping and cheering for bullying don't have to concern yourselves too much over it. I don't' think you'd understand. Perhaps others will.
[real-life information deleted]--
Do you genuinely think that the Mopologists are guiltless? Do you think they actually deal with substantive issues? Or not?
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14