> > > You think your skewed interpretation is the correct one, and all > > > Christians (who after all should be more familiar with it than you) > > > Disagreeing with their policy should not imply that I don't know > > enough about Christianity to adequately assess it -- unless you assume > > that everyone who knows *enough* about it becomes a Christian. > > All those with good will, yes.
You're using different flavor of poison in this well. Sometimes you say everyone who is honest or smart enough agrees with you, agrees with Christianity or Catholicism or whatever -- today you say "all those with good will." It's a baseless assertion. > Just answer my questions as honestly as you can. Drop the sarcasm. > No one is here to be impressed by your wit. You complain that I > assume I know what is in your head, and then you turn around and do > the exact same thing to me. It gets us nowhere. No, because your words are evidence that support the things I say about you. Your assertions about my motivations are not supported by any evidence. > > PS - "Subjective" can mean "biased" depending on who you talk to or > > which dictionary or thesaurus you trust. > > It can certainly mean biased if that's what you mean by it. It certainly means "biased" by general concensus when multiple dictionaries and thesauruses spell it out that way, when modern speakers of English language consistently use it that way. It's hardly unique to me. Its validity does not suffer a bit from your denials. > Has > nothing to do with trusting anything, it is a matter of what you wish > to make the word mean. I will continue to use it in the way that > makes sense to me, and if you try to use it to mean biased, it is > possible that I may "correct" you on that, since I see no reason to > overload the term. The only thing we are doing here is attempting to > communicate (well that is the only thing we *should* be doing > anyway.) Since there is no reason to try to impress anyone, and since > I freely choose to be stupid about this, you will just have to deal > with it, and either stop using subjective to mean biased, or continue > to use it and have me "correct" you. It's all the same to me, I don't > care what you do, but I will simply point out that for you to conform > your opinion to mine in this will make for a smoother interchange. That's fine. You keep "correcting" me. It's an ongoing demonstration of how stubbornly disingenuous you are. > Please note that I have said nothing at all about any alleged > objective philosophical truth of my position. I have placed the word > "correct" in quotes to point out that I am using it somewhat glibly. Your use of quotation marks does not effectively communicate what you think it does. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "A Civil Religious Debate" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/a-civil-religious-debate?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
