|
Post by slowtosee on Dec 19, 2014 21:37:13 GMT -5
Thanks for reply. I wonder if the culture we enjoy in Canada is a little more "relaxed" , concerning some of your issues with religion vs atheism. I find it a little strange to feel some of the perceived animosity as if one group is a real threat to the other. Gotta go. TTYL. Alvin
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 20, 2014 16:55:22 GMT -5
Thanks for reply. I wonder if the culture we enjoy in Canada is a little more "relaxed" , concerning some of your issues with religion vs atheism. I find it a little strange to feel some of the perceived animosity as if one group is a real threat to the other. Gotta go. TTYL. Alvin I do think it's somewhat different here in Canada. We all seem to accept each other and our differences more. But that is a 'Canadian thing' isn't it? We are known for our politeness etc.
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Dec 21, 2014 0:02:08 GMT -5
Just not sure, either, snow. I enjoy visiting , debating, with my atheist friends, and we probably all make some pretty strong challenging statements, but I just very very much appreciate them, and look forward to spend time with them, and they SURELY are not my enemies, although we have vastly different world views. Of course, we all have our biases, prejudices etc. but if we would be constantly using every angle and example and opportunity to, "evangelize " and ""prove" ones own point of view, and make no acknowledgements of the weakness in one's own position, the atmosphere gets pretty noisy and shallow and mud flying dirty with everybody big time losers, as we all have lots to contribute and learn from each other. I have definitely learned from you, snow, and you didn't yell so loud that I couldn't hear Ya. Love Ya and all here. Thanks Alvin. Thinking about the time we had in Rumallah, Palestine last year. In some heart to heart talks, those precious devout Muslim people taught me a thing about "loving " their enemy. I thought they automatically hated Jews etc. Don't be so simple, Alvin is what they told me. My best friend is a jew, was one reply. What, you just told me that an Israeli soldier killed your buddy. ? True, but it's not that simple. And we talked for long time. I really think they had learned what Sharon. A wrote about the other day. Questions that might not get answered in this life. Awesome post, sharon. Wow encourage all to go read it again "The answer, my friend. Is blowing in the wind".. p.p. And mary
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 21, 2014 1:21:41 GMT -5
www.theguardian.com/books/2008/mar/15/society Interesting article in The Guardian newspaper talks about why the elimination of "religion" in the world , would leave a vacuum , that would be filled with .............. \Article dated 2008, so nothing new, really. Warning- it is called" the atheist delusion." Alvin The article (link) you posted is a powerful piece of writing. It captures a side of the debate that is rarely publicized in the current environment. On my quick read through, the material seems quite dense and will take considerable effort to digest. Do you happen to know how the article and subsequent book were received by the popular press. It is hard to imagine positive critical reviews but I would be delighted to be surprised. Thanks for the link. Which book do you mean ? Bently's book Atheist Delusion or one of Gray's books? Straw Dogs or Black Mass?
I am wondering why you think that "It is hard to imagine positive critical reviews?"
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Dec 21, 2014 11:26:03 GMT -5
Which book do you mean ? Bently's book Atheist Delusion or one of Gray's books? Straw Dogs or Black Mass?
I am wondering why you think that "It is hard to imagine positive critical reviews?"
There is something strangely exhilarating to awake on a cold winter morning to a challenging request for clarification of one’s opinion. As I had hoped the context of the posts would help convey, the sentence you have selected for clarification refers to the article written by John Gray and published in The Guardian and linked to the thread by ‘slowtosee’. The book I intended to reference is John Gray’s book “Black Mass: Apocalyptic Religion and the Death of Utopia” which is referenced at the end of the cited article and which I presumed (without confirmation) explores in greater depth the perspective described in the aforementioned article. I note with regret that the sentence asking the question in my post was not delineated with the correct punctuation, a question mark (?). I apologize for this typographical error. I have not read either of the two books you cite by John Gray (“Straw Dogs” or “Black Mass”). I have not read David Bentley Hart’s book “Atheists Delusions: The Christian Revolution and Its Fashionable Enemies”. By way of clarification and casual curiousity, Hart’s book “Atheists Delusions” was first published (April 2009) a year after John Gray wrote his article “The atheist delusion” (March 2008). By way of further clarification, I was unaware of the individual, John Gray, prior to reading the article linked by ‘slowtosee’. Having quickly scanned through his biography since reading the article, he strikes me as an interesting “character” with an eclectic background and an idiosyncratic view of mankind and culture. Finally, I will answer your direct question, directly. It is my perspective that Western societies are currently experiencing a cultural meme articulated primarily by intellectuals of the political left, members of the academic community and radical chic publications which favors humanism, empiricism, scientism, objectivism, etc. My sense is that these philosophical perspectives champion arguments with a patina of rationality that dissuades thoughtful commentary by individuals who embrace perspectives that may transcend society’s imperfect knowledge of meaning and purpose. Put another way, it is presently, déclassé, not to be skeptical about transcendence. It is my personal perspective that we lack a suitable vocabulary to ask meaningful questions about phenomena that go beyond the strictures of sensory perception and measurement. I believe that our capacity to ask (and answer) meaningful questions about phenomena beyond observation and measurement will continue to evolve and contribute significant value to our appreciation of both faith and reason. It was as a consequence of these personal perspectives that I asked the question about critical reviews of John Gray’s article and book. I hope that the subsequent comment “ . . . . I would be delighted to be surprised” helps to illuminate my personal perspectives, as I have just described them.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 21, 2014 13:05:02 GMT -5
Just not sure, either, snow. I enjoy visiting , debating, with my atheist friends, and we probably all make some pretty strong challenging statements, but I just very very much appreciate them, and look forward to spend time with them, and they SURELY are not my enemies, although we have vastly different world views. Of course, we all have our biases, prejudices etc. but if we would be constantly using every angle and example and opportunity to, "evangelize " and ""prove" ones own point of view, and make no acknowledgements of the weakness in one's own position, the atmosphere gets pretty noisy and shallow and mud flying dirty with everybody big time losers, as we all have lots to contribute and learn from each other. I have definitely learned from you, snow, and you didn't yell so loud that I couldn't hear Ya. Love Ya and all here. Thanks Alvin. Thinking about the time we had in Rumallah, Palestine last year. In some heart to heart talks, those precious devout Muslim people taught me a thing about "loving " their enemy. I thought they automatically hated Jews etc. Don't be so simple, Alvin is what they told me. My best friend is a jew, was one reply. What, you just told me that an Israeli soldier killed your buddy. ? True, but it's not that simple. And we talked for long time. I really think they had learned what Sharon. A wrote about the other day. Questions that might not get answered in this life. Awesome post, sharon. Wow encourage all to go read it again "The answer, my friend. Is blowing in the wind".. p.p. And mary We can learn so much from each other if we are open to another's pov. Travelling and talking to people from different areas of the world is so enlightening I find. We all have our preconceived ideas of who and what people are and rarely are they accurate. While it is frustrating sometimes to be talking with someone that has a very narrow understanding of the world, it does give insight into their thoughts and in the end it helps to understand where they are coming from better. I have got to the point in life where I see people as being the product of so many things. Learning, travel or lack of travel, childhood learning and experiences etc. We all are such a mixed bag of things. How that emerges in what we think and say is always of interest to me and I have begun to understand that everyone is doing the best they can with what they know and what they have experienced. We all have our strengths and weaknesses and we all have wisdom to offer. To shut out someone because they don't agree with you is to isolate yourself and limit what you could have learned. There is always common ground if you take the effort to find it. I do realize some circumstances don't offer the opportunity of time to do that, but when time is available there is something you can find to agree on, I'm sure.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Dec 21, 2014 17:36:22 GMT -5
Just not sure, either, snow. I enjoy visiting , debating, with my atheist friends, and we probably all make some pretty strong challenging statements, but I just very very much appreciate them, and look forward to spend time with them, and they SURELY are not my enemies, although we have vastly different world views. Of course, we all have our biases, prejudices etc. but if we would be constantly using every angle and example and opportunity to, "evangelize " and ""prove" ones own point of view, and make no acknowledgements of the weakness in one's own position, the atmosphere gets pretty noisy and shallow and mud flying dirty with everybody big time losers, as we all have lots to contribute and learn from each other. I have definitely learned from you, snow, and you didn't yell so loud that I couldn't hear Ya. Love Ya and all here. Thanks Alvin. Thinking about the time we had in Rumallah, Palestine last year. In some heart to heart talks, those precious devout Muslim people taught me a thing about "loving " their enemy. I thought they automatically hated Jews etc. Don't be so simple, Alvin is what they told me. My best friend is a jew, was one reply. What, you just told me that an Israeli soldier killed your buddy. ? True, but it's not that simple. And we talked for long time. I really think they had learned what Sharon. A wrote about the other day. Questions that might not get answered in this life. Awesome post, sharon. Wow encourage all to go read it again "The answer, my friend. Is blowing in the wind".. p.p. And mary We can learn so much from each other if we are open to another's pov. Travelling and talking to people from different areas of the world is so enlightening I find. We all have our preconceived ideas of who and what people are and rarely are they accurate. While it is frustrating sometimes to be talking with someone that has a very narrow understanding of the world, it does give insight into their thoughts and in the end it helps to understand where they are coming from better. I have got to the point in life where I see people as being the product of so many things. Learning, travel or lack of travel, childhood learning and experiences etc. We all are such a mixed bag of things. How that emerges in what we think and say is always of interest to me and I have begun to understand that everyone is doing the best they can with what they know and what they have experienced. We all have our strengths and weaknesses and we all have wisdom to offer. To shut out someone because they don't agree with you is to isolate yourself and limit what you could have learned. There is always common ground if you take the effort to find it. I do realize some circumstances don't offer the opportunity of time to do that, but when time is available there is something you can find to agree on, I'm sure. Enjoyed both of your posts snow and slowtosee. I am reading a wonderful book at the moment that in many respects captures the point of view you are both expressing. I heartily recommend this book to all, it is a fun and enlightening read: Heirs to Forgotten Kingdoms: Journeys Into the Disappearing Religions of the Middle East
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Dec 21, 2014 18:17:29 GMT -5
Sounds interesting, yknot. I can imagine snow and many reading that book. I have a hard time disciplining myself anymore to read longer books. Soooooo many other interesting and captivating and demanding activities , is only an excuse , I guess. A weakness and handicap, but ?? along the line of listening and talking with other people, I recall a kinda light bulb moment, when after spending time with a group of Muslim people in Amman , Jordan, last year. we left the bar, ( coffee shop, remember they don't drink alchol) in the early hours of the morning, and out in the street we were saying our goodbyes, and a young outspoken Muslim man, who had much participation in the spiritual debate we had had in the bar, came and we just embraced each other and I don't know if he had tears in his eyes, but I know, I sure did, and as he held me he said, to the effect " |I doubt we will ever see each other again in this life, but if not, we will see each other over there" What? we were both out of our zone - a muslim and a Christian embracing each other and giving a blessing to each other for our eternities. I thought . I hope I can retain some of the lessons learned here. My world is even less black and white, and I imagine his got a little muddled too lol. and it is OK. I sure do appreciate your posts, yknot, and feel I am benefitting from the books and knowledge you share. Thanks Alvin
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 21, 2014 22:17:05 GMT -5
I will try to get a look at it. Right now I'm reading an interesting book 'The Gospel According to Jesus' by Stephen Mitchell. It is an interesting read too. Lots I have thought before and some I have never considered. A good combination.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2014 3:58:16 GMT -5
I don't care what someone believes, but I do care how they support that view.. Bert, I note that you quote from the bible a lot and use quotes from the bible to support your views on a regular basis in a manner which indicates that you believe the words written in the bible have some special significance not only for you as a believer but for non believers too. May I enquire; 1. What is your belief as regards the bible being the Word of God or inspired by God? 2. How do you support that view? Matt10 I believe the bible is the inspired Word of God, but not as most people think that to be. The bible confirms God to the believer, and confirms non-existance to the disbeliever by sending strong delusion. 2 Thess 2:11 Furthermore the bible gave much to the Jews to ensure its preservation, such as the Law and Jewish history. It goes beyond pithy wisdom writings like that Confucius (or even Solomon) and is so beautifully demonstrated in the other-worldly power of the Sermon on the Mount. It demonstrates its power with its ability to see the past and future in a way which begs explaining away, or ignoring by the scribes of this world. It refuses to celebrate human nature like most of the great religious texts celebrate. And as is shown in our newspapers with the coming back of the Jews to Israel "the second time" and to "take it back with the sword," the power of Isaiah, Daniel and Ezekiel is very much alive. We still live in "biblical times."
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 22, 2014 10:58:35 GMT -5
Bert, I note that you quote from the bible a lot and use quotes from the bible to support your views on a regular basis in a manner which indicates that you believe the words written in the bible have some special significance not only for you as a believer but for non believers too. May I enquire; 1. What is your belief as regards the bible being the Word of God or inspired by God? 2. How do you support that view? Matt10 I believe the bible is the inspired Word of God, but not as most people think that to be. The bible confirms God to the believer, and confirms non-existance to the disbeliever by sending strong delusion. 2 Thess 2:11 Furthermore the bible gave much to the Jews to ensure its preservation, such as the Law and Jewish history. It goes beyond pithy wisdom writings like that Confucius (or even Solomon) and is so beautifully demonstrated in the other-worldly power of the Sermon on the Mount. It demonstrates its power with its ability to see the past and future in a way which begs explaining away, or ignoring by the scribes of this world. It refuses to celebrate human nature like most of the great religious texts celebrate. And as is shown in our newspapers with the coming back of the Jews to Israel "the second time" and to "take it back with the sword," the power of Isaiah, Daniel and Ezekiel is very much alive. We still live in "biblical times."Where you get any of this from is beyond understanding. The Sermon on the Mount had been said in various ways by many before Jesus was even a twinkle in his daddy's eye.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 22, 2014 11:44:17 GMT -5
Bert, I note that you quote from the bible a lot and use quotes from the bible to support your views on a regular basis in a manner which indicates that you believe the words written in the bible have some special significance not only for you as a believer but for non believers too. May I enquire; 1. What is your belief as regards the bible being the Word of God or inspired by God? 2. How do you support that view? Matt10 I believe the bible is the inspired Word of God, but not as most people think that to be.
The bible confirms God to the believer, and confirms non-existance to the disbeliever by sending strong delusion. 2 Thess 2:11
Furthermore the bible gave much to the Jews to ensure its preservation, such as the Law and Jewish history. It goes beyond pithy wisdom writings like that Confucius (or even Solomon) and is so beautifully demonstrated in the other-worldly power of the Sermon on the Mount. It demonstrates its power with its ability to see the past and future in a way which begs explaining away, or ignoring by the scribes of this world. It refuses to celebrate human nature like most of the great religious texts celebrate. And as is shown in our newspapers with the coming back of the Jews to Israel "the second time" and to "take it back with the sword," the power of Isaiah, Daniel and Ezekiel is very much alive. We still live in "biblical times." This what I find interesting about some arguments. It is a kind of circular reasoning. "The bible confirms God to the believer, and confirms non-existance to the disbeliever by sending strong delusion. " Which ever way it goes, the believer can rationalize their belief.
If you believe in God the bible confirms your belief. If someone doesn't believe in god, it is because that same god has used that same bible has send them a delusion.
Either way, the person arguing the point can hang on to their belief.
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Dec 22, 2014 11:57:44 GMT -5
Right, like the statement you made a while ago. dmmichgood,rationalizing the belief that believers have never once changed their belief, I guess. US humans are good at that. Alvin
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 22, 2014 12:09:09 GMT -5
I think we have all changed our beliefs. I know I have. I was a professing member of the fellowship and now I'm not because I no longer believe in God. At one point I believed in that God with my whole heart. As we learn and more data is revealed, we can't help but change our beliefs imo. If we are afraid to change them, then we have a huge struggle ahead of us. I see that a lot with people on here, trying to reconcile what they have learned with what they have been told and still trying to believe all those things they have been told as a child.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 22, 2014 15:18:22 GMT -5
Right, like the statement you made a while ago. dmmichgood, rationalizing the belief that believers have never once changed their belief, I guess. US humans are good at that. Alvin What statement did I make? I don't understand a vague comment. Why would I say "that believers have never once changed their belief?" I was a believer & changed mine!Can you quote where I ''rationalize(ing) the belief that believers have never once changed their belief?"
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Dec 22, 2014 20:11:12 GMT -5
Right, like the statement you made a while ago. dmmichgood, rationalizing the belief that believers have never once changed their belief, I guess. US humans are good at that. Alvin What statement did I make? I don't understand a vague comment. Why would I say "that believers have never once changed their belief?" I was a believer & changed mine!Can you quote where I ''rationalize(ing) the belief that believers have never once changed their belief?"
That would be nice, Mary, if all most Christians really believed & acted as you say, but they don't. 1) I have yet to see most Christians be open-minded and be willing to alter your beliefs with new evidence. Can you tell me of one time? 2) I don't see Christians striving to understand what is most likely to be true. For instance what about that the Hebrew god was a only a tribal god & not the god of the universe? 3) When science cannot find answers for something, They wait to see where evidence leads, while Christians & other religions won't wait for evidence, they throw some paranormal being into the gap. 4) Christians believe that very person has the right to control of their body? Then why do Christians deny Men & Women rights to contraception, or gays rights to control their sexuality or deny women the right to not have to continue a pregnancy? 5) It seems to me that knowing that this life is all you have would led one living life to the fullest in the here and now. 6) It isn't a matter of whether WE will be judged by our actions. Forget the ME and MY being judged. It is a matter of thinking about how our actions affect others. 7) "Treat others as you would want them to treat you, and can reasonably expect them to want to be treated." has been a principle. long before it became a Christian one. 8) True 9) Straw man argument. Atheists aren't advocating "A society without laws" PROVE IT! Hi dmmichgood, Sorry for confusion and delayed response. I am back home again . I think , as humans we are very good at rationalizing . I suggest your post I quoted , is an example, that you and me are more alike than , different. We rationalize. The first statement is a belief you hold. I accept that as your belief. In order for you to hold true to that belief you will have had to rationalize many many instances and occurences where believers have changed totherheir mind. Also, I accept the fact you believe that Christians and religious people do not wait for evidence and just throw some paranormal being into the gap. In order for you to arrive at that belief, you will have had to do some rationalizing. It was mentioned here a while ago how many Christians and other religious have won the Nobel prize, a cursory glance at statistics showing there are many many Christian and other religuos scientists , and many many evidences to the contrary of your belief, have been rationalized away. Don't worry. I understand the process and am "with you". It is just what we are sooooo good at, including myself. Some easy ones that surface on this board are often the frustration of many, but it is what it is. Nathan, please don't feel I'm picking on you, but I think you believe the earth is hollow and there is no amount of "evidence' that we could show to you to change your belief, right? Same to many beliefs that some of us hold. We rationalize. There are many people who believe the holocaust was not true. Any amount of evidence will not change that belief. Rationalize. There are people who believe that the complete police force in USA gets up in the morning with the purpose of shooting black people. No amount of evidence to the contrary will change that belief. they rationalize. Women get beat up by their spouse, and rationalize why they need to stay and he didn'[t mean it and made another little mistake and I guess I deserve it and on and on and on it goes. we rationalize. I have used mainly negative examples , but actually rationalization can be used for good and our survival. It is not necessarily good or bad, but neutral, and probably necessary for our survival. Alvin
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 22, 2014 22:10:02 GMT -5
What statement did I make? I don't understand a vague comment. Why would I say "that believers have never once changed their belief?" I was a believer & changed mine!Can you quote where I ''rationalize(ing) the belief that believers have never once changed their belief?"
Hi dmmichgood, Sorry for confusion and delayed response. I am back home again . I think , as humans we are very good at rationalizing . I suggest your post I quoted , is an example, that you and me are more alike than different. We rationalize. The first statement is a belief you hold. I accept that as your belief. In order for you to hold true to that belief you will have had to rationalize many many instances and occurences where believers have changed to their mind. Also, I accept the fact you believe that Christians and religious people do not wait for evidence and just throw some paranormal being into the gap. In order for you to arrive at that belief, you will have had to do some rationalizing. It was mentioned here a while ago how 1)many Christians and other religious have won the Nobel prize, a cursory glance at statistics showing there are many many Christian and other religuos scientists , and many many evidences to the contrary of your belief, have been rationalized away. Don't worry. I understand the process and am "with you". It is just what we are sooooo good at, including myself. Some easy ones that surface on this board are often the frustration of many, but it is what it is. Nathan, please don't feel I'm picking on you, but I think you believe the earth is hollow and there is no amount of "evidence' that we could show to you to change your belief, right? Same to many beliefs that some of us hold. We rationalize. 2) There are many people who believe the holocaust was not true. Any amount of evidence will not change that belief. Rationalize. 3) There are people who believe that the complete police force in USA gets up in the morning with the purpose of shooting black people. No amount of evidence to the contrary will change that belief. they rationalize. Women get beat up by their spouse, and rationalize why they need to stay and he didn't mean it and made another little mistake and I guess I deserve it and on and on and on it goes. we rationalize. I have used mainly negative examples , but actually rationalization can be used for good and our survival. It is not necessarily good or bad, but neutral, and probably necessary for our survival. Alvin
I agree that all people tend to rationalize and it it well may be a survival mechanism. (evolutionary)
However, I still have no idea what you mean by this statement: "In order for you to hold true to that belief you will have had to rationalize many many instances and occurences where believers have changed to their mind." Why would I have to rationalize ANY instances where believers have changed to their mind in order for me to hold true to my belief?
I don't have to "rationalize" why I changed my mind. I know why. I looked at the evidence for there being any paranormal entity called god and there was no evidence! There just wasn't anything there!
It is positives that one has to "rationalize" as true! You don't Need to rationalize a negative.
Your examples are mostly logical fallacies
For instance:
1)"many Christians and other religious have won the Nobel prize, a cursory glance at statistics showing there are many many Christian and other religuos scientists" is a logical fallacy of irrelevance.
There is no relevance between being a Nobel prize winner and being a Christian.
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Dec 22, 2014 22:25:42 GMT -5
OK. Cheers. Alvin
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 22, 2014 23:44:31 GMT -5
Ok, Cheers to you also, Alvin BUT ::)you still didn't answer why you said this.
"In order for you to hold true to that belief you will have had to rationalize many many instances and occurences where believers have changed to their mind."
Why would I have to rationalize ANY instances where believers have changed to their mind in order for me to hold true to my belief?
PS I can wait until after Christmas, Mitheras or whatever. I realize Christians & non-believers alike are busy right now. ( I have to go & make some candy)
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Dec 23, 2014 8:08:52 GMT -5
Reluctant, but one more try. You stated that you believed that believers NEVER changed their beliefs with new evidence, and asked to be shown just once where they did. Is this correct so far? Alvin
|
|
|
Post by rational on Dec 23, 2014 10:03:06 GMT -5
"The answer, my friend. Is blowing in the wind".. p.p. And mary Bob Dylan
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Dec 23, 2014 11:00:28 GMT -5
Thanks rational. I was listening to p paul Mary singing it. I incorrectly thought it was their song. Appreciate your effort to put credit , where credit is due, the writer, Bob Dylan. Alvin
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 23, 2014 14:30:59 GMT -5
Reluctant, but one more try. You stated that you believed that believers NEVER changed their beliefs with new evidence, and asked to be shown just once where they did. Is this correct so far? Alvin NO Alvin, That is NOT correct! I did NOT make any such statement you say I did!
I did NOT say that I "believed that believers NEVER changed their beliefs with new evidence."
That is what happens when someone paraphrases a quote rather than actually quoting the person. My statement was:
1) " I have yet to see most Christians be open-minded and be willing to alter your beliefs with new evidence. "
I did not use the word "NEVER" and I said MOST Christians NOT all!
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Dec 23, 2014 17:33:33 GMT -5
OK. Apologies for paraphrasing. I think we agreed that we all rationalize, so will simply leave it at that. Alvin
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 23, 2014 17:57:06 GMT -5
OK. Apologies for paraphrasing. I think we agreed that we all rationalize, so will simply leave it at that. Alvin Thank you for your apology, but that doesn't cover your post where you made the statement that "in order for you to hold true to that belief you will have had to rationalize many many instances and occurences "By making such a statement, you tried to make a whole case built solely on something that I hadn't even said to begin with!So you can leave it there if you want but the subject isn't about agreeing on rationalization. It is about inaccurately posting what someone says.
|
|