Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (27011)	3/20/2008 1:09:52 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Re: "I said it doesn't mean the church is still radical." You KEEP trying to argue with things that I NEVER SAID (or have already corrected). Why do you continue to argue with straw men of your own creation? (What'sa matter? Nothing else to do?) If you are going to argue with yourself then there is no particular need for me in the conversation... you can easily handle both ends of the 'debate'! I thought I clarified the meaning of my posts, cleaned-up any areas of mistake or misinterpretation, making them sufficiently clear for most anyone, with this one: Message 24424978 Re: The accepted definition of 'radical' is "was a strong departure from the norm 2000 years ago"? I was unaware of that. You still are. 'Cause that isn't what I said. (I was talking about Christianity being a radical concept in the world at it's founding... NOT that the definition of the word 'radical' referred to '2000 years ago'! <GGG>) YOU posted that: "Christianity may have started out as a radical departure from the accepted norm. It was at least a departure, exactly how radical depends on what aspects you care to focus on." I replied with: 'MAY HAVE?' (LOL!) However, with your next remark "But that doesn't mean that its still a departure from the norm", it appears you got me twisted around and I MISSPOKE when I replied with: 'Well... yes, why yes it does. That's pretty much the accepted definition for the word 'radical'. :-) *************** So I agree with your latest point: I did not mean to suggest that Christianity was as different from the 'norm' TODAY as it most certainly was when it began. (That would just be silly... with Christianity in all it's various forms being the largest single organized religion in the world today....) However, after that minor slip and failure to grasp exactly what you had said, my post continued in it's original vein, and made that exact same point: And, at the time of Christianity's inception... it certainly WAS quite the 'departure' from the dominant religions of it's day! **************** Tim... I NEVER SAID, not in any post, (as you falsely claim): "the church is now radical." You are simply making that one up out of whole cloth!