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 : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (9330)	10/22/2010 2:14:27 PM
From: one_less	2 Recommendations Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 69300

A prime example is the the way you took heated issue with the article I posted ... siliconinvestor.com This is a prime example alright. A prime example of you misrepresenting my post, unless you can show how this prime example post is 'taking heated issue,' you have just confirmed once again the basis (not bare assertion) for your reputation as a hypocritical fraud. I took heated issue??? Quite to the contrary the post you targeted is rational, logically recognizing the basis of logic in the article, while rationally explaining the author's flaw of contagion. Your author's example was not convincing and I went to some lengths to demonstrate why that is the case. I recognized in my post how a truth may be absolute and uncompromisable, while demonstrating how in practical circumstances two apposing statements may not actually be mutually exclusive. Statements such as 'Jesus is God' are subject to view points. View points are subject to individual knowledge bases, circumstance, experience, and awareness which would have to be at an omniscient level to draw the conclusion you and your author have promoted, that Christians should not be cowardly in standing behind such a declaration as uncompromisable and mutually exclusive fact. You didn't remain in the logic mode of the discussion and instead preferred to attack me personally, which is where every attempt at rational discussion with you has ended to date. ------------- In addition you just completely skirted over the context and essence of the post you were responding to in order to wield this falsity. Dodging responsibility for your own actions is yet another of your common proclivities.

To: Greg or e who wrote (9330)	10/22/2010 2:41:20 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

"and took the very next opportunity Message 26890602 to jump into a conversation with someone else to launch your latest personal attack which has continued till now. Apparently you consider an honest appraisal of the facts in this case to be a nasty personal attack. Yet the facts remain as they are regardless of your objection, where such an objection reflects further back on you, not on the person making such an observation. Those observations are valid based on the following: The Bible is a rich resource of literature. Containing everything from geneological records, to history, prose, poetry, metaphorical stories, parables, prophesy, information delivered by 'inspired' persons, messages delivered by Angels, and a few words attributed directly to God. This is all subject to as many forms of interpretations as there are inhabitants of the world willing to give it a shot. Some claiming to be scholarly enough to have the one and only correct interpretation, even while these scholars distinguish themselves into sects and factions, who've historically engaged in genocidal wars against one another. Then we move on to the NT which has itself had a similar history of traumatic handling. It is all, however, underlain with a code of morality which narrows to one concept, 'caring for that which is beneficial for others.' Not beneficial in the sense of what others may see as desirable but to that which is more of a long term beneficial well being. You have chosen to post Biblical dogma in an on going manner with no apparent concern for the well being of those you are engaging. In fact, your conduct has represented the very opposite, or a violation, of the core and essential message promoted both in the OT and the NT. You have abused others with misrepresentations of their conduct on numerous occasions. This is all definitional to hypocrisy, deceit, and fraud. I have asked you for an explanation or a justification for your conduct. I have also encouraged you to consider a more benevolent path, but you respond only that you are being subjected to nasty personal attacks, or with your own attacks on me or other posters here abouts. Those are simply the facts.