Are you religious?

[Davidc]

[QUOTE 2374152, member: 45"]You're entitled to that opinion.[/quote]
Supported, I'm being told, by just about every piece of research into child development ever done.

I'll leave you to it.

 

[Davidc]

[QUOTE 2374278, member: 45"]You're not taking what I'm saying at face value. Or you're being told wrong.[/quote]
What you're saying is almost entirely nonesense, and I'd be very surprised if my informant is wrong. As I said I'll leave you to it, and enjoy seeing your posts continuing to be accurately rubbished by other people.

 

[clarion]

[QUOTE 2374215, member: 45"]You've lost me. I disagreed with you.[/quote]

I had thought (hoped) that, in saying 'No. It's not', you were agreeing with me when I said it was not acceptable.

Well then, I am very disappointed to hear that you believe systematic lying to children is acceptable.

Wow.

Just: Wow.

That's a messed up way to bring up children.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

Any 'extension' is yours. Christians state that Jesus was the son of God and was born of a virgin. And they mean that literally. In exactly the sense I mean it. That Mary was a virgin, yet she gave birth. To the Son of God. Literally. I'm not sure what their take on DNA is. You'd have to ask them.

You know, irrespective of whether you believe in God, that Jesus was divine etc., you simpy cannot assert that 'Christians state that Jesus was... born of a virgin'. A lot do, perhaps even the vast majority, but even (famously) Bishops of the Church of England have stated that you don't have to take this literally and still be a Christian.

 

[swee'pea99]

Christians state that Jesus was... born of a virgin. There. I can. I do. They also believe in God. If they don't, they aren't Christians. They may be splendid upright fellows, but they aren't Christians. Ask any Christian.

 

[Thomk]

Christians state that Jesus was... born of a virgin. There. I can. I do. They also believe in God. If they don't, they aren't Christians. They may be splendid upright fellows, but they aren't Christians. Ask any Christian.

I'm mainly with you except that the virgin thing is not a particularly good example due to the disagreement about whether virgin is a mistranslation and young lady or maiden is more accurate.

 

[Dan B]

[People who I consider to be] Christians state that Jesus was... born of a virgin. There. I can. I do. They also believe in God. If they don't, they aren't [people who I consider to be] Christians. They may be splendid upright fellows, but they aren't [people who I consider to be] Christians. Ask any [person who I consider to be a] Christian.

I have added the bits in square brackets just to make it obvious that your argument is circular. You may wish to familiarise yourself with the phrase "'No true Scotsman' fallacy"

 

[Rev]

I have added the bits in square brackets just to make it obvious that your argument is circular. You may wish to familiarise yourself with the phrase "'No true Scotsman' fallacy"

I owe you a pint However quite worryingly apparently [People who I consider to be] are the only voices certain posters hear! The other voices either don't exist or are cranks claiming a legitimacy not based on [People who I consider to be] therefore they cannot be .......ad infinitum.

If one has the audacity to point out beliefs do exist from other than [People who I consider to be] you are lambasted and lampooned as a either a fellow crank and not [People who I consider to be] or a liar.

The Holy Church of the Solipsist ps loved clarions excerpts from web pages, even for his own faith

 

[Rev]

I like that Quakers accept gay, lesbian and transgendered into the fold. I do wonder though if Clarion would insist on telling a trans that they are their birth gender?
After all following his logic......
As surely they would not fit the medical model for the gender they chose to be re-assigned to!
Nor would they fit most definitions of the genders they choose...fitting more definitions of their birth genders.
So how do we solve this conundrum Clarion, do you follow your fellowship/friends in the society or do you apply your rather vociferous tests?

(after all one should be true to ones self)

 

[Rev]

You Madam are most definitely a man, I have the definition here in my dictionary! Stop being so silly take off that ridiculous dress and act manly!

 

[swee'pea99]

How about [people who the overwhelming majority of people, and the overwhelming majority of people who consider themselves to be Christians, would consider to be] Christians state that Jesus was... born of a virgin. They also believe in God. If they don't, they aren't [people who the overwhelming majority of people, and the overwhelming majority of people who consider themselves to be Christians, would consider to be] Christians. They may be splendid upright fellows, but they aren't [people who the overwhelming majority of people, and the overwhelming majority of people who consider themselves to be Christians, would consider to be] Christians. Ask any [people who the overwhelming majority of people, and the overwhelming majority of people who consider themselves to be Christians, would consider to be a] Christian.

Better?

 

[Rev]

Look up 'appeal to popularity fallacy'

 

[swee'pea99]

But it's not about popularity. It's about the meaning of words. And words' meaning is defined by the ways people use them.

If the overwhelming majority of people think 'Bugs Bunny' refers to an engaging, carrot-munching cartoon rabbit, and a tiny minority think it refers to a cat, the minority is wrong. They can use Bugs Bunny to refer to cats if that works for them; but if they try to insist that their view has any wider validity, they will be, literally, wrong. Bugs bunny is a rabbit, not a cat. Majority rule? Absolutely. It's how language works.

 

[Rev]

There is no such thing as Lamb sausages, don't be so silly, that's just lamb in a sausagey shape. Sausages are only ever pork or beef!

 

[Rev]

But it's not about popularity. It's about the meaning of words. And words' meaning is defined by the ways people use them.

People mis- use words! So now you are saying that the meaning of words is defined by popularity? Still a fallacy!

Absolutely. It's how language works

Language is decided by the popular conception of meaning?

Oh good lord