Me>>So why should we deny that their [ie the Malkioni] orthodoxy
>>considering that the Brithini themselves do not adhere to all
>>of Malkion's teachings?
>Yes, some of us do have problems with words.
>Could you repeat that in english?
Delete 'that' and see if it makes things any clearer. But you should be aware by now that this sort of comment is bad form. After all, people haven't been chastenising you for putting = on the end of your lines.
Julian had made a blanket statement of his to the effect that when talking about religion, the term Orthodox Westerners is gibberish.
Me>>So if I say that 'Orthodox Malkioni (or westerners) worship only
>>the Invisible God', I am uttering gobbledegook in your humble
>>opinion because I am discussing religion?
Julian sidesteps this by digging up another quotation of mine:
::The brithini are not orthodox westerners anymore than jews are ::orthodox christians.
and comments:
>This is theological mish-mash.
Arguing by assertion does not make your point correct. My statement is not gibberish and neither is the second quote. I have even explained the statement for you, pointing out that the difference between the Brithini and orthodox Malkioni is as great as the difference between orthodox christians and the jews (Digest #607). I have even explained what definition of orthodoxy I was using (#610). But you have seen fit to ignore this. Why?
>PS I refuse to participate any further in this
>degrading (to both of us IMVHO) squabble.
Then kindly permit me a few meta-issue comments.
In your postings are numerous statements that are somewhat ... odd. Phrases to the effect of 'Scientists do not predict but observe', 'the spirit plane cannot be described in words' or 'orthodox westerners is a nonsensical phrase when the subject matter is religion' spring to mind.
When these statements are questioned, you resort to further curiousities ('Science is Knowledge, Your Move', a confusing theory that treated thoughts, facts and theory as indistinguishable), accusations (I am seeking to make the Malkioni righter than anybody else for 'obscure etymological reasons', hallucinogen consumption) and other things save, it seems, cogent argument.
Could you not make your statements more understandable in the future?
Powered by hypermail