309d
@pettytalk saidI am not.
Why are you attempting to misrepresent what I said?
I said this:
If you believe he was born in Bethlehem, then that is your prerogative.
So, based on your reaction to what I have said, I assume you do believe the claim he was born in Bethlehem. So I asked you a question:
Is your belief based on the convoluted attempt to place him there that the writers of the Gospels named "Matthew" and "Luke" inserted into their texts?
If you want to sidestep this question, that's fine. I went on to state what I think:
Whoever Jesus was, assuming he is not some kind of composite figure, we have absolutely no way of knowing where he was born.
If you disagree with this, you are free to say.
I then reiterated my perspective:
As I say, the Bethlehem thing is merely evidence of the piggybacking I mentioned.
If you disagree with this then say so plainly. Don't pretend you have been wronged in some way.
@pettytalk saidYou're free to insult my intelligence anytime you wish. I don't hold my intelligence in high esteem anyway, but you asked for an explanation in your OP and I gave you one.
I typically don't insult people's intelligence, and I just ignore them. I'm making a rare exception for you and this idiotic reply of yours. You are an *^!#$. Got it?
309d
@pettytalk saidYou certainly do not speak for me. If you claim to be a scholar of some kind who is merely regurgitating "higher-level academic sources" to some degree, then that is a matter for you. I certainly do not claim to be a scholar, amateur or otherwise, and my personal perspectives on what I used to believe and now believe are not "shaped by higher-level academic sources" in any meaningful way. I haven't consulted any.
Without speaking for others, I would speculate that we are all amateur scholars here, expressing opinions that have likely been shaped by higher-level academic sources.
@mchill saidHe's just a bit ruffled, that's all. Judging by numerous posts he was making a few weeks ago, in the face of disagreements, silly insults riffing on low intelligence seem to be his stock in trade.
You're free to insult my intelligence anytime you wish. I don't hold my intelligence in high esteem anyway, but you asked for an explanation in your OP and I gave you one.
@fmf saidAnd I thought you were a bit brighter than your other half. That was a mistake on my part. You two are neck and neck. I don't suppose it would make any difference to go over what you wrote and show you that you did misrepresent how I stand on the matter of Bethlehem; therefore, I am not.
I am not.
I said this:
If you believe he was born in Bethlehem, then that is your prerogative.
So, based on your reaction to what I have said, I assume you do believe the claim he was born in Bethlehem. So I asked you a question:
Is your belief based on the convoluted attempt to place him there that the writers of the Gospels named "Matthew" and "Luke" inserted into ...[text shortened]...
If you disagree with this then say so plainly. Don't pretend you have been wronged in some way.
To make you feel better, I'll say that you are right on all counts, past, present, and future.
@fmf saidThen I suggest you do consult with those sources, because, as it's said, modesty is not good for a needy man.
You certainly do not speak for me. If you claim to be a scholar of some kind who is merely regurgitating "higher-level academic sources" to some degree, then that is a matter for you. I certainly do not claim to be a scholar, amateur or otherwise, and my personal perspectives on what I used to believe and now believe are not "shaped by higher-level academic sources" in any meaningful way. I haven't consulted any.
309d
@pettytalk saidThanks for the exquisite banter.
And I thought you were a bit brighter than your other half. That was a mistake on my part. You two are neck and neck.
@mchill saidEven you’ve upset him mchill!
You're free to insult my intelligence anytime you wish. I don't hold my intelligence in high esteem anyway, but you asked for an explanation in your OP and I gave you one.
@pettytalk saidIf all you see yourself doing on this message board is regurgitating "higher-level academic sources" like some kind of "amateur scholar", then so be it. I am not interested in doing this.
Then I suggest you do consult with those sources, because, as it's said, modesty is not good for a needy man.
@mchill saidIf you do not hold your intelligence in high esteem, then I was justified, as I was only telling you what you already know about yourself. Anyone who does not hold themselves in high esteem should not go around trying to make others understand... got it now?
You're free to insult my intelligence anytime you wish. I don't hold my intelligence in high esteem anyway, but you asked for an explanation in your OP and I gave you one.
If you were giving an opinion on change in reference to a God that never changes, you did not address the apparent class of changes being put forth for the thread. What you put forth is idiotic and a baseless affirmation.
@fmf said"Banter is both a noun and a verb about talking. It comes from unknown origins, but even as a word, it seems to be playful and teasing. You can engage in banter with friends, siblings, parents, and even good-natured strangers. Banter usually ends with everyone feeling better for the talk and verbal play. Joking, joshing, and teasing are all related to banter.
Thanks for the exquisite banter.
Good friends usually banter back and forth easily, like they're trying to keep a step ahead of each other in witty responses. This type of banter is their special language of friendship."
You are most welcome for your thanks.
309d
@pettytalk saidI was using the words "banter" and "exquisite" ironically.
Good friends usually banter back and forth easily, like they're trying to keep a step ahead of each other in witty responses. This type of banter is their special language of friendship.
309d
@pettytalk saidAre you sure?
I typically don't insult people's intelligence, and I just ignore them.