@fmf saidThat was another strange debate. Plagiarism is not tolerated.
It reminds me of the time sonship got caught bang-to-rights plagiarizing an Italian writer, probably in his haste to land a dramatic blow [he was in high dudgeon and the quote was about hanging out the burning bodies of unbelievers on chains to "glorify" God] - but then, after disappearing in [presumably] embarrassment for a couple of weeks, he came back bristling, doubling down, ...[text shortened]... o when I was caught red-handed reproducing a block of text from a book without crediting the source.
I think sonship, because of the overkill in volume of the posting of information, loses track of what who said what and inadvertently it appears as plagiarism.
I'm not going to take exception to, nor overly criticize him for it though since this format isn't that formal a setting. After all nobody here is submitting for publication what is written, or are they taking an exam for a course of study at a university here.
But it is annoying when someone can't simply state their ideas or beliefs in as succinct and brief a way as possible, with just a few reference quotes, without dominating time and space.
It's what those who think they know it all do when trying to indoctrinate those they consider subordinate. Like a pontificating blow hard with an authority complex.
Like divegeester for example. Just kidding. I'm waiting for him to show up here today so I can leave. 😂
06 Jan 20
@secondson saidA tiny, tiny, tiny ~ minuscule ~ number of sonship's post involve plagiarism. It's just interesting to see his reaction when he IS caught.
That was another strange debate. Plagiarism is not tolerated.
I think sonship, because of the overkill in volume of the posting of information, loses track of what who said what and inadvertently it appears as plagiarism.
06 Jan 20
@secondson saidI agree with the first sentence (above) with regard to sonship but I think the two sentences below it are a bit harsh, although I may well have said similar things about him at times in the past.
But it is annoying when someone can't simply state their ideas or beliefs in as succinct and brief a way as possible, with just a few reference quotes, without dominating time and space.
It's what those who think they know it all do when trying to indoctrinate those they consider subordinate. Like a pontificating blow hard with an authority complex.
'God's purpose in creating man is not merely to obtain a sinless man, but even more to have a God-man, one who has God's own life and nature.'
(Living Stream Ministry - What is Regeneration? page 8)
Is this an agreeable explanation to you, as to why God created us?
Ghost, why on a thread about the creation of man/woman did you lift up one sentence from the book dedicated to Regeneration?
Was it that you were trying to portray - For example - "This is what the LSM publications say about Why God created man/woman, from a book on What is Regeneration?" ?
@fmf saidMy wife just told me I come across too strong. It's true.
I agree with the first sentence (above) with regard to sonship but I think the two sentences below it are a bit harsh, although I may well have said similar things about him at times in the past.
It's the way I was raised. I'm more civilized than I used to be though.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidSure, there's plenty of evidence for that.
That man created gods (well, the idea of them at least).
But that's not evidence that there's not a creator.
06 Jan 20
@secondson saidYou come across like someone with a huge chip on his shoulder, especially when you try writing word salads ~ about intellect, and mental illness, and people being incapable of rational thought" ~ as if to keep up with people better able to express themselves than you. Your huff and puff persona here is a waste of breath. Your doctrinal duckspeak and recitals aside, you are one of the least "Christian" posters here.
My wife just told me I come across too strong. It's true.
It's the way I was raised. I'm more civilized than I used to be though.
@fmf saidComing from you that's just confirmation that what I'm posting here is good enough to be considered spreading the gospel, since those that killed Jesus said the same things about Him.
You come across like someone with a huge chip on his shoulder, especially when you try writing word salads ~ about intellect, and mental illness, and people being incapable of rational thought" ~ as if to keep up with people better able to express themselves than you. Your huff and puff persona here is a waste of breath. Your doctrinal duckspeak and recitals aside, you are one of the least "Christian" posters here.
@sonship saidYou don't think a quote that begins, 'God's purpose in creating man..' is relevant in a thread about why God created man/woman?!
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
'God's purpose in creating man is not merely to obtain a sinless man, but even more to have a God-man, one who has God's own life and nature.'
(Living Stream Ministry - What is Regeneration? page 8)
Is this an agreeable explanation to you, as to why God created us?
Ghost, why on a thread about the creation of man/woman did you ...[text shortened]... publications say about Why God created man/woman, from a book on What is Regeneration?"[/i] ?