Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Sinning in the womb
Hi Stephen,

Stephen Silver Wrote:I suggest that you proof-read your entire post and correct it where appropriate. Yo have Lazarus mixed up with the rich-man and visa versa.

The entire post? What else needs correction? There was only that one mistake, no? If so, then I feel as if the point was clearly illustrated and relayed - I wouldn't think it something capable of throwing anyone for a loop. I'll change it, though.

Stephen Silver Wrote:Read the entire post and ask yourself if you can some how find a way to condense it to a reasonable length. Much of your writing is repeated and redundant.

Not to be contentious, I'm honestly not trying to be, but if the members are okay reading a lengthy post, why would we have to condense it? I now know that the topic may border on breaking the rules, but does the site have a character limit, as well? Again, I promise you I'm doing nothing more than trying to be precisely clear on what is and isn't an accepted method of writing on this forum. Is always attempting to turn 3 words into 1 a suggestion, or an all-out rule / command?

One thing I've learned by speaking with people online (and I can use examples from this exact topic) is that certain things need to be repeated. We're so caught up in our own mind, that we overlook what other members are truly trying to relay to us. I don't think one's typing style should be an exact science and additionally don't feel as if there's anything wrong in mentioning certain things once, twice or three times (or more) for that matter - and feel, that at times, it relays a point the third time that wasn't caught the first time around.

But just so we're on the same page from here on in, as my intention is to abide by the rules (stated or not), can you point out what's redundant? At least the first thing to pop in your head? So that I can have a good grasp of what it is you're talking about. You say "much", but I honestly don't see it. Help me out here.

Stephen Silver Wrote:Moreover ask yourself if this topic is a theological one which as you know is not aceptable on the Forum.

In all honesty, this I didn't know. I'd only figured that out after I read the rules - should have read them before posting, I know.

And not to repeat myself, but if you look up, I'd mentioned how I would read the rules following a certain post above. Which I have done and now have a somewhat better (yet vague) understanding of what is and isn't allowed on here.

Stephen Silver Wrote:Both should ask yourselves "is thnis lengthy tgopic really necessary.

I would safely assume it's of absolute no relevance to our salvation, and although "necessary" is not quite the word I'd use, it's interesting conversation, nonetheless. Even Thirdwoe thought so.

Though that's entirely besides the point - I'll tread more carefully in the future. Apologies to both Shamasha Paul and you for breaking the rules this time around.

By the way, you can PM me your reply if you'd like.

We'll, some beggars have more money than the guy who owes everyone for everything he has...

And Seeker, on Origen...did you learn what he really had to say about the "pre-existance of Souls"? And did you find out when he was declaired a "Saint" and then "un-Sainted" by The Church. As far as I can tell, neither happend, just that some of his ideas and teachings were condemend as being heretical in a Church Council. You can message me in privet on this, and other things that are not edifying to the whole group if ya like. Most people here are interested in the Peshitta and what relates to it's text and transmission...less about ponderings of a theological nature.

Thirdwoe Wrote::

We'll, some beggars have more money than the guy who owes everyone for everything he has...

Rich in spirit. Very true. "Freedom" is not quite what most perceive it to be.

Thirdwoe Wrote:You can message me in privet on this

Sure, if you don't mind, I'd be glad to. PM coming up.

Seeker, I noticed that you fixed something about Lazarus and the rich Man above, but you forgot a few lines there that equate Lazarus with the rich Man. Lazarus was the poor Man, and not in torment as was the rich Man, who is un-named. Iv'e gone through my responses and don't see anything that needs fixing, but, If you see something that I blew, please let me know.

Also, keep in mind, that when you come with numerous questions, that takes some time to answer in a thorough manner, they most likely won't get attention, as most don't want to take the time, or think it very important, maybe just one question at a time, and keep the post's to a short length...Often times, less is more, as it's said.


Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)