Crosswords1 min ago
Good To See The Taliban Getting Their Priorities Right.....
68 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
naomi - // I'm not interested in your thoughts about me, AH. //
I am not writing to 'interest' you naomi, I am writing to advise others that to take your pronouncements as definitive, merely because you like to present them as such, would be a mistake.
// Yes, bobbi, I have read it, I have three translations. //
Interesting. There is no one definitive translation, there are three that you know of.
The simple fact that three people have decided that the text means different things is the absolute definition of interpretation, which entirely underlines my point.
I am not writing to 'interest' you naomi, I am writing to advise others that to take your pronouncements as definitive, merely because you like to present them as such, would be a mistake.
// Yes, bobbi, I have read it, I have three translations. //
Interesting. There is no one definitive translation, there are three that you know of.
The simple fact that three people have decided that the text means different things is the absolute definition of interpretation, which entirely underlines my point.
AH, //I am not writing to 'interest' you naomi, I am writing to advise others that to take your pronouncements as definitive, merely because you like to present them as such, would be a mistake. //
Haha! Doubtless everyone will be very grateful for your esteemed advice - but you know that how?
Interesting. There is no one definitive translation, there are three that you know of.
// The simple fact that three people have decided that the text means different things is the absolute definition of interpretation, which entirely underlines my point. //
There are many more than three translations - but the message doesn't change.
Haha! Doubtless everyone will be very grateful for your esteemed advice - but you know that how?
Interesting. There is no one definitive translation, there are three that you know of.
// The simple fact that three people have decided that the text means different things is the absolute definition of interpretation, which entirely underlines my point. //
There are many more than three translations - but the message doesn't change.
naomi - // AH, //I am not writing to 'interest' you naomi, I am writing to advise others that to take your pronouncements as definitive, merely because you like to present them as such, would be a mistake. //
Haha! Doubtless everyone will be very grateful for your esteemed advice - but you know that how? //
Because I have read enough of your pronouncements on this site to know beyond doubt that your authority does not extend beyond your own impression of yourself.
// There are many more than three translations - but the message doesn't change. //
Of course there are. But the message is what was originally written, and as you rightly confirm, that does not change.
But the interpretation of the message has infinite possibilities, hence the need for different translators to offer their own individual version of what that message actually means.
And interpretation is infinite, and can be adjusted to suit, which is the point I am making
Haha! Doubtless everyone will be very grateful for your esteemed advice - but you know that how? //
Because I have read enough of your pronouncements on this site to know beyond doubt that your authority does not extend beyond your own impression of yourself.
// There are many more than three translations - but the message doesn't change. //
Of course there are. But the message is what was originally written, and as you rightly confirm, that does not change.
But the interpretation of the message has infinite possibilities, hence the need for different translators to offer their own individual version of what that message actually means.
And interpretation is infinite, and can be adjusted to suit, which is the point I am making
naomi - // AH, as one entirely ignorant of the subject you have no yardstick by which to judge or assess my 'pronouncements'. //
First of all, knowledge of any subject whatsoever is not a requirement for knowing that someone is pronouncing in a way that infers a superior knowledge, when no evidence of such superiority is ever produced.
And secondly, as I have pointed out endless times, you have no idea of the depth of my knowledge of Islam, or indeed anything else, so your assumption of ignorance is, as usual, an assumption.
First of all, knowledge of any subject whatsoever is not a requirement for knowing that someone is pronouncing in a way that infers a superior knowledge, when no evidence of such superiority is ever produced.
And secondly, as I have pointed out endless times, you have no idea of the depth of my knowledge of Islam, or indeed anything else, so your assumption of ignorance is, as usual, an assumption.
Re the OP.
It shows that secularity, in the sense of keeping religions away from the making of laws, is a very good thing. Can you imagine what life would be like if right wing evangelists were to come to power in the USA or over here? In the USA they are merely a powerful influence, but not quite in charge.
It shows that secularity, in the sense of keeping religions away from the making of laws, is a very good thing. Can you imagine what life would be like if right wing evangelists were to come to power in the USA or over here? In the USA they are merely a powerful influence, but not quite in charge.
naomi - // AH, //you have no idea of the depth of my knowledge of Islam, or indeed anything else//
Oh I do. Your posts say it all. //
As do yours!
You can't have it both ways - either both of us are qualified to judge each other's ability to comment on something, or neither of us are.
But instead of determining to attack me personally, why not confine yourself to the point I have made several times about interpretation, something you have sidestepped up to now.
Oh I do. Your posts say it all. //
As do yours!
You can't have it both ways - either both of us are qualified to judge each other's ability to comment on something, or neither of us are.
But instead of determining to attack me personally, why not confine yourself to the point I have made several times about interpretation, something you have sidestepped up to now.
Atheist - // Re the OP.
It shows that secularity, in the sense of keeping religions away from the making of laws, is a very good thing. Can you imagine what life would be like if right wing evangelists were to come to power in the USA or over here? In the USA they are merely a powerful influence, but not quite in charge. //
Absolutely.
The concept of religion as a part of daily life is something to which I do not subscribe personally, but can entirely understand.
The concept of religion as entirely daily life is something that is nothing but dangerous, and should never be allowed to take charge of anything - the results as we can see, are horrendous.
It shows that secularity, in the sense of keeping religions away from the making of laws, is a very good thing. Can you imagine what life would be like if right wing evangelists were to come to power in the USA or over here? In the USA they are merely a powerful influence, but not quite in charge. //
Absolutely.
The concept of religion as a part of daily life is something to which I do not subscribe personally, but can entirely understand.
The concept of religion as entirely daily life is something that is nothing but dangerous, and should never be allowed to take charge of anything - the results as we can see, are horrendous.
Stickybottle - // andy-hughes
You may scoff,
Did I actually just read that ? Had no idea that AB members condoned Taliban violence ! //
What on earth are you talking about????
At no stage on this, or any other thread, have I ever remotely implied that any AB'er condones violence from any source, including the Taliban.
I suggest you re-read my post and have a go at understanding what it means - your response clearly shows that you have no idea what I am talking about.
You may scoff,
Did I actually just read that ? Had no idea that AB members condoned Taliban violence ! //
What on earth are you talking about????
At no stage on this, or any other thread, have I ever remotely implied that any AB'er condones violence from any source, including the Taliban.
I suggest you re-read my post and have a go at understanding what it means - your response clearly shows that you have no idea what I am talking about.
Stickybottle - // AH
Dress it up however you like
Certainly no condemnation from you
Speaks volumes //
I am not dressing anything up, as you put it.
Since you have opted to sidestep my response to your original post, can we assume that you acknowledge that you are talking nonsense, and prefer not to be further embarrassed by discussing it?
Fine - to your post here then, which is something else again.
Firstly, please understand a simple premise of debating - not condemning something, anything at all, does not automatically convey tacit support of the subject.
There are some things that can actually be taken as read on the basis that we are all mature adults on here, and fundamental agreement on some subjects is so obvious that they do not need affirmation.
The following therefore apply to me, and to every other contributor without exception, we agree that -
The sun rose this morning.
Christmas is coming.
Boris Johnson is the Prime Minister.
We drive on the left side of the road.
The Taliban uses abhorrent and indefensible methods to enforce its current hold on power in Afghanistan, and no-one with anything more than an ounce of moral judgement would ever hold any other view than that, so no-one needs to state that position we can all take it as a given.
OK?
Hope that helps.
Dress it up however you like
Certainly no condemnation from you
Speaks volumes //
I am not dressing anything up, as you put it.
Since you have opted to sidestep my response to your original post, can we assume that you acknowledge that you are talking nonsense, and prefer not to be further embarrassed by discussing it?
Fine - to your post here then, which is something else again.
Firstly, please understand a simple premise of debating - not condemning something, anything at all, does not automatically convey tacit support of the subject.
There are some things that can actually be taken as read on the basis that we are all mature adults on here, and fundamental agreement on some subjects is so obvious that they do not need affirmation.
The following therefore apply to me, and to every other contributor without exception, we agree that -
The sun rose this morning.
Christmas is coming.
Boris Johnson is the Prime Minister.
We drive on the left side of the road.
The Taliban uses abhorrent and indefensible methods to enforce its current hold on power in Afghanistan, and no-one with anything more than an ounce of moral judgement would ever hold any other view than that, so no-one needs to state that position we can all take it as a given.
OK?
Hope that helps.
// // AH, //you have no idea of the depth of my knowledge of Islam, or indeed anything else////
I am pleased to observe that AB has a very good idea of the depth of N's knowledge - I mean you werent exactly keeping it secret innit?
[er deep it is, so deep]
oh and by the way - leaping to wild conclusions - I had no idea people condoned violence
is called a non sequitur
On AB they commonly scream or howl ( the non sequiturs that is!)
I am pleased to observe that AB has a very good idea of the depth of N's knowledge - I mean you werent exactly keeping it secret innit?
[er deep it is, so deep]
oh and by the way - leaping to wild conclusions - I had no idea people condoned violence
is called a non sequitur
On AB they commonly scream or howl ( the non sequiturs that is!)
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.