Jodi? DJ?
Could you hold off on this for a bit?
I’d appreciate your help over in GD. I have a couple of apparent college students who seem intent on condemning Christian beliefs because of apparent meaningless statements.
Thanks for any help you could be.
Polycarp:
Seriously? If so, sure. Gotta link?
DaLovin’ Dj
There’s no need to hold off on it, POLY, we’re done anyway. He either sees my point or he doesn’t and he either agrees with it or he doesn’t. I think the answer to both of those is abundantly clear, so there’s little point in my continuing to attempt to pound a stake into his head, or he into mine.
gobear:
And I don’t. In this case, however, Jodi admits she understands. It’s not a question of whether or not she gets it. She does. Then she says it’s “stupid” and “self-evidently bullshit”, while at the same time claiming to agree with the underlying sentiment. How can she claim it’s stupid and bullshit if she understands and agrees with the text? If she’s attacking the validity of the literary tools the author used, I feel she is way over in the wrong. If she’s just arguing for the sake of arguing (which I suspect), she is pretty lame. I would feel differently if she did not genuinely understand.
It’s like if I were to tell a kid that when you say “wood” it means from a tree. But when you say “would” it means something different. The kid understands and learns, but every time I say go get some fire-wood, just to be difficult, he says “That doesn’t make sense because I’m using the definition of would”. Even though the child understand and knows the intended meaning, they insist on bringing in another meaning just to be a pain. I fear that is similar to what is going on here.
Perhaps. I’ll answer with another quote. this time frome Shakespeare (He “august” enough for ya Jodi?):
DaLovin’ Dj