Posted on 08/30/2014 8:36:05 AM PDT by WXRGina
Please see the RF Guidelines set up by the RM in regards to accusing others of lying.
http://www.freerepublic.com/~religionmoderator/
“Forms of “making it personal” include mind reading, attributing motive, accusing another Freeper of telling a lie (because it attributes motive, the intent to deceive) - making the thread “about” individual Freeper(s), following a Freeper from thread to thread and badgering a Freeper over-and-again with the same question. “
So now i am lying because i took your response at face value as a denial ("disinformation") of my assertion that the Donation of Constantine was a forgery? Them then tell me how your response says otherwise:
“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donation_of_Constantine"; I have been wondering how you came to be in possession of so much disinformation. I’ve been reading a book called “The Da Vinci Hoax,” and now I think you got a lot of your information from “The Da Vinci Code.”
You cite a source i provided, and then refer to so much disinformation, and that you think i get lot of my information from “The Da Vinci Code.” How then is this not a denial of my assertion that the Donation of Constantine was a forgery??? And that i am lying about you by taking this at face value? Does anyone else want to judge this matter (besides violating forum rules)?
Or do you want to blame this your old age again?
In post 66, did you or did you not intend to convey that Daniel's information about the Donation of Constantine was false?
This thread is not posted in the Religion Forum and therefore the RF guidelines do not apply on this thread.
“In post 66, did you or did you not intend to convey that Daniel’s information about the Donation of Constantine was false?”
So, “one of the most charitable posters on FR” wants to badger me with a tendentious question.
No, I did not intend to make a statement about the authenticity of the Donation of Constantine.
I intended to make a statement about bringing up the Doctrine of Constantine in the first place, when no one else had.
I intended to make a statement about using that long-dead controversy to badger present-day Catholics.
And I intended to make a statement about the ethics of a person who would do that.
“You cite a source i provided, and then refer to so much disinformation, and that you think i get lot of my information from “The Da Vinci Code.” How then is this not a denial of my assertion that the Donation of Constantine was a forgery?”
Not that this would apply to any poster on FR, of course, but I find it unpleasant to try and converse with someone who is both malicious and stupid, and is blissfully unaware of either condition. Not, of course, that anyone on FR is both malicious and stupid. That could never happen, and if it did, we wouldn’t be permitted to comment on it.
To those of moderate or higher intelligence, my comment speaks to the dishonesty of bringing up a long-dead, ancient kerfluffle in an attempt to sling mud at the One True Church.
“accusing another Freeper of telling a lie (because it attributes motive, the intent to deceive)”
Notice that this rule advantages liars, and disadvantages those who catch them. You can tell which is which by gauging a poster’s affection for this rule.
DSC, resorting to such bombast only digs your hole deeper, as if any postings evidence maliciousness by deliberate distortion of the truth and or lacking intelligence it is yours, as you charge me with lying due to your apparent inability to makes yourself clear - or admit guilt - which is the second time you did this in a 3 days.
First you carelessly make the fallacious statement that "As a matter of fact, if you go to Mass every day for three years, you will hear the entire Bible read aloud," which is rather a dumb thing to do in an age and forum in whichsuch assertions can be checked out and error exposed.
And yet after this was exposed, your only response to my assertion that this was as "another parroted dubious claim" was that "The Internet is a wonderful resource. It also provides fallacious information for the malicious to use in spreading error."
Meaning either you were the malicious one using the Internet in spreading error, or fellow RCs, which can hardly be your charge, or it infers that my exposé of your prevaricating propaganda is what is spreading error.
Finally when cornered you blamed your old age and infirmity, admitting you "misspoke," but followed that with distinguishing it from the professional liars one encounters.
And which is consistent with your well-know theme of anti-Catholic bias, and asserting there never has been or is a scintilla of anti-Protestant bias on FR, and thus i replied "Be careful throwing rocks at known or anonymous liars, Rome herself made use of the works of such done in the interest of supplying what Scripture does not," citing the Donation of Constantine besides the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals.
But true to form, you retort , "I have been wondering how you came to be in possession of so much disinformation. I’ve been reading a book called “The Da Vinci Hoax,” and now I think you got a lot of your information from “The Da Vinci Code.”
And which i dare say "anyone of moderate or higher intelligence" would normally see as a denial that the Donation was a forgery - or an example of an inability of a FR to be coherent - or unwillingness to be honest - and invite anyone on FR to express their judgment.
And yet when i conclusively substantiated that this is held to be a forgery even by Cath. scholarship, you have the audacity to charge me with lying, saying you did not affirm or deny anything about the Donation of Constantine, the very thing you cited as disinformation akin to The Da Vinci Code! And if not then the only item remaining as "disinformation" would be the Pseudo-IsidorianDecretals. No wonder you threatened to ignore me!
Yet when i went over this with you, rather than admitting the obvious, you example more inability to be coherent, or honest, explaining that you find it "unpleasant to try and converse with someone who is both malicious and stupid, and is blissfully unaware of either condition," but that this does not apply to any poster on FR or that it could.
A poor attempt at tongue-in-cheek at best, while then you come close to exampling malice by deliberate distortion of the truth and or lacking intelligence (even in damage control) by explaining your "disinformation" "Da Vinci Code" dismissal of my reference to the fallacious Donation really refers to "the dishonesty of bringing up a long-dead, ancient kerfluffle in an attempt to sling mud at the One True Church,"
which not only presumes what remains to be proven, and attempts to blithely dismiss such evidence as the Donation (and infers more recent examples of dishonestly are non-existent) against Rome being the OTC , but in-credibly charges me with dishonesty when it is you who have exampled this by your fake claims and damage-control denials!
Yes indeed, it would be best for you to ignore me, as the more you attemptted to be an escape artist the more your insolence has been displayed on FR for all to see, and as a negative example of what devotion to Rome can foster and excuse. Like mother like son, while charging bias in your glass house.
Thanks.
I hadn’t noticed.
Thanks.
Nice use of alliteration!
I just HATE when evidence of this is posted!!!
Matthew 15:16
"Are you still so dull?" Jesus asked them.
Matthew 231. Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples:
2. "The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat.
3. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.
4. They tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.
5. "Everything they do is done for men to see: They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long;
6. they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues;
7. they love to be greeted in the marketplaces and to have men call them `Rabbi.'
8. "But you are not to be called `Rabbi,' for you have only one Master and you are all brothers.
9. And do not call anyone on earth `father,' for you have one Father, and he is in heaven.
10. Nor are you to be called `teacher,' for you have one Teacher, the Christ.
11. The greatest among you will be your servant.
12. For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.
13. "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to.
14. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.
15. "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are.
16. "Woe to you, blind guides! You say, `If anyone swears by the temple, it means nothing; but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.'
17. You blind fools! Which is greater: the gold, or the temple that makes the gold sacred?
18. You also say, `If anyone swears by the altar, it means nothing; but if anyone swears by the gift on it, he is bound by his oath.'
19. You blind men! Which is greater: the gift, or the altar that makes the gift sacred?
20. Therefore, he who swears by the altar swears by it and by everything on it.
21. And he who swears by the temple swears by it and by the one who dwells in it.
22. And he who swears by heaven swears by God's throne and by the one who sits on it.
23. "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices--mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law--justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.
24. You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.
25. "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence.
26. Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean.
27. "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean.
28. In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness.
29. "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous.
30. And you say, `If we had lived in the days of our forefathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.'
31. So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets.
32. Fill up, then, the measure of the sin of your forefathers!
33. "You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?
34. Therefore I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town.
35. And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.
36. I tell you the truth, all this will come upon this generation.
37. "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing.
38. Look, your house is left to you desolate.
39. For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, `Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.' "
Mark 7:26-27
26. The woman was a Greek, born in Syrian Phoenicia. She begged Jesus to drive the demon out of her daughter.
27. "First let the children eat all they want," he told her, "for it is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs."
And St. Paul chimes in...
Galatians 5:12
As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!
Let them see...
Arrogance is boundless in some people.
As it should.
I'm late.
Did it START in religion and then get MOVED to blog?
I intended to make a statement about bringing up the Doctrine of Constantine in the first place, when no one else had.
I intended to make a statement about using that long-dead controversy to badger present-day Catholics.
And I intended to make a statement about the ethics of a person who would do that.
_enUS475&gws_rd=ssl#q=Madison+Ruppert+hijack+republic+focus&rls=com.microsoft:en-US:IE-Address
Ah... intentions!
Gotta love 'em!
(They make SUCH good paving stones!)
I hardly think it needs any more than what it has on it's plate right now.
Oh??
You can tell which is which by gauging a poster’s DISaffection for this rule.
...by a nattering nabob of negativity!
—DSC_Wanna_be(I’m right - you’re wrong - The End)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.