Not gonna take it anymore - Definition [see Fed Up]
(n.) Descriptor usually found at bottom of reply. Frequently describes an attribute of poster.
See Howard Beale
Not gonna take it anymore
Posted on 09/02/2011 9:07:47 AM PDT by marshmallow
Minneapolis, Minnesota (CNN) –Prior to 2006, few people even knew that then-Minnesota state legislator Keith Ellison was a Muslim. Because of his English name, he said, no one thought to ask.
But five years ago, when he ran for a seat in the United States House of Representatives - a race he would go on to win - word of his religious affiliation began to spread.
“When I started running for Congress it actually took me by surprise that so many people were fascinated with me being the first Muslim in Congress,” said Ellison, a Democrat now serving his third term in the House.
“But someone said to me, ‘Look Keith, think of a person of Japanese origin running for Congress six years after Pearl Harbor–this might be a news story.’”
Though Ellison's status as the first Muslim elected to Congress is widely known, fewer are aware that he was born into a Catholic family in Detroit and was brought up attending Catholic schools.
But he said he was never comfortable with that faith.
“I just felt it was ritual and dogma,” Ellison said. “Of course, that’s not the reality of Catholicism, but it’s the reality I lived. So I just kind of lost interest and stopped going to Mass unless I was required to.”
It wasn’t until he was a student at Wayne State University in Detroit when Ellison began, “looking for other things.”
(Excerpt) Read more at religion.blogs.cnn.com ...
Beats heck out of road rage. It's possible you are not aware of that.
Yes, I’m certain he does not suffer from road rage. He is the one traveling in the left lane, going 40 miles an hour, not bothering to look in his rear view mirror to see the massive traffic jam, since the speed limit is 65. I’m certain the drivers behind him are praying to that Mary statue, that she would intercede on their behalf, to make him get over and out of the way.
Okay. If you say so.
THAT's assuming facts not in evidence. So, except for their being, in your view, wrong, those Catholics who repeat assertions with arguments which would only persuade those who already agree with them are really doing the right thing, except for the wrong side.
The "flogging" will continue as long as longsuffering and doctrine continue for reproof and rebuke and exhortation.
Ah. So declamation in place of conversation. Carry on then. Now I see why your side doesn't think it right to pray for humility.
FR needs a like button.
Don’t pretzel converse with me today, MD. I’m really not in the mood. You are the one who first used the term “flogging” for providing Scripture to defend a position. Humility? How about TRUTH? Humility without the truth is fake. And deceiving. It’s a work of the carnal mind. It’s an outward show of piety. Without truth, it’s cheap and insulting.
Not gonna take it anymore - Definition [see Fed Up]
(n.) Descriptor usually found at bottom of reply. Frequently describes an attribute of poster.
See Howard Beale
Not gonna take it anymore
It was a TYPE of Christ pointing TO HIM
It's either a type of Christ or a pointing to Christ (not a type). My point was that since the Ark is definitely NOT God, making it a type would be more in the direction of blasphemy, responding to your charge of same.
Mary is not God and carried God. The type here for Ark/Mary is more clear - and I believe, less blasphemous for the reason above.
"Nay!", I say!
We caprines have GOATherds - NOT SHEPards!
(Think Sound of Music)
Them 'some' people make it tough for EVERY religion; doncha think?
And yet; so many ARE!
I know.. sorrta like sticking a statue of her in a bath tub
You think that’s true in Hebrew? Real question.
If it weren’t for some people, this would be a pretty boring forum ;)
They should come on Free Republic if they REALLY want to do penance.
Actually I used the term “flogging” as a reference to the old saying “to flog a dead horse” meaning to return to a topic which has already been discussed many many times with little resolution because I thought bringing up the intercession of the saints YET AGAIN was going to be a waste of time.
What seems obvious to one side seems artificial and sophistical to the other. One side thinks its arguments from Scripture are solid and persuasive while the other thinks they're a phony as a threedollar bill.
But if you want to go over it again, that's your affair.
(I would like to observe here that FR'sspell check offered "Euro dollar" for my original "three-dollar". Just sayin'.
One of the reasons, one of the things in the back of my alleged mind which led me to bring up the question of Pauline Mysticism was that I think that area of question might shed light on the differences about the meaning and, so to speak, the application of koinonia.
As a hint, we all are much in accord over what we are saved FROM. But we have very different ideas of what we are saved FOR and TO.
LOL! Why woul...nevermind, just LOL!
Well, MD, it was said with an eye to humor. Sorry about that.
Otherwise, it was said to state an agreement with MM's assessment of what I believe to be a faulty teaching of the RCC.
I found great joy in praising MM! :D
Hoss
It is always fun to praise the good. That’s why at least SOME worship is a group endeavor.
So I’m glad you found joy.
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.