The Club Cease Fire / Truce Thread

[DJR210]

So weed has raisins in it these days?

how crappy is your monitor??

[Blizzardwizard]

Chill out, mate. You're gonna have a coronary.

Don't get my hopes up, you a fellow Brit ??

[Avante]

I was 16 when I had your mom.

Yes you were.

[Jeff Leppard]

Don't get my hopes up, you a fellow Brit ??

I lived in Birmingham for a bit as a boy, but I'm a Scot through and through.

[Blizzardwizard]

I lived in Birmingham for a bit as a boy, but I'm a Scot through and through.

You a Rangers fan?

[xmas1997]

When is the last time you said that to me?

Be honest.

Honestly?

When we discussed the Raiders relocation, not that long ago.

I admitted you were right about L.A. being the more probable choice, but you lost track of that because we were in a debate about other issues concerning it, some of which I was right about, such as that S.A. had done a lot more work than was presently reported and when I said that the report that they paid for was not set in stone and had been altered recently, and this was a few days later verified to be the case.
Yet you made a huge deal about it calling me a liar etc. your usual distortions because you could not and would not accept the fact that you were wrong.

You made a huge blunder with your Christian dogma over generalization but you refused to admit you were wrong about that too even though I gave you lots of proof to show you where you erred.

And then you have the gall to call me arrogant when in fact it is you.

I admitted a mistake earlier today.

Kinda blows your theory out of the water.

You admitted no mistakes today to me, that is just another lie you are trying to spin for others on here.

If that were true then you wold have given an example like I did, but you can't, so you lie.

[Jeff Leppard]

You a Rangers fan?

Indeed, mate. Kyle is my boy.

[ChumpDumper]

Honestly?

When we discussed the Raiders relocation, not that long ago.

I admitted you were right about L.A. being the more probable choice, but you lost track of that because we were in a debate about other issues concerning it, some of which I was right about, such as that S.A. had done a lot more work than was presently reported and when I said that the report that they paid for was not set in stone and had been altered recently, and this was a few days later verified to be the case.
Yet you made a huge deal about it calling me a liar etc. your usual distortions because you could not and would not accept the fact that you were wrong.

You made a huge blunder with your Christian dogma over generalization but you refused to admit you were wrong about that too even though I gave you lots of proof to show you where you erred.

And then you have the gall to call me arrogant when in fact it is you.

You admitted no mistakes today to me, that is just another lie you are trying to spin for others on here.

If that were true then you wold have given an example like I did, but you can't, so you lie.

I wasn't wrong about dogma. I used the dictionary definition. You used a different one.

As for the link, are you asking for one?

Just say please. It's the civil thing to do.

[Blizzardwizard]

Indeed, mate. Kyle is my boy.

Good on ya, best team in Scotland

[xmas1997]

I wasn't wrong about dogma. I used the dictionary definition. You used a different one.

As for the link, are you asking for one?

Just say please. It's the civil thing to do.

That is another lie.

If you had bothered to read what I wrote, you would have seen that I started out with the definition that you posted.

That was the only way to competently show you the difference and "WHY" your over simplification and over generalization was wrong.

There was no other way to show you.

I didn't make an issue of it until you started to lie, distort, and try to confuse others as to the truth.

[xmas1997]

And you are correct, you were not wrong about dogma.

But you were wrong about "Christian dogma", and that was what you said, "Christian dogma".

Had you only used dogma then I would have only argued the difference between "doctrine", which is what you should have said, and "dogma".

[ChumpDumper]

That is another lie.

If you had bothered to read what I wrote, you would have seen that I started out with the definition that you posted.

That was the only way to competently show you the difference and "WHY" your over simplification and over generalization was wrong.

There was no other way to show you.

I didn't make an issue of it until you started to lie, distort, and try to confuse others as to the truth.

but it wasn't wrong. It was the dictionary definition of the word.

Nothing you wrote changed that.

I agree there are different definitions, but the one I used was just as valid as any.

[ChumpDumper]

And you are correct, you were not wrong about dogma.

But you were wrong about "Christian dogma", and that was what you said, "Christian dogma".

Had you only used dogma then I would have only argued the difference between "doctrine", which is what you should have said, and "dogma".

The dictionary definition can be used for christianity as well as any other religion.

[xmas1997]

but it wasn't wrong. It was the dictionary definition of the word.

Nothing you wrote changed that.

I agree there are different definitions, but the one I used was just as valid as any.

It was only valid in respect to ALL religions, and an OVER generalization and a misrepresentation, thus another distortion of the truth.

Had you just used "dogma" and not what you did use, "Christian dogma", which is a "specific" reference, then I would have had no issue with it other than you mistook dogma to mean "doctrine".

The context you were using to Avante at the time was not dogma, it was doctrine.

[ChumpDumper]

It was only valid in respect to ALL religions, and an OVER generalization and thus another distortion of the truth.

Had you just used "dogma" and not what you did use, "Christian dogma", and that is a "specific" reference, thus I would have had no issue with it other than you mistook dogma to mean "doctrine".

The context you were using to Avante at the time was not dogma, it was doctrine.

Not according to the dictionary definition. Putting "Christian" before it doesn't change the definition; it only specifies.

[xmas1997]

Not according to the dictionary definition. Putting "Christian" before it doesn't change the definition; it only specifies.

You just proved my the point I was trying to make to you, yes, it "specifies" a particular dogma or dogmata that are shared by Christians ONLY, not all the other religions on the face of the planet.

And I went on to give you the COMMONLY SHARED Christian dogma so that you could see that you were in actuality talking about "doctrine" in that particular denomination that most of the other denominations did not share alike.
Thus they were not Christian dogma. At best, some of those tenets were Christian doctrine, but not dogma.

You brought up a commandment as an example, but the commandments are not dogma to most of the Christian denominations, they are merely doctrine.

[ChumpDumper]

You just proved my the point I was trying to make to you, yes, it "specifies" a particular dogma or dogmata that are shared by Christians ONLY, not all the other religions on the face of the planet.

And I went on to give you the COMMONLY SHARED Christian dogma so that you could see that you were in actuality talking about "doctrine" in that particular denomination that most of the other denominations did not share alike.
Thus they were not Christian dogma. At best, some of those tenets were Christian doctrine, but not dogma.

You brought up a commandment as an example, but the commandments are not dogma to most of the Christian denominations, they are merely doctrine.

Again, I was using the dictionary definition, which still fits even after putting the word "Christian" before it. That word doesn't change the definition.

[DJR210]

So what would it take to have ChumpDumper and xmas1997 drop the mul hreaded spat? Is there any hope for peace?

[ChumpDumper]

So what would it take to have ChumpDumper and xmas1997 drop the mul hreaded spat? Is there any hope for peace?

I'm fine with agreeing to disagree.

[Blizzardwizard]

So what would it take to have ChumpDumper and xmas1997 drop the mul hreaded spat? Is there any hope for peace?

WWE match, but then again, Silverblk mystix would just hit ChumpDumper with a chair whilst Xmas was getting into an argument with the ref.

[xmas1997]

Again, I was using the dictionary definition, which still fits even after putting the word "Christian" before it. That word doesn't change the definition.

No, it does not.

It is true that that as far as the word "dogma" goes, the dictionary definition is correct, and I acknowledged that to you.

But it is an "OVER SIMPLIFICATION" in the context you were using it because you did not simply say dogma.

No, you said "Christian dogma" and not "dogma".

Honestly, I refuse to make fun of you on this issue or ridicule you anymore about it because I could and already have, but that solves nothing.

I will try just between man to man to explain in brief the difference so your contextual use of Christian dogma was neither dogma nor doctrine.

And if you "get it", then you "get it", and if you don't, then I will not make an issue of it like trolls are wont to do.

"In a nuts , all dogma is clearly and infallibly defined doctrine. Nothing new can be added, only clarified and developed. For example let's look at moral doctrine. There is not one case that I am aware of where moral doctrine has been defined as dogma. Thus there is only social doctrine, but no social dogma. The cir stances may change but the principles don't. But none of the specifics of morality are dogma."

DOCTRINE: "a set of ideas or beliefs that are taught or believed to be true"

DOGMA: "a belief or set of beliefs that is accepted by the members of a group without being questioned or doubted"

WORLDVIEW: "concepts that include each particular denominations philosophical concept, to a synonym for doctrine"


I honestly hope this helps to clear up any misunderstandings, and if so, then my last question to you is "when did you admit to me that you were wrong?"

You said you did today.

Was that just another lie?

[Blake]

Let it go. let it go.

[xmas1997]

I admitted a mistake earlier today. Kinda blows your theory out of the water.

When did you admit to me you made a mistake?

In the interest of this possible truce, and no offense meant when I say this again, but this sounds like another of your lies to me.

So what did you admit to me that you were wrong about?

If you can tell me, and show me where, then I will admit that I my assessment of you could change for the better.

[xmas1997]

Let it go. let it go.

You're next.

You and I have had contention the longest, so we can either resolve it and have peace, or we can escalate it even more.

[DJR210]

I'm fine with agreeing to disagree.

No, it does not.

It is true that that as far as the word "dogma" goes, the dictionary definition is correct, and I acknowledged that to you.

But it is an "OVER SIMPLIFICATION" in the context you were using it because you did not simply say dogma.

No, you said "Christian dogma" and not "dogma".

Honestly, I refuse to make fun of you on this issue or ridicule you anymore about it because I could and already have, but that solves nothing.

I will try just between man to man to explain in brief the difference so your contextual use of Christian dogma was neither dogma nor doctrine.

And if you "get it", then you "get it", and if you don't, then I will not make an issue of it like trolls are wont to do.

"In a nuts , all dogma is clearly and infallibly defined doctrine. Nothing new can be added, only clarified and developed. For example let's look at moral doctrine. There is not one case that I am aware of where moral doctrine has been defined as dogma. Thus there is only social doctrine, but no social dogma. The cir stances may change but the principles don't. But none of the specifics of morality are dogma."

DOCTRINE: "a set of ideas or beliefs that are taught or believed to be true"

DOGMA: "a belief or set of beliefs that is accepted by the members of a group without being questioned or doubted"

WORLDVIEW: "concepts that include each particular denominations philosophical concept, to a synonym for doctrine"


I honestly hope this helps to clear up any misunderstandings, and if so, then my last question to you is "when did you admit to me that you were wrong?"

You said you did today.

Was that just another lie?

There you have it. ChumDumper agrees to disagree, then you get the ginormous response fueling the fire from xmas1997. If xmas1997 agrees to disagree, it's over, but at this point it really appears like xmas1997 is not interested in squashing this.