Ah me.
You have to realize, I am not so young as I was nor so polarized At the age and stage of Number 1 Son I might well have been more passionate and prolonged [he by the bye, went through a stage of frequently being duious as to whether he existed].
These days, I am more aware of having been on both sides, and my tendency to see and argue both sides of an issue [sometimes manifesting as arguing against whatever the other has asserted] increasingly takes precedence over my tendency to see issues as black and white, red all over only when one side draws blood.
Whatever - i have less energy for the inhderently unwinnable debate than I had.
It is not arrogance per se that I object to. I am Outward ennea-5 AND Linguist de Luxe, son of two Classicists, grandson of two lawyers, father of a specimen who sees himself as pretty hot stuff, and I am Lord [under God] of Creation and will take on anyone in arrogance. Your arrogance, for example - or objective humility if you prefer, Awesomely Glorious - does not disturb me, so that you speak seriously and to the point.
But there are those - I will mention here my brother-in-law - who get their kicks out of demonstrating that they can speak and sing better and do more push-ups than a newborn or the old gentleman in the corner in a coma.
Whose initial posts and whose repartee are not sincere, interesting or to the point. Whose arrogance is snobbery in the most literal etymological sense [that, O ye whom the shoe fits, is the kind of nasty crack an arrogant but reasonably competent philologer comes up with]. With whom I will not engage even on the issue of the Real Presence].
As for +/- God - that topic has been cycled repeatedly, quite competently, and I frankly would rather accept Zwingli's offer [if you don't know it, I might just post it in as bit] and move on to debating with you, Master Pedant, 91, Angelrho [is the H there? My Greek wants it] the Stinking Clammyweed White Paper on Abortion.
Or whatever.
15 Dec 2010, 10:01 am
