I would think the why of Revelation would be pretty clear. The Apostle John is in exile on a small island and has an incredible vision of Jesus, of heaven, and of the future. Nothing else short, I suppose, of Daniel or Isaiah can match it's depth of revelation, so quite naturally it was written. In fact, John was commanded to write it. Now a person can say that John was drunk, or depressed, or even psychotic, but he clearly did not see it that way. I can find no reason at all to suppose it was written in code, nor do I see any reason to suppose it was written after the events it describes. In fact, that would seem to be an absurd position, as would be the suggestion that someone other than John wrote the book at some point in the second century. But if you can explain why a person should believe that, then I'm all ears. Just please, please don't tell us that you have already done so because you absolutely have not.

I was waiting for the other shoe to drop....

Never give JL a shoe to beat you over the head with.

Quote:

---

Never give JL a shoe to beat you over the head with.

---

Learn to be accurate and honest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Learn to be accurate and honest.

---

...Or get beat upside the head?

Like you frequently do to me? 8D

Only when you're NASTY.

We have an old saying here that I imagine you have heard. "Don't pxss in your boot, pour it on my head, and then try to tell me it's raining." That's where I am with a lot of this. If you make a point that you can't support, then just admit it. Not a big deal. But try and tell me it's raining??? That does not go well.

No evidence is good enough for you, and you tend to get nasty and dismissive when you don't agree with someone. Can't you just disagree and leave it at that?

You should assume that people are peeing on your head on purpose...maybe it is raining. We're just conversating, not invading your backyard and stealing the lawn furniture.

Quote:

---

No evidence

---

So far that is what has been presented.

Quote:

---

and you tend to get nasty and dismissive when you don't agree with someone. Can't you just disagree and leave it at that?

---

You mean like you do?

Quote:

---

I enjoyed my turn to bash the powers that be at the time.

---

so you think that the contributors here are the powers that be?

Do you feel I have bashed you personally?

Quote:

---

Do you feel I have bashed you personally?

---

Do I really need to go back to the "head up the Dufus's arse" comments, or would you rather stop the silliness and just be honest? I'm not going to go back and comb your hundreds of past comments, and I'm not worried about it, but yeah, you have been personal in the past. We've bashed each other some. Not so much recently, but in the past.

As for me "bashing" someone, I don't think asking a person to be honest and open rather than evasive is bashing. When a person wants to say she has answered a question when both of us know she has not, then to point it out is just part of a discussion to me, and not so much "bashing". To treat a person like an intelligent, accomplished adult fully capable of rational discussion just does not strike me as bashing, but I will try and temper my comments with greater kindness in the future. I am aware they do not come across frequently as I intend them to do. I do not mind you calling me to task, but for you to try and portray yourself as "Mr. Objectivity" on this board would seem to be quite a stretch.

I have my biases like everybody else but you wingers get my goat sometimes. Especially YOU with your incessant insistence of "evidence" while having none of your own. Now if you think it's okay to be on the attack then best be ready to get it back and then some. I was hoping that the dufus getting booted out the WH would move you to extricate your head from his arse or at least stop kicking when someone grabs your ankles to pull you free, so I try to give you space for that, but you're right I'm not the most objective, though I do try, but what do you expect when you talk crazy and act NASTY?

PS.

My query was directed at Clete.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

My query was directed at Clete.

---

I wasn't really responding to you tal but to jl but the question still stands do you think the contributors here are the powers that be?

I understand Tal. No one likes it when we get our mail read.

you really want to be critical of someone else “talking crazy and acting nasty”? Hmmm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

I wasn't really responding to you tal but to jl but the question still stands do you think the contributors here are the powers that be?

---

Naw, just a bunch of folks with opinions and points of view.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I understand Tal. No one likes it when we get our mail read.

you really want to be critical of someone else “talking crazy and acting nasty”? Hmmm.

---

Yep! Can't handle the heat................!

Quote:

---

Yep! Can't handle the heat................!

---

Oh, sometimes you can. Don't be too hard on yourself.

Making the dufus a one term president made the kitchen a much cooler place. Getting rid of his cult of sycophants and butt kissers is a breath of fresh air. No time to celebrate though as cleaning up the mess of another repub prez won't be that easy for ole Joe, as the dufus has already started to pardon the turkeys while he dithers with the sickness and death ravaging the country.

In the meantime, you have the sterling displays of Covid character from the Calif. gov and the Denver mayor to "boast" of. Both dems, I might add. As to the rest, we'll see whether you choose to fit into the "cult of sycophants and butt kissers" yourself. When your "ole Joe" starts to mess up, as he will, then your response will be interesting.