But please assist me: which one do you have in mind? — tim wood

Or is it possible you might just be mistaken? — tim wood

I don't disagree, but it matters how you take it on. Many times aggressive responses just contribute to the chaos. — T Clark

The question was, what to do about them what don't. The answer seems to be, nothing. — tim wood

The elephant in the room this time is obviously NOS4A2, and Tim's opening post is basically just a verbose attack piece on him, with the intent of seeking attention, gathering supporters, and of influencing the decision-making of the site staff. It's a lynching, basically. Gather your pitchforks, fellow villagers!
— S

I didn't even know who were talking about lynching until you brought it up. Till now, I just saw it as an opportunity to talk about an important issue. — T Clark

This thread follows on from exchanges in the Donald Trump thread.
If you want to, you can look under tim wood 'Comments' for detail.
— Amity

Is there any other poster than tim doesn't figure is a liar or a troll, though? — Terrapin Station

I haven't noticed any particularly unpleasant exchanges recently, but I suppose it depends which topics we follow. For all I know, the OP is complaining about me. — Pattern-chaser

So what do we do about it...drum roll....nothing. Or at least nothing much. This is a well moderated forum. The moderators usually get crap when they delete posts or ban people. I think they walk a good line between rigid control and chaos.
— T Clark

:up: Our mods seem to do a good job. Thanks to them! :up: — Pattern-chaser

I try to make sure I am not contributing to the problem. Make sure my posts are reasonably civil and respectful and not disruptive. Don’t call anybody a dick, no matter how much they deserve it. Make sure I try to stay on the subject as described in the OP. — T Clark

get over it and move on. — S

Gove concludes by saying a no-deal Brexit would pose undoubted risks and real challenges for the UK. But he says there would also be opportunities.

Opportunities for...
The Brexit Billiionaires.
Ch4 Dispatches 'The Brexit Millionaires' - those who've got rich from Brexit. First shown Monday 11th March this year.

https://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/episode-guide/

Risks as per the Operation Yellowhammer document which Gove had been planning to publish today, but dropped the idea because it was too negative. — Guardian Politics Live

It's not really redefining anything to portray a door as a wall (in some circumstances). That's just being flexible, and saying 'let's just see where this goes...'. :up: — Pattern-chaser

Yeah, totally irrelevant because Brexit is totally going to empower tenants and the working class because no Brit will ever have to adhere to those pesky EU regulations. — Benkei

Trump talked up the prospects for a US-UK trade agreement when the two men met face to face in Biarritz on Sunday, for the first time since Johnson became prime minister.

The US president said they would sign a “very big trade deal, bigger than we’ve ever had,” once the UK is freed from the “anchor” of the EU around its “ankle”.

Asked what his advice was for Brexit, the president said: “He [Johnson] needs no advice. He is the right man for the job.” Johnson said Trump was “on message there”. — Heather Stewart

Blair said Boris Johnson wanted an early election because it would be a “trap” for Labour. Rather than voting for an early election, MPs should insist on a referendum, he said:

If parliament cannot agree, then the right way to consult the people is not through a general election but through a referendum.

That means, as MPs from different parties have agreed, that there should not be a motion of no confidence but rather legislation preventing no deal.

Should the government seek an election, it should be refused in favour of a referendum.

It is counter-intuitive for opposition parties to refuse an election. But in this exceptional case, it is vital they do so as a matter of principle, until Brexit is resolved.

Brexit is an issue which stands on its own, was originally decided on its own and should be reconsidered on its own.

The Brexiteers are laying a trap, to seem as if pushed into an election, whilst actively preparing for one.

Blair said Jeremy Corbyn’s unpopularity would make an election more appealing to Johnson.

[The Brexiters] know there are two issues in British politics not one: Brexit; and the Corbyn leadership.

It is the interplay between these two issues that has shaped and defined British politics over the past 3-4 years.

Boris Johnson knows that if no deal Brexit stands on its own as a proposition, it might well fail. But if he mixes up the Brexit question with the Corbyn question in a general election, he could succeed, despite a majority being against a no deal Brexit, because some may fear a Corbyn premiership more. — Live feed from Guardian

It has suited [the Brexiters] to ride a wave of ‘just do it’ emotion, born of public impatience. You’re bored of Brexit. I’m bored of Brexit. We all are. But no serious political leader would suggest that we should take a decision of this magnitude by an effluxion of patience. — Tony Blair's speech

Does anyone know when the next general election will be? — Evil

The Guardian leads with “Johnson ready to sacrifice majority by withdrawing whip from rebels”.
The Telegraph has “PM warns rebel MPs: back me or be sacked”.
The Times’headline is “I’ll kick you out of the party, Johnson tells Tory rebels”.

The FT zeroes in on what a Corbyn government might do: “Labour would cost UK companies £300bn by shifting shares to staff”, as it predicts an election is “likely” amid Brexit turmoil. — The Guardian's Monday Briefing

But, but...lift doors can still look or function like a wall, when closed.
There needs to be a button, a knob or a key to open any such 'wall'.
— Amity

I like this, instead of expanding the point, you've redefined one of the main elements of the question. And that, my friends, is what we call "philosophy." — T Clark

Bo Jo goes rogue with prorogue. — Michael

Gove, who is in charge of planning for no deal, did not commit to abide by any law which rebel MPs will attempt to pass this week that could mandate an extension to article 50 in the event of no deal...

...The shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, said Gove’s hints that the government may ignore legislation was a major escalation. “The Tory attack on our democracy is getting worse. Gove has just refused to confirm.. that the government will accept legislation passed by Parliament,” he tweeted.

“This is a startling move beyond anything we’ve ever seen. Johnson government is becoming an elective dictatorship.”

...Scotland’s first minister Nicola Sturgeon said it was a “dangerous time for democracy” when ministers could not answer yes or no to whether they would abide by the law. “Not so much prorogue as just plain rogue,” she tweeted. “We mustn’t allow this behaviour to be normalised.”
— Jessica Elgot

Protests are a means by which law - and what motivates law - is challanged. Those who would prefer that protests are carnivals may as well join the circus. — StreetlightX

So if you praise the rule of law, then you need to walk the talk. There are many protest actions that can be made lawfully. But when you break the law in order to protest, then there’s a risk of trashing the very thing you say you’re trying to defend. — Wayfarer

The article really takes a plunge into the hearts of the protesters and the fear of living in a Chinese city is as real as it can get. The air of freedom and the sense of being unmonitored makes one feel alive and dignified as a human. — Wittgenstein

Everyone who goes to these protests risks getting sentenced to 6~10 years in prison. — Wittgenstein

The movement now is directionless and it is more about causing riots, — Wittgenstein

When I ask protesters why they are still coming to the streets, some say they don’t want to see Hong Kong turned into another Chinese city. They cite the detention of Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang, activists imprisoned for years on trumped up charges, or the plan for a nationwide “social credit system”, which they see as the culmination of a digital police state. Because I’ve spent the last year reporting on many of these issues, this answer often makes the deepest impression on me...


...Unlike five years ago, this is a leaderless movement. What’s striking is not only its scale and persistence, and the variation and escalation in tactics, but the degree of unity that it has maintained over two-and-a-half months. Even when they disagree over what actions to take, in particular the growing use of force, participants refuse to distance themselves from each other. What also unifies them is that no one pretends to know where this is heading...

...But at the same time, as the movement escalates and some protesters adopt increasingly violent tactics, and dozens get beaten and arrested every week, I am also gripped by a perpetual state of anxiety. What will happen to these young radicals who see themselves as “death fighters” struggling for Hong Kong’s future? What will happen to this wonderful city where I grew up?

Tell our story to the world” many have told me over the past 12 weeks, as they handed me biscuits and drinks, and offered me a hand to get up and down barriers and roadblocks. Their words sounded eerily similar to what Beijing residents told Hong Kong and foreign reporters during the Tiananmen crackdown 30 years ago. Just that this time, it is the Hongkongers who are fighting for their rights and freedom, even though they know there is little hope ahead of them.

“Hong Kong is dying anyway, so we might as well make a last struggle before we die,” many have said.

I feel humbled by their trust in me.
— Lily Kuo,Tania Branigan and Verna Yu,

Proroguing parliament is unlawful abuse of power, court told
MPs seek interdiction in Scotland as challenges also filed in Belfast and London

Boris Johnson’s decision to prorogue parliament is an unlawful abuse of power, a Scottish court has heard in the first of three legal challenges.

Aidan O’Neill QC, acting for a cross-party group of 75 MPs and peers, told a court in Edinburgh that the prime minister had trampled on more than 400 years of constitutional law by asking the Queen to prorogue parliament solely for political gain...

...Whichever side loses in the parallel cases is expected to appeal immediately, and the cases will soon be heard by the supreme court, potentially grouped together.

It is the first time in UK legal history the Queen’s decision to prorogue a Westminster parliament has been challenged in court. — Severin Carrell and Lisa O'Carroll

The second way that the question-asking approach works is, this tactic veritably helps you get to connect with folks on a more personal level. You will get to know them better and see what makes them “tick” – whether or not they had previously been a total stranger to you. And since they will force themselves to see why they believe the way they do, they will simultaneously get to know themselves better in the process! If you sprinkle in your own responses that you find in common with them (“you’ve come across hypocrites in the church, too? I know exactly how you feel! Here’s what happened to me…”), * *
you can actually start to build a relationship with them. And relationships can start to tear down those defensive walls people erect, making them more open to what you have to say about the Gospel.

What questions should you ask? They needn’t be anything overly complicated. Just keep the discussion going with a line of questions in a gentle, loving, and non-threatening manner. *
You could ask:

“What do you mean by that? Could you explain that to me a little better?”
“Why do you think that way?”
“How did you come to that conclusion?”
“Where did you get that information?”
“What’s the best case you could make for that?”

From here, you could get a bit more specific based on what your new friend brings up in the conversation, always putting them in the place where they’re forced to introspectively example themselves. — Scott Roberts

Rich words! .. I certainly did not intend to do that. I chose to respond only to what was necessary.
What did you think of the content regarding 'the rhetorical question' ?
— Amity
It has already been covered in prior material on this thread.
Did it lead to an improved understanding?
— Amity
Do you understand why you are asking this question? * — Serving Zion

I am sorry that it grated you, I don't know how many rude bible thumpers have assaulted you with scripture in the past,
but I know my own portion, how hurtful it can be. **
I hope this has explained my intention properly and that you might look back on what I have said as a friendly person to see that I have meant no harm. — Serving Zion

As for the rest of your post, I also wish to apologise double for having not thanked you for your contribution sooner. I can see that you really are a thoughtful, kind person, you did good work to gather the pieces that you brought to me, and you are motivated by a genuine love in doing so (Matthew 7:12). So it truly is regrettable that I failed to grasp that sooner, and that I didn't see the warning signs of this very thing in your words, and that we subsequently were severed and grappling for reconciliation.

I might have spoken differently to avoid such conflict if I had been a bit wiser, so I am grateful that you are who you are, and that despite finding that you are sometimes not appreciated fairly, still you have not held back from bringing your firstfruits. — Serving Zion

In evidence of this, I can show you
What I offer as honest discussion you dismiss as "calculated".
— Fooloso4

.. which is based upon my having advised that you not take such a calculated approach as you were intending to do, as an effort to try and change me. I said that you should just let truth manifest through your humble service [to me]. — Serving Zion

Well, I was looking for a way to present rhetorical questions to Zion in ways he might be more open to and knowledgeable about, given his quoting from the NT. — Coben

I think that is why there is so much of the problems I find amongst book-idolising people, it is essentially an intellectual dishonesty that prevents them from wrestling with the speaker for fear that they would lose their salvation by choosing to wrestle Him - and of course, that is to believe in quite a different character than the one who says "come now, let us reason together". — Serving Zion

I got these primarily from two sources....

https://blog.logos.com/2016/10/quickly-find-every-rhetorical-question-bible/
https://michaeljeshurun.wordpress.com/tag/rhetorical-questions-in-the-bible/
this second one is especially good since it categorises the different uses of rhetorical questions. IOW it catologues the benefits. And there are many benefits to this rhetorical device. So, one can then weigh the benefits against possible problems. It seems to me the writers of the Bible have implicitly come down on the side saying that the benefits outweigh the problems. — Coben

Because other cultures are different from biblical culture, they may use rhetorical questions in ways that are different from the ways used in New Testament. We will need to know what the function of a question is in a particular verse, and we will need to know how this meaning can be translated into the ethnic language. If a question in the Bible is consistently misunderstood in an ethnic language where the people use rhetorical questions only to ridicule or emphasize the negative aspects of an action, some adjustments may be necessary.

There are at least three possible ways to adjust rhetorical questions to make them understand in the way intended.
[ my bolds ]

1.Change the question into a statement.
2.Change negative questions to positive ones.
3. Supply an answer to the question.

In Romans 8:31 it says, “If God be for us, who can be against us?” We can supply the answer: “No one!”

In 2 Corinthians 6:15 it says, “And what concord hath Christ with Belial?” We can supply the answer: “None at all!”

In Mark 8:37 it says, “Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?” Because this verse is often taken to mean that a man can give something in exchange for his soul, an answer to the question may be given, “He can’t give anything in exchange for his soul!”

OK, thanks for that explanation — Serving Zion

FWIW, the NIV doesn't have the keywords that I was relying on "let us reason together". So perhaps that is where the whole deviation is rooted, and I will take on board to use links in future (as I said). I can't see any value in responding further, it's a derailment and off-topic to the thread. You could PM me if you have a personal grievance, more than happy to work that out in an appropriate place. — Serving Zion

Isaiah 1:18 New International Version (NIV)

18 “Come now, let us settle the matter,”
    says the Lord.
“Though your sins are like scarlet,
    they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
    they shall be like wool. — NIV

...Seeking out what is right and knowing what is right are not the same. What you cling to may not be right even though such doubt may compel you to cling to it even more. Is it possible a well phrased rhetorical question will help loosen your grip? Or is that the thing you want most to guard against?
— Fooloso4

I would advise to not take such a calculated approach, rather in humble service, allow the truth to manifest by purely honest discussion. James has observed that the "earthly, sensual, demonic wisdom is selfish and full of jealousy, but the wisdom that is from above is pure, peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy, impartial, not hypocritical". But yeah, you can see an evolution of thought through this thread that demonstrates a tendency to cut loose the wrong when the right comes to light. — Serving Zion

I don't believe I was wrong to assume so. It was the obvious explanation for why you would object to the action of referencing rather than asking for an explanation. — Serving Zion

Referencing scripture as a response - how helpful is that ? Sounds somewhat preachy...
...So - are you saying you can't remember the point ?

But while I could remember the details of the conversation yesterday, today it has slipped my mind. I just trust that if it becomes necessary to explain, those details will come back to me, because it is certainly in there but there seems to be something blocking it :)
— Serving Zion

While it is not necessary to explain, it might help to put your question in context.
What were the differences between you in 'handling the scripture as intended' ? — Amity

I do understand the internal pressures that impede us from going where others desire to lead us. I have years of experience in these matters. Even when I provide links, there are some people who, being prejudiced against the value of scripture, will simply not click it. — Serving Zion

So it equips me with experience to understand how such behaviours, regrettable though they may be, in fact can and do occur. — Serving Zion

Speculative reasoning. Let me know if you need more information to help with that. — Serving Zion

You have a predisposition to oppose the use of scripture, because you think it is "preachy" and that appears to be a despicable practice in your opinion. — Serving Zion

preachy - adjective
INFORMAL
having or showing a tendency to give moral advice in a tedious or self-righteous way.
"his patriotic pictures had a preachy tone"

synonyms:moralistic, moralizing, sanctimonious, self-righteous, holier-than-thou, priggish, sententious, pietistic, didactic, dogmatic; — Oxford online dictionary

It is easy to find Isaiah 1:18 or any scriptural reference. Not so easy to see the relevance here.
— Amity
Alright. Well, as I said, make of it what you will. I had remembered that scripture because it shows God invites reasoning and that is contrary to the spirit that produces views such as what I was addressing on Sunday, and that interprets questions as having rhetorical value without first answering the question. I thought you might rather benefit by that perspective. — Serving Zion

Isaiah 1:18 New International Version (NIV)

18 “Come now, let us settle the matter,”
    says the Lord.
“Though your sins are like scarlet,
    they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red as crimson,
    they shall be like wool.
— NIV

I think you're making too much out of this, although we could probably say that about 95% of the threads on the forum. — T Clark