Oldbear83 said:
The definition of ad hominem:
ad hominem
[ad hmnm]
adjective
adverb
ad hominem (adjective)
[ol](of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining: [/ol]
"an ad hominem response"
BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Oldbear83 said:
The definition of ad hominem:
ad hominem
[ad hmnm]
adjective
adverb
ad hominem (adjective)
[ol](of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining: [/ol]
"an ad hominem response"
Yes, thank you for proving mypointerror.
Oldbear83 said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:Oldbear83 said:
The definition of ad hominem:
ad hominem
[ad hmnm]
adjective
adverb
ad hominem (adjective)
[ol](of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining: [/ol]
"an ad hominem response"
Yes, thank you for proving mypointerror.
Corrected.
BUDOS said:
" I just proved his statement was false above, and he admitted it. That is if you care to read, or even know how to read, I think that makes YOU the moron."
Sorry guys I really wanted to take a hiatus and let you guys get back to constructive conversation. And I do hope you understand why I want to respond. I think I would like BTD to explain why he thinks that I lied and how I admitted it. Once he explains it I will have a better understanding of either how I lied or why he believes I lied.
What would help me is if anyone who has been keeping up with this give and take could point out to me what I said which may appear to be false.
BUDOS said:
" I just proved his statement was false above, and he admitted it. That is if you care to read, or even know how to read, I think that makes YOU the moron."
Sorry guys I really wanted to take a hiatus and let you guys get back to constructive conversation. And I do hope you understand why I want to respond. I think I would like BTD to explain why he thinks that I lied and how I admitted it. Once he explains it I will have a better understanding of either how I lied or why he believes I lied.
What would help me is if anyone who has been keeping up with this give and take could point out to me what I said which may appear to be false.
BUDOS said:
BTD, after reading your post I have to say that I don't think I have laughed so hard in quite a long time. Your sense of humor is a bit, shall we say, different. Although one of my minors was psychology, as intelligent as you continue to prove to us you are , certainly you are aware of the following facts:
"A person does not have to exhibit every single characteristic of a personality disorder to be diagnosed with one. Diagnoses are typically based on a threshold, where a person must meet a specific minimum number of criteria from a larger list.
How Thresholds Work
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) uses a "polythetic" approach for most personality disorders, meaning there are multiple ways to meet the diagnostic requirements.
* Minimum Symptom Count: For many disorders, such as Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) or Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), a patient generally needs to meet at least five out of ninelisted symptoms.
* Diverse Presentations: Because patients only need a subset of symptoms, two people with the same diagnosis can have very different outward behaviors.
* Core Requirements: Beyond specific traits, a clinician must confirm that the pattern of behavior is:
* Persistent (stable over time, typically starting by adolescence).
* Inflexible (present across many different social and personal situations).
* Distressing (causing significant impairment in work, social, or other important areas of life).
Common Variations in Diagnosis
* Subclinical Traits: Many people have some "traits" of a personality disorder without meeting the full clinical threshold for a diagnosis.
* Mixed Traits (PD-TS): If someone has significant personality-related difficulties but doesn't perfectly "fit" one specific disorder, they may be diagnosed with Personality DisorderTrait Specified (PD-TS), formerly known as "not otherwise specified".
* Co-occurrence: It is common for individuals to meet the criteria for multiple personality disorders simultaneously, as many symptoms overlap between clusters.
For a formal evaluation, it is essential to consult a licensed mental health professional, as they use specialized clinical interviews to distinguish these long-term patterns from temporary stress or other conditions.
In other words, specifically related to those two terms I listed, I would appreciate you pointing out where you believed I lied. I am looking forward to this hopefully being my last post on this issue. Despite my best efforts, you are beginning to get on my nerves.
BusyTarpDuster2017 said:BUDOS said:
" I just proved his statement was false above, and he admitted it. That is if you care to read, or even know how to read, I think that makes YOU the moron."
Sorry guys I really wanted to take a hiatus and let you guys get back to constructive conversation. And I do hope you understand why I want to respond. I think I would like BTD to explain why he thinks that I lied and how I admitted it. Once he explains it I will have a better understanding of either how I lied or why he believes I lied.
What would help me is if anyone who has been keeping up with this give and take could point out to me what I said which may appear to be false.
And I'm afraid to ask, but I have to - you do know that me calling you a liar is NOT an ad hominem, right? Or do you join your fellow marian idolatry deniers (curtpenn, OldBear) in their failed comprehension?
Consider this a test of your intelligence and rationality, and it'll tell me whether I'm wasting my time with you or not.
BUDOS said:
No BTD, I am the one that is tired of wasting my time.
We are done here.
BUDOS said:
Coke
Thank you for what appears to be an articulate yet fairly concise summary of the position of the Catholic Church. I have some questions and/or points to share.
My take is that when the apostles were establishing churches in the various regions, they selected/instructed elders to lead each one and gave them some general parameters to follow/enforce within their respective congregations.
Where does it say that they have to give part of their resources to some distant authority or that their elders/pastor had to be approved by that distant authority. To me each church/congregation is its own entity, and its elders/leaders lead and are responsible for that.
Christ is the head of every church not another layer of man imposed authority.
Whether or not one is a Baptist, Catholic, Nazarene or whatever is secondary to is that person a Christian and their actions reflect that belief. I see no need for a pope, cardinal or regional officer whose authority exceeds that of the elders of that church, provided the congregation has sufficient power in elder selection and a few key functions of that church.
Now you give me your take on that and let's see where we go as to areas we agree/disagree or declare neutral.
Coke Bear said:BUDOS said:
Coke
Thank you for what appears to be an articulate yet fairly concise summary of the position of the Catholic Church. I have some questions and/or points to share.
My take is that when the apostles were establishing churches in the various regions, they selected/instructed elders to lead each one and gave them some general parameters to follow/enforce within their respective congregations.
Where does it say that they have to give part of their resources to some distant authority or that their elders/pastor had to be approved by that distant authority. To me each church/congregation is its own entity, and its elders/leaders lead and are responsible for that.
Christ is the head of every church not another layer of man imposed authority.
Whether or not one is a Baptist, Catholic, Nazarene or whatever is secondary to is that person a Christian and their actions reflect that belief. I see no need for a pope, cardinal or regional officer whose authority exceeds that of the elders of that church, provided the congregation has sufficient power in elder selection and a few key functions of that church.
Now you give me your take on that and let's see where we go as to areas we agree/disagree or declare neutral.
Thanks for your response and apologies for my delay.
We both agree that Christ is the Head of the Body of Christ. But is he physically on earth making decisions for Church today? Before He ascended into heaven, the promised an advocate the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit guides us all. However, the Catholic Church believes that the Holy Spirit guides and protects his Church and the Pope is a unique way.
Even though we all have the Holy Spirit, we can be lead astray. Let's look at what happened to those elders who had "general parameters to follow/enforce within their respective congregations" in the first century in Corinth
In A.D. 96, some younger church members had unjustly deposed elder, established leaders (presbyters). Clement (in his role as Bishop of Rome) wrote to those in Corinth and instructed them to repent, called them to unity, and to reinstate the leaders (presbyters.) Before the first century is even over, we have communities already going astray.
In A.D. 180, Irenaeus of Lyon wrote in his work, Against Heresies, "For it is a matter of necessity that every church should agree with this church (in Rome), on account of its preeminent authority." He then gives a list of the bishops of Rome dating back to Peter.
Even with a central figure leading the Church, we still have heresies to combat. In the early 4th century, the Arian heresy (denying that Jesus had equal divinity with God the Father, but he was created and of finite nature.)
How do we decide what "some general parameters to follow/enforce within their respective congregations" are? Who gets to make that decision?
Without a central structure, we have chaos. Essentially, it gives everyone the right to choose what they want to believe. Simply inspect what has happened in Protestantism protestants can't decide what the essential doctrines are much less which side to believe. Take baptism for instance, protestants disagree on whether it is salvific or not. They disagree on infant baptism. Baptism is a MAJOR point of Christianity. Christ commanded us to do it in the Great Commission, yet there's still disagreement on what it does, who should get it, and how it is to be done.
Finally, with respect to authority, EVERY organization in the world has a leader. It doesn't matter if it is a business, school, police department, military, city, country, etc. Without a leader, we have no direction. Christ came to earth and established a Church, not the Bible. He never commanded anyone to write a word. He didn't want Christianity to flounder. He gave us a leader of his Church.
Once again, thanks for responding. I look forward to discussing any issue here that you may disagree with.
BUDOS said:Coke Bear said:BUDOS said:
Coke
Thank you for what appears to be an articulate yet fairly concise summary of the position of the Catholic Church. I have some questions and/or points to share.
My take is that when the apostles were establishing churches in the various regions, they selected/instructed elders to lead each one and gave them some general parameters to follow/enforce within their respective congregations.
Where does it say that they have to give part of their resources to some distant authority or that their elders/pastor had to be approved by that distant authority. To me each church/congregation is its own entity, and its elders/leaders lead and are responsible for that.
Christ is the head of every church not another layer of man imposed authority.
Whether or not one is a Baptist, Catholic, Nazarene or whatever is secondary to is that person a Christian and their actions reflect that belief. I see no need for a pope, cardinal or regional officer whose authority exceeds that of the elders of that church, provided the congregation has sufficient power in elder selection and a few key functions of that church.
Now you give me your take on that and let's see where we go as to areas we agree/disagree or declare neutral.
Thanks for your response and apologies for my delay.
We both agree that Christ is the Head of the Body of Christ. But is he physically on earth making decisions for Church today? Before He ascended into heaven, the promised an advocate the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit guides us all. However, the Catholic Church believes that the Holy Spirit guides and protects his Church and the Pope is a unique way.
Even though we all have the Holy Spirit, we can be lead astray. Let's look at what happened to those elders who had "general parameters to follow/enforce within their respective congregations" in the first century in Corinth
In A.D. 96, some younger church members had unjustly deposed elder, established leaders (presbyters). Clement (in his role as Bishop of Rome) wrote to those in Corinth and instructed them to repent, called them to unity, and to reinstate the leaders (presbyters.) Before the first century is even over, we have communities already going astray.
In A.D. 180, Irenaeus of Lyon wrote in his work, Against Heresies, "For it is a matter of necessity that every church should agree with this church (in Rome), on account of its preeminent authority." He then gives a list of the bishops of Rome dating back to Peter.
Even with a central figure leading the Church, we still have heresies to combat. In the early 4th century, the Arian heresy (denying that Jesus had equal divinity with God the Father, but he was created and of finite nature.)
How do we decide what "some general parameters to follow/enforce within their respective congregations" are? Who gets to make that decision?
Without a central structure, we have chaos. Essentially, it gives everyone the right to choose what they want to believe. Simply inspect what has happened in Protestantism protestants can't decide what the essential doctrines are much less which side to believe. Take baptism for instance, protestants disagree on whether it is salvific or not. They disagree on infant baptism. Baptism is a MAJOR point of Christianity. Christ commanded us to do it in the Great Commission, yet there's still disagreement on what it does, who should get it, and how it is to be done.
Finally, with respect to authority, EVERY organization in the world has a leader. It doesn't matter if it is a business, school, police department, military, city, country, etc. Without a leader, we have no direction. Christ came to earth and established a Church, not the Bible. He never commanded anyone to write a word. He didn't want Christianity to flounder. He gave us a leader of his Church.
Once again, thanks for responding. I look forward to discussing any issue here that you may disagree with.
.... Thanks for taking the conversational/narrative format, as it's the one I prefer as well.
BUDOS said:
BTD, after reading your post I have to say that I don't think I have laughed so hard in quite a long time. Your sense of humor is a bit, shall we say, different. Although one of my minors was psychology, as intelligent as you continue to prove to us you are , certainly you are aware of the following facts:
"A person does not have to exhibit every single characteristic of a personality disorder to be diagnosed with one. Diagnoses are typically based on a threshold, where a person must meet a specific minimum number of criteria from a larger list.
How Thresholds Work
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) uses a "polythetic" approach for most personality disorders, meaning there are multiple ways to meet the diagnostic requirements.
* Minimum Symptom Count: For many disorders, such as Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) or Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), a patient generally needs to meet at least five out of ninelisted symptoms.
* Diverse Presentations: Because patients only need a subset of symptoms, two people with the same diagnosis can have very different outward behaviors.
* Core Requirements: Beyond specific traits, a clinician must confirm that the pattern of behavior is:
* Persistent (stable over time, typically starting by adolescence).
* Inflexible (present across many different social and personal situations).
* Distressing (causing significant impairment in work, social, or other important areas of life).
Common Variations in Diagnosis
* Subclinical Traits: Many people have some "traits" of a personality disorder without meeting the full clinical threshold for a diagnosis.
* Mixed Traits (PD-TS): If someone has significant personality-related difficulties but doesn't perfectly "fit" one specific disorder, they may be diagnosed with Personality DisorderTrait Specified (PD-TS), formerly known as "not otherwise specified".
* Co-occurrence: It is common for individuals to meet the criteria for multiple personality disorders simultaneously, as many symptoms overlap between clusters.
For a formal evaluation, it is essential to consult a licensed mental health professional, as they use specialized clinical interviews to distinguish these long-term patterns from temporary stress or other conditions.
In other words, specifically related to those two terms I listed, I would appreciate you pointing out where you believed I lied. I am looking forward to this hopefully being my last post on this issue. Despite my best efforts, you are beginning to get on my nerves.
BusyTarpDuster2017 said:BUDOS said:
" I just proved his statement was false above, and he admitted it. That is if you care to read, or even know how to read, I think that makes YOU the moron."
Sorry guys I really wanted to take a hiatus and let you guys get back to constructive conversation. And I do hope you understand why I want to respond. I think I would like BTD to explain why he thinks that I lied and how I admitted it. Once he explains it I will have a better understanding of either how I lied or why he believes I lied.
What would help me is if anyone who has been keeping up with this give and take could point out to me what I said which may appear to be false.
And I'm afraid to ask, but I have to - you do know that me calling you a liar is NOT an ad hominem, right? Or do you join your fellow marian idolatry deniers (curtpenn, OldBear) in their failed comprehension?
Consider this a test of your intelligence and rationality, and it'll tell me whether I'm wasting my time with you or not.
curtpenn said:BUDOS said:
BTD, after reading your post I have to say that I don't think I have laughed so hard in quite a long time. Your sense of humor is a bit, shall we say, different. Although one of my minors was psychology, as intelligent as you continue to prove to us you are , certainly you are aware of the following facts:
"A person does not have to exhibit every single characteristic of a personality disorder to be diagnosed with one. Diagnoses are typically based on a threshold, where a person must meet a specific minimum number of criteria from a larger list.
How Thresholds Work
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) uses a "polythetic" approach for most personality disorders, meaning there are multiple ways to meet the diagnostic requirements.
* Minimum Symptom Count: For many disorders, such as Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) or Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), a patient generally needs to meet at least five out of ninelisted symptoms.
* Diverse Presentations: Because patients only need a subset of symptoms, two people with the same diagnosis can have very different outward behaviors.
* Core Requirements: Beyond specific traits, a clinician must confirm that the pattern of behavior is:
* Persistent (stable over time, typically starting by adolescence).
* Inflexible (present across many different social and personal situations).
* Distressing (causing significant impairment in work, social, or other important areas of life).
Common Variations in Diagnosis
* Subclinical Traits: Many people have some "traits" of a personality disorder without meeting the full clinical threshold for a diagnosis.
* Mixed Traits (PD-TS): If someone has significant personality-related difficulties but doesn't perfectly "fit" one specific disorder, they may be diagnosed with Personality DisorderTrait Specified (PD-TS), formerly known as "not otherwise specified".
* Co-occurrence: It is common for individuals to meet the criteria for multiple personality disorders simultaneously, as many symptoms overlap between clusters.
For a formal evaluation, it is essential to consult a licensed mental health professional, as they use specialized clinical interviews to distinguish these long-term patterns from temporary stress or other conditions.
In other words, specifically related to those two terms I listed, I would appreciate you pointing out where you believed I lied. I am looking forward to this hopefully being my last post on this issue. Despite my best efforts, you are beginning to get on my nerves.
BTD is a son of Satan holding himself out as some sort of defender of the faith. He has been spewing on this thread for several years now. No point in attempting any sort of rational exchange. I'm content to drop in and point out his lies and hypocrisy from time to time. Blessings for your journey.
curtpenn said:BusyTarpDuster2017 said:BUDOS said:
" I just proved his statement was false above, and he admitted it. That is if you care to read, or even know how to read, I think that makes YOU the moron."
Sorry guys I really wanted to take a hiatus and let you guys get back to constructive conversation. And I do hope you understand why I want to respond. I think I would like BTD to explain why he thinks that I lied and how I admitted it. Once he explains it I will have a better understanding of either how I lied or why he believes I lied.
What would help me is if anyone who has been keeping up with this give and take could point out to me what I said which may appear to be false.
And I'm afraid to ask, but I have to - you do know that me calling you a liar is NOT an ad hominem, right? Or do you join your fellow marian idolatry deniers (curtpenn, OldBear) in their failed comprehension?
Consider this a test of your intelligence and rationality, and it'll tell me whether I'm wasting my time with you or not.
So you're ok with me calling you a liar then, right?
curtpenn said:BUDOS said:
BTD, after reading your post I have to say that I don't think I have laughed so hard in quite a long time. Your sense of humor is a bit, shall we say, different. Although one of my minors was psychology, as intelligent as you continue to prove to us you are , certainly you are aware of the following facts:
"A person does not have to exhibit every single characteristic of a personality disorder to be diagnosed with one. Diagnoses are typically based on a threshold, where a person must meet a specific minimum number of criteria from a larger list.
How Thresholds Work
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) uses a "polythetic" approach for most personality disorders, meaning there are multiple ways to meet the diagnostic requirements.
* Minimum Symptom Count: For many disorders, such as Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) or Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), a patient generally needs to meet at least five out of ninelisted symptoms.
* Diverse Presentations: Because patients only need a subset of symptoms, two people with the same diagnosis can have very different outward behaviors.
* Core Requirements: Beyond specific traits, a clinician must confirm that the pattern of behavior is:
* Persistent (stable over time, typically starting by adolescence).
* Inflexible (present across many different social and personal situations).
* Distressing (causing significant impairment in work, social, or other important areas of life).
Common Variations in Diagnosis
* Subclinical Traits: Many people have some "traits" of a personality disorder without meeting the full clinical threshold for a diagnosis.
* Mixed Traits (PD-TS): If someone has significant personality-related difficulties but doesn't perfectly "fit" one specific disorder, they may be diagnosed with Personality DisorderTrait Specified (PD-TS), formerly known as "not otherwise specified".
* Co-occurrence: It is common for individuals to meet the criteria for multiple personality disorders simultaneously, as many symptoms overlap between clusters.
For a formal evaluation, it is essential to consult a licensed mental health professional, as they use specialized clinical interviews to distinguish these long-term patterns from temporary stress or other conditions.
In other words, specifically related to those two terms I listed, I would appreciate you pointing out where you believed I lied. I am looking forward to this hopefully being my last post on this issue. Despite my best efforts, you are beginning to get on my nerves.
BTD is a son of Satan holding himself out as some sort of defender of the faith. He has been spewing on this thread for several years now. No point in attempting any sort of rational exchange. I'm content to drop in and point out his lies and hypocrisy from time to time. Blessings for your journey.
