"Fact:
I knew what the word "subjective" meant, in its common
usage."
Apparently you did not know the word "subjective" has 7
definition thats why you seek clarifications. You just assumed what
you think is "common" without self check.
"Fact:
It is common in dialogue to seek clarification when terms are used
while also attempting to give a reasonable and
plausible interpretation of the term as in "what you mean by
XXX? Is it YYYYYY?" which is what I did."
I pointed to you its 1b, what else do you want me to say? A
simple thank you would suffice...
"If my understanding was correct all you needed to do was to agree.
But you can't help it but had to go for a hit and
insinuate that I could not grasp what you meant and berate me for
not having initiative to check the dictionary. There is no
obligation for me to check a word whose meaning I already
know."
There's no need for agreement as its for opinions, just
understanding of words definitions which you are failing to
do. I know there's no obligation on your side, but pointed out
that "no obligation" is lack of initiative and a mental block.
I don't like to repeat myself but you are making me referring to
what you posted.
"Fact: You
threw out a dictionary that listed SEVEN definitions and picked one
(1b). Had I really did not know what the word meant, how can
you honestly expect me to pick the same 1b as you? And if I did,
which you admitted later, then why accuse me of not grasping
it? Why not be upfront about your intentions that you were
simply taking the opportunity, or making one, to go for a
personal attack?"
The fact is you assumed you understood "subjective" but did not
know there were 7 meanings only show that you did not fully
understand. I don't have any expectations especially from you.
Zero. Zilch. If you think its a personal attack, means you are
taking it personally, which is not my concern.
"Bottom line:
All you needed to do was to agree or disagree with my understanding
of your terms. If correct, say so. If incorrect, then just be kind
and clarify what you meant. But your agenda of trying to always be
superior and condescending of me got the better of
you. Don't act blur and play daft concerning your personal
attacks. Is that how you teach your....oops sensitive point, forget
it."
Its either you agree to the dictionary definitions or not,
nothing to do with me. Unless you are disagreeing with my usage of
subjective justifications. [Ignores other personal rants]
"You don't
even know how to use the word "solipsism" properly, LOL! I guess
your ego just won't accept the fact that your analogy was flawed
and busted."
Whatever... hehehehe. You say its wrong so its wrong to you.
What else is new?
"You still
missed the point of John 14:6 and pretending to be the exegete that
you aren't. That verse has NOTHING to do with God's alleged
hiddenness at all. Your quoting of this verse is entirely out of
context."
You miss my point again. I'll just brush the dust from my
feet.
"You accused
me of being blind to my weakness. When asked, you cannot point them
out. You then emphasize I am being blind, but again you cannot
explain. Looks like you just go personal attack for the sake of
personal gratification."
Are you implying you have no weaknesses? Ok... noted.
"How do I
choose? The same way how you chose to ask me that question.
Duh."
Let me rephrase. How do you choose to act?
Why do I need to be aware of the number of meanings that are listed
in the dictionary? This is not a test of knowledge about
dictionaries. Duh. You later admittes that my understaning was not
contradictory, a simple "you are right" would suffice.
As to missing the point on John 14, perhaps I did miss your
point but not the point of that verse. Whatever your point was it
was irrelevant to that verse. Duh.
Just because I ask you to be specific about what weakness of
mine you were referring to you conclude that I think I have no
weaknesses at all? What a fallacious conclusion you made!
How I choose to act is no different from how you choose to act.
Duh