沙文

So you agree it can be a religion other than christianity in this board now? You didn't prove it can only be christianity, yet. So how can I disprove something you didn't prove?

I don't agree with your reasoning. Prove he intend to be laughing at Christianity please.

jimmychauck

The reasoning had already been blatently written

Dior intend to be laughing at Christianity

only the image of Christianity fits in what George Carlin describes as religion

Dior did post this thread in the "the religion of Christianity" board of the "Exchristian" forum

Bring this case before any court and tell the judge that Dior did not post this thread intending to laugh at Christianity

Agree with that, or don't, and hence show others your reasoning ability.

沙文

Not only the image of Christianity fits in what George Carlin describes as religion.

There are some other threads regarding religions other than christianity  posted in "the religion of Christianity" board of the "Exchristian" forum.

Mr. Plaintiff, you file the lawsuit in the high court ASAP, but you are suing whom?

jimmychauck

fine, you stated, there are some other, name them.

沙文

回復 24# jimmychauck

The legal process has begun, we cannot talk about it outside the court. I'll wait for the court order. See what date they arrange for the first trial. Hopefully it comes soon, I have a vacation plan this xmas.

jimmychauck

Avoid providing the reaosn or any queried information with whatever excuse you want, it just shows how good you are at certain areas.

沙文

回復 26# jimmychauck

You are good at setting up black-hearted Christian tricks and I am good at discovering them. Why you want me in jail so bad?

If you are hungry to discuss it here why you ask for a lawsuit in the first place? I wish I can go on in this board as much as you do, but it is you who asked for a court verdict. I don't want to put both of us in trouble. They will lay charge for "Perverting the course of justice". Have You ever heard of it? Ask you lawyer if you haven't.
Now all I can do is to ensure you can have all answers in the court room. The sooner the trial starts, the sooner we can talk about this again. If you are that impetuous, urge the court office to set out a date for us.

jimmychauck

so you are using 1 statement in my reasoning

Bring this case before any court and tell the judge that Dior did not post this thread intending to laugh at Christianity

which simply asks you to make a verdict yourself (because when you go to a court, they always arrive at a verdict), and now blaming me for blackheart waste your time itimidate you bla bla bla.


And until now decline to provide any decent argument.

沙文

回復 28# jimmychauck

What are you complaining? I wanted to resolve it here even more than you do, but it is you who leaded this dispute to this situation. We do not have the authority to make a verdict.
I am not declining, I am well prepared to provide the court everything they ask.
I am a good citizen. If you want to talk about it outside the court please get a amnesty from the higher authority. Otherwise wait for the trial.

jimmychauck

You very much fail to show us you have the ability to understand that the when statment

Bring this case before any court and tell the judge that Dior did not post this thread intending to laugh at Christianity

exists within a reasoning context, it is retorically asking you to justify your opposite idea.

Then we conclude the discussion above.
1. You failed to show that you understand sarcism, retorical questioning.
2. You failed to provide reasonig or queried information.

沙文

回復 30# jimmychauck

It shows you do not want to discuss here. You know when it goes to the court it is out of our hands, but you still chose to do it this way.  What are you afraid of?

jimmychauck

wahahaha,

I have not followed your principle of "case is in legal process, cannot speak outside of course" and provided, restated, interpreted my reasoning in this board. Asking you to do the same, provide your reasoning here, information here, for discussion, you say it is in the courts hand, you cannot disclose anything.
Now you are accusing me of not wanting to discuss here, because "I" brought this case to the court? Your logic is just absolutely screwed.

Fine, I now commit criminal contempt, I will discuss the case here, outside of the "court" (as if it exists, dah..), as the case is in "legal process". Get the court to charge me when you like, or provide information to it, that I am talking about the case outside the "court".

So, I shall remain triumph here, since you decline to provide arguements or dicuss here, until the "any court" makes a verdict (and of course, there is still a 50% chance the verdict is to my favour), and in the "court", you will provide statements to the "judges" (dah, like they exists), and "they" shall tell you the verdict.

沙文

You requested to brought this case to the court. not me, right?

You want to  commit criminal contempt, but I don't. We are adults and both have a family and job.You can discuss it here solely if you wanted to but, as a friend I really don't want you to get into trouble. There are already too many priests in jail. Think of you family and your church before you take the wrong step.

So please take my advice, my dearest Jimmy, let's wait for the trial which you asked for. Looking forward to seeing you there.

Best Regards,
Sharman

jimmychauck

Just that you know

Bring this case before any court and tell the judge that Dior did not post this thread intending to laugh at Christianity

was a statement made by me. It is an instruction to you (well, lets for a moment disregard the fact that it is a retorical statement). So when I didn't perform any action of bring it to the court, it must have been you who brought the case to the court.
And since I have receive none legal notice from no court, I presume that there is none, even I am willing to commit criminal contempt, I cannot. May I be provided with the name, address of the court, such that we appear.

So conclusion remains as follow, or may be we should add some more:
1. You failed to show that you understand sarcism, retorical questioning.
2. You failed to provide reasonig or queried information.
3. You failed to show that you can distinguish between a staturary statement or instruction
4. You failed to show that you can distinguish between the addresser and the addressee

Oh, am I talking to someone imagining a court? I am no expert in Delusional disorder by I think there is one case here.

沙文

回復 34# jimmychauck

You told me to bring this case before any court and tell the judge that Dior did not post this thread intending to laugh at Christianity. I did as told.

The court is busy. Do you know how many years people wait for their lawsuit? Be patient, keep in mind: 1 Co13:4 Love is never tired of waiting.

Amen

jimmychauck

Oh, bringing something to the court before resolving the issue peacefully, is an act of love, interesting.

I am no expert of law, but I believe if you have to state that this case is in trail in any court, you at least have to state which court, or else your statement will not be effective

1. You failed to show that you understand sarcism, retorical questioning.
2. You failed to provide reasonig or queried information.
3. You failed to show that you can distinguish between a staturary statement or instruction.
4. You failed to show that you can distinguish between the addresser and the addressee.
5. You failed to even tell which court you bring a law suit to

沙文

回復 36# jimmychauck

Oh if you want to resolving the issue peacefully you would not order me to bring it to court.

I did not state which court, yet, because you failed to ask.

jimmychauck

which simply asks you to make a verdict yourself (because when you go to a court, they always arrive at a verdict), and now blaming me for blackheart waste your time itimidate you bla bla bla.

was a statement made by me. It is an instruction to you (well, lets for a moment disregard the fact that it is a retorical statement).

May I be provided with the name, address of the court, such that we appear.

Hi~~, you blind? you read English?
1. You failed to show that you understand sarcism, retorical questioning.
2. You failed to provide reasonig or queried information.
3. You failed to show that you can distinguish between a staturary statement or instruction.
4. You failed to show that you can distinguish between the addresser and the addressee.
5. You failed to even tell which court you bring a law suit to
6. Do you read English?


state. (instruction)

沙文

"May I be provided with the name, address of the court, such that we appear."
If it is a question, it ends with a "?".
example:
May I be provided with a dictionary which has an explanation of the word  "sarcism"?
So, hi~~, you lame? you write English?

jimmychauck

you still failed to understand retorical statement, and still failed to follow simple instruction to "state" information I queried upon. "May I be provided...." blablabla is not a question, its also an instruction.

1. You failed to show that you understand sarcism, retorical questioning.
2. You failed to provide reasonig or queried information.
3. You failed to show that you can distinguish between a staturary statement or instruction.
4. You failed to show that you can distinguish between the addresser and the addressee.
5. You failed to even tell which court you bring a law suit to
6. Do you read English?
7. Do you understand context?
8. You failed to follow simple instruction.