Major Mitchell, I let you know what I thought about your "vindictive protectiveness" (to quote Lewis) of your offended sensibilities, and I'm done discussing them with you. And to quote your own most recent post, "If you want to respond with more [on this topic], do that in the other thread... practice what you preach."

Incorrect again, its you and the wacky "whisky priest" who want to confine this to the "kestas" thread, not me. I'll go anywhere with this.
I did and continue to make an OFFER to oblige your apparent desire to end this in this thread, and others, if you want that as a bonus
You are wonderfully selective in a self serving way with your pedantry

Let me clarify the offer.
To end it in all places you and CrazyAnglican both simply make the "we agree to disagree" statement, and make no other comment, here or elsewhere.

To take it to the "kestas" thread, you both make the "agree to disagree" statement here and advise that you've made further comments in the "kestas" thread , and make them there.
If you both want to continue as one trick show ponies to impress your, in my opinion, deluded acolytes in this thread, then just keep on being gifts that keep on giving

" if YOU want to respond to this, do it in another thread", clearly as part of comments directed to the wacky whisky priest, is distinctly different from
" I (the almighty mm) want to respond to this and will do so in another thread"

Also my prediction as to whether you might Mujus would elucidate what standards you choose for what mildy comic or mildly insulting comments you will tolerate with regard to your God and spiritual beliefs ( as you have criticised the overly sensitive ) and what types of comments you'd regard as unacceptable, is, so far, correct,. You've failed to provide any guidance, ducked for cover and run away, run away....brave, brave Sir Mujus, he bravely ran away.., there's an entertainment reference for your appreciation

Damnable typo's, not whether you might Mujus would elucidate, should be... Whether you Mighty Mujus would elucidate...

Strongly suggest you take the we agree to disagree offer and observe it's conditions, I do retain the privilege of withdrawing it. But I'll keep it on offer, for the present.

Now I'm giving plenty of verbal stick to you two chaps here, but out of deference to your spiritual beliefs there's something that by absolute coincidence came up on the kestas thread, and I won't even describe it here but it's an excellent example of what I think we might agree would be entirely unacceptable.
Don't want to bring it here, so challenge Crazy Anglican and Mujus to confront it there. Not saying I won't bring it here, but saying I'd much prefer not to bring it here, and emphasise that's out of deference to your spiritual beliefs

Matthew 11:25-28 is the Bible reading for Friday December 4, 2015.
New Living Translation (NLT)

Jesus’ Prayer of Thanksgiving

25 At that time Jesus prayed this prayer: “O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, thank you for hiding these things from those who think themselves wise and clever, and for revealing them to the childlike. 26 Yes, Father, it pleased you to do it this way!

27 “My Father has entrusted everything to me. No one truly knows the Son except the Father, and no one truly knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.”

28 Then Jesus said, “Come to me, all of you who are weary and carry heavy burdens, and I will give you rest.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+11%3A25-28&version=NLT

The brave, brave clerics, they bravely ran away....

@ MM

A cursory read of your multiple posts makes me question your ability and/or motivation to read and understand what I wrote. There were just too many things that were so off base I am not sure where to begin. So, I'll focus only on your magnanimous "offer". I can certainly agree to disagree with you, although I have little interest in childish extortion tactics that amount to "I 'll keep throwing my fit in the hopes that I make you uncomfortable enough to give in to my demand."

As for me, I think it is your right to make a public spectacle of yourself, even if it means willfully misinterpreting what I have said and attributing the worst possible motives to my statements. I have nothing to really lose by being castigated by a stranger on an game website.

Now the Whiskey Priest thing, though. I have to clarify something. I am not a priest. I do like a good bourbon every now and again. Just tried a new one over the Holiday Bulleit Rye Whiskey. Never had one made in Indiana before, but it was quite tasty in the egg nog. Made a good Toddy too when I had a cold a couple of weeks ago. I highly recommend it.

As too all of the other schlock. I might take your allegations of hypocrisy a little more seriously when you develop some higher functioning in the area of actually reading what I wrote.

Now that being said, My tone was definitely not cordial in my last post. If I have insulted you, I apologize.

What the heck, I've got a little time to kill. May as well indulge in this futile exercise for a bit.

@ MM

Let me acknowledge the good in what you say. Yeah, absolutely. Nazi's suck and it is not really a laughing matter to call someone a Nazi. No argument there.

That being said: Until you insinuated the idea Mujus never mentioned anything about it being a joke or amusing.

Here this was his response:
"First, no one was implying that Kestas is a Nazi in that thread. It was quite obvious from the context that this was a use of hyperbole and in no way derogatory."

You were the one to respond sarcastically that it was okay to call someone a Nazi as long as it was hyperbole and amusing...

Whatever his response may have been (and I didn't go back to see), you read something into his response that wasn't there. Hyperbole can be used for any number of reasons. For instance, if I say "That was the hardest test ever" I am not trying to amuse anyone or make a joke. I am trying to et the point across that I thought it was a very hard test.

So assuming the guy was giggling in his sleeve about the Nazi's was an off the wall comment with little provocation. When he didn't respond to you in the other thread, you seem to have chased him down to make some account for something he didn't say. Even though he two chances to do so before you began going in on him.

Again, your words on the forum are yours. Say whatever you like. If people point out that you aren't making a lot of sense, jump down their throats with both feet, feel free. Likewise it is my right to speak up, if I think somebody is getting a raw deal. Wasn't that the gist of the Parson Niemoller speech? Speak up early when others are being mistreated, that way you can take the bad guys on when there are enough good guys to do something about it.

Dear Crazy Anglican
You just can't help yourself can you. Blathering on when all that was required was a simple, brief statement
Fine. Offer withdrawn

Yes, yes, my mother was a hamster and my father smelt of elderberries. I get it.


Have fun stormin' the castle guy.

You are so superficial Crazy Anglican, and an excellent example is your response to the term "whisky priest".
You talked about your drinking in a jocular manner.

There are few more tragic characters in the Irish " zeitgeist " than the whisky priest. You failed entirely to see beyond some superficial view, and ask yourself deeper questions about this character, such as the important question, why does this priest drink?
It's about the loss of faith.
The whisky priest has realised there is no God, that his life's work has been a fraud, that he is a fraud, that's why he is a tragic character.

It's probably innacurate to use the term to describe you Crazy Anglican. You are so incredibly stupid that you'll never ask those important questions, so are unlikely to have that loss of faith.
You've apparently embraced your superstitious nonsensical beliefs so wholeheartedly that loss of faith is probably unlikely, along with genuine enlightenment.

Hmm, seems like what I failed to do was recognize a cultural reference that might or might not be common in a setting that is far removed from my own. As to being too stupid to realize the tragedy of my life, I can merely say...

DUH! :-)

You're kind of fun MM, I like you :-)

No, dopey, and typically egocentric, the tragedy in other people's lives

Yes, but since I'm not a priest, my life; right?

"the important question, why does this priest drink?
It's about the loss of faith."

Then I should keep my faith as proof against alcoholism? Alright, I agree.


Your brand of atheism (or whatever you might be) sounds a bit depressing. Would you like to talk about the possibility of inviting Jesus Christ into your life as Lord and Savior?

That isn't flippant. I'm serious. Why embrace the tragedy of life without faith when you unwillingly acknowledge that you'd be happier if you had it?

In the other thread, you yourself praised brave Christian clerics that stood against the Nazis. Why not honor them by becoming that kind of Christian? Lord knows there are enough of us lesser ones.

CA, I'm very impressed by your ability to endure abuse and still reach out to the abuser. That's the very essence of being Christ-like, and a helpful example. Thank you!

Insofar as MM's term "whisky priest" refers to a priest or other ordained minister who preaches morality but has moral failings himself--I would reply that 1) Christians should not be teaching morality primarily, but rather the path to a right relationship with God, and 2) That relationship is between the God who is perfect in every way, including morally, and fallen sinners (all of us) who had no hope of being righteous until Jesus the Messiah, God himself in human form, paid our penalty/paid our ransom/bought back our birthright that we had sold by living among us and dying on the cross. In fact in Revelation(s) it says that everyone will be judged by their actions EXCEPT those whose names are written in the Book of Life. What an amazing gift, to escape what we deserve and receive the free gift--although purchased by the suffering Messiah of Isaiah 22 and the gospels-- of being marked down as righteous in God's book. If you are thirsty, come and drink. If you are hungry, come and eat. "Blessed are those who hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled." It's an amazing reaching out in love. Come to the waters.

Please chaps, don't waste your time, if I have to choose deities, then I choose Shiva, and of course Hymen, the God of marriage.
If you'd hitched up with the fire breathing MemSahib, or "Her Indoors" you might feel similarly

Mujus, come on. I haven't endured even so much as a paper cut. Thanks for your kind words, but I think they are undeserved. Dieterich Banhoffer, St. Maximilian Kolbe, et. al. Those are the rock stars of the Christian faith we were referencing.

And again you choose a self serving analysis Crazy Anglican, and ignore all else.
I do SO like Mujus's pissing in your pocket routine
You chap's really are,in my opinion, the modern day whores, and whore masters of babble on

Wow, CA--another lesson. Are you sure you're not a priest or pastor?? :-)

Minus that's what an incorrect and again self serving analysis that misrepresents what I've said
The whisky priest preaches a Beleif in God that he now knows is false you cork brained clerical clown, morality is irrelevant in this context

Damnable typo's, Mujus not minus