Posted by Steve on 10/13/07 17:51

<danielcarrington4@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1192296003.510114.17510@v29g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 12, 9:24 pm, "Steve" <no....@example.com> wrote:
>> "Drew" <whoisthatmasked...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:4710047c$0$4996$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > Steve wrote:
>> >> "Drew" <whoisthatmasked...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >>news:470ff10d$0$20614$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>> >>> Damn, Steve. Put your religious beliefs aside and read the metaphor.
>>
>> >> my lack of religious beliefs aside, what then, was the metaphor i
>> >> missed?
>> >> i thought i showed i understood the metaphore and drew the contrasts
>> >> at
>> >> the same time. sup?
>>
>> > Who's neck is the noose around?
>>
>> > Who is the recipient of masterfully laid snares?
>>
>> > What heathen is raging?
>>
>> > What "murderer" has fallen into his own creation?
>>
>> the 'heathen' of course. that would technically be the godless or
>> irreligious. and though really the comment was aimed at all participating
>> in
>> the current thread, i pay particular attention to religious babble and
>> actually fit the definition. so, aside from condecending to the entire
>> list
>> of participants for our 'raging' - which the religious tend to like to
>> do,
>> condecend that the rest of us just don't 'get it' and their morals are
>> far
>> superlative to other mortals' - i think the analogy is full of logical
>> holes
>> and is merely drivel. now if the kook wants to defend his position, i
>> invite
>> it.
>>
>> > Pay attention.
>>
>> yes, please do. why you're jumping in to say i missed the point, when i
>> clearly got it, is beyond me.
>
> You're taking it too literally. Think metaphorically.
>
> Think back to the days when you read "Canterbury Tales" in school and
> you'll get it. :)

omg, eod

[Back to original message]