Gives them something to do, I suppose...

But if you prefer limitations....

Why do you always make snide attacks like that, g? There is no reason to do that.

Be a better Christian.

#2, no, it wasn't an attack on you, it was a commentary on the article you posted. That seemed pretty clear to me. But you had to go and make it personal. Is that what Jesus would want you to do?

So judgmental.

Clearly you recognize your behavior is indefensible, so you continue to lash out.

Sad.

Why can't you show people how good Christians are supposed to behave?

Why is it so difficult for you to be nice?

And it is this constant attempt to misframe that is a huge obstacle to actual dialogue.

It started with YOUR misframing of MineralMan's post.

No one is falling for your dirty tricks, g. Start acting like you think a Christian should. Or perhaps you already are, and that's the problem. You're certainly acting like some other Christians I know.

Expanding something, perhaps, but not necessarily that.

"People are unsettled with something in the environmental movement. I come from an environmental activist background, and I know that burns people out when they don’t have that direct experience (of the sacred)."

That is a load of horseshit.

You want to be an environmentally aware christian, hey that's great. But don't go blowing your horn that your path is the only way. Oh wait, these are evangelicals, that is what they do by definition.

who seek the divine. Nowhere did she claim that her way is the only way, or the best way.

only to those who are “seeking the divine”.

I guess she was speaking in tongues or something. Your excerpted paragraph I quoted refers only to “people” in the environmental movement. Where does she restrict “people” to “people seeking the divine”?

So no, she did not expressly state which people she referred to, but I am certain that the vast majority of those reading it understand her point.

the experience of the sacred will “burn out”. This is not a case of biblical nonsense where you get to make up any nonsense you choose and claim that as the true meaning. It is an article reporting what this person said.

Again, I feel that you are looking for something that is not there.

Or just keep attacking, whatever. You get to show us what being a Christian is all about, g. And so far, you've shown everyone quite the example.

that is not dialogue. The idiomatic use of the word "people" to refer to some but not all is well known by all of us.

My view is that the poster is trying to create an issue.

Try it. Or just shit on people. Whatever, g. You choose to be the Christian you want to be.

"people" to "people who seek the divine" in the paragraph in the text you linked to.

I'll wait.

With no evidence but your own assumption.

And that summarizes this sub-thread very well.

movement. That is not disputable, at least not honestly disputable. You asserted a further restriction "seeking the divine". Please provide some evidence to support that assertion.

And based on your insistence that she must have intended your own reading. The word people is often used to refer to some people. Perhaps you are not aware of that.

Here is an example:

People tell me that...….

This phase does not imply all people, or every person. it is a general statement that implies more than one person.

So again, your assertion is unsubstantiated and needs no refutation.

that it's really just a small number of posters on DU and accuse them of misunderstanding their own idiom.

But people might disagree.

and denying something is an idiom when it does not suit your purpose.

I hear the Attorney General position may be opening up. Main qualification is selective reading skills. No law license or experience required.

As to selective reading, this sub-thread was started by a selective reader.

How Christian.

It's very popular among authoritarians, I understand.

"Altruistic Evil" is what one author called it. Being convinced that whatever you are doing is for the greater good of your religion, and that even if you are aware of your behavior being inappropriate, you do it anyway because you have faith your god approves, and besides your victims probably deserve it because they post links on the Internet about the Catholic sex abuse scandals.

We are the ultimate "others." There are relatively few of us, so we're a safe group to attack. Or so some believe.

"People are unsettled with something in the environmental movement. I come from an environmental activist background, and I know that burns people out when they don’t have that direct experience (of the sacred). "


"that burns people out".' That' refers to the environmental movement. 'People' refers to people in the environmental movement.
This is my evidence for my assertion that she, in her use of the term 'people' in the sentence containing the phrase 'that burns people out' is clearly referring to 'people in the environmental movement'.

Now please provide your evidence that she is referring only to people who "seek the divine". Where does she state that? Where does she imply that?

And you misread my further comment as the comment of the Wild Church founder.

Mis-framing and obvious misreading.

that she was referring ‘seekers of the divine”.

I made that interpretation, not her.

And that argues for the correctness of my observation.

Do you understand that?

The paragraph in question was not complex or obscure. Please post your evidence that she meant "people seeking the divine" in that paragraph.

of what the word people means to the author in that context.

And you insist that your view is the only correct one.

And you persist in confusing my opinion with that of the subject of the article.

“BabaG’s ice cream store is so popular that people line up and wait for hours to buy it.”

In that sentence what does the word ‘people’ mean?

A) all humans in the universe.
B) the subset of all humans who have chosen to visit the store and wait for hours to purchase BabaG’s ice cream.
C) any human in the vicinity of BabaG’s ice cream store.
D) people with green hair waiting to purchase BabaG’s ice cream.
E) anything at all, and all answers are equally valid.