Happy St. David's Day 2023 A.D.!!!

[ConfederateSS]

-------- Happy St. David's Day 2023 A.D. ...Wales... Dragons everywhere...... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

[jonesthecurl]

Who leeked that information?

[ConfederateSS]

Who leeked that information?

------ The same ones who leaked that the F.B.I and Energy Dept...Found out...COVID was leaked from a Lab in Wuhan,China...Shh... Don't let it get out.. ... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

[HitRed]

Does this go with Mexican elfin

[jonesthecurl]

Who leeked that information?

------ The same ones who leaked that the F.B.I and Energy Dept...Found out...COVID was leaked from a Lab in Wuhan,China...Shh... Don't let it get out.. ... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

wooosh! Over your head.

[ConfederateSS]

Does this go with Mexican elfin

------No....St. David is a Bishop from 6th Century A.D. Wales...You can see the area he is from on the Conquer Club map Wales,Mynwy,Glywysing...... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

[jusplay4fun]

Who leeked that information?

------ The same ones who leaked that the F.B.I and Energy Dept...Found out...COVID was leaked from a Lab in Wuhan,China...Shh... Don't let it get out.. ... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

wooosh! Over your head.

Saint David (Welsh: Dewi Sant; Latin: Davidus; c. 500 – c. 589) was a Welsh bishop of Mynyw (now St Davids) during the 6th century. He is the patron saint of Wales. David was a native of Wales, and tradition has preserved a relatively large amount of detail about his life. His birth date, however, is uncertain: suggestions range from 462 to 512.[1] He is traditionally believed to be the son of Saint Non and the grandson of Ceredig ap Cunedda, king of Ceredigion.[2] The Welsh annals placed his death 569 years after the birth of Christ,[3] but Phillimore's dating revised this to 601.[4]

(...)

The Monastic Rule of David prescribed that monks had to pull the plough themselves without draught animals,[5] and must drink only water and eat only bread with salt and herbs.[8] The monks spent their evenings in prayer, reading and writing. No personal possessions were allowed: even to say "my book" was considered an offence. He lived a simple life and practised asceticism, teaching his followers to refrain from eating meat and drinking beer. His symbol, also the symbol of Wales, is the leek

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_David

[jimboston]

Under “Saint” David monks can’t have possessions…

So “St. David’s Day” is heretical by definition.

[HitRed]

It gets interesting when a rich person is near the vow of poverty.

[jusplay4fun]

Under “Saint” David monks can’t have possessions…

So “St. David’s Day” is heretical by definition.

What convoluted Logic; that makes NO Sense. BUT, Nothing New Here.

[jonesthecurl]

Various sources have St D as a relative of King Arthur, though inconsistently so. He was, variously, Arthur's uncle, grand-nephew, or second cousin.
Arthur was also supposedly related to St Illtyd, a much more obscure guy from close to where my parents lived. Illtyd's Mother was sister to Igraine ( Arthur's Mum) -thus a cousin.

[jimboston]

Under “Saint” David monks can’t have possessions…

So “St. David’s Day” is heretical by definition.

What convoluted Logic; that makes NO Sense. BUT, Nothing New Here.

“St. David’s Day” is a statement of possession.
He espoused the philosophy of non-possession.
It’s heretical.

If the feckin’ Welsh want to honor his memory they would more appropriately call the day something like…
“A day on which we honor St. David”
or
“Poverty Day”

Maybe instead of praying the Welsh could donate 90% of their wealth to those in need?

Naming a day with a possessive pronoun just goes against his philosophy and religious beliefs.

[jimboston]

Various sources have St D as a relative of King Arthur, though inconsistently so. He was, variously, Arthur's uncle, grand-nephew, or second cousin.
Arthur was also supposedly related to St Illtyd, a much more obscure guy from close to where my parents lived. Illtyd's Mother was sister to Igraine ( Arthur's Mum) -thus a cousin.

So seeing that King Arthur is a fabricated mythical figure does that mean this “saint” is also not a real person?

[jonesthecurl]

The reality of Arthur is a tricky question.
But so far as I can judge, both the saints were real.
One story has Julius Caesar being the father of Oberon, King of Fae, but that doesn't mean Julius wasn't real.

[jusplay4fun]

Under “Saint” David monks can’t have possessions…

So “St. David’s Day” is heretical by definition.

What convoluted Logic; that makes NO Sense. BUT, Nothing New Here.

“St. David’s Day” is a statement of possession.
He espoused the philosophy of non-possession.
It’s heretical.

If the feckin’ Welsh want to honor his memory they would more appropriately call the day something like…
“A day on which we honor St. David”
or
“Poverty Day”

Maybe instead of praying the Welsh could donate 90% of their wealth to those in need?

Naming a day with a possessive pronoun just goes against his philosophy and religious beliefs.

Like I said, convoluted and illogical. The Saint does not own his/her Saint's Day. It is not even conferred until after that person DIED. One (the Saint) does not possess the Saint's Day as one possesses a spoon, a dog, or even illogical statements. How does one possess ANYTHING after one dies? CONVOLUTED Logic (or lack thereof).

QED

To support my statement, let me quote THIS:

Anyone can become a saint in the Roman Catholic Church, but this status is only granted after death. Furthermore, to achieve this beatified status, one must lead a heroically virtuous life, in the strictest accord with the teachings of the church, embracing charity, faith, hope and other virtues. One must also perform miracles during their life and either be martyred in the name of their religion, or be responsible for miracles posthumously.

The canonisation procedure must begin at least five years after a person’s death.

https://interactive.aljazeera.com/aje/2016/how-to-become-a-saint-mother-theresa/index.html#:~:text=A%20formal%20request%20for%20an,be%20a%20Servant%20of%20God.

For those who do not know, canonisation is the process in the Catholic Church where one becomes a Saint.

[jusplay4fun]

Various sources have St D as a relative of King Arthur, though inconsistently so. He was, variously, Arthur's uncle, grand-nephew, or second cousin.
Arthur was also supposedly related to St Illtyd, a much more obscure guy from close to where my parents lived. Illtyd's Mother was sister to Igraine ( Arthur's Mum) -thus a cousin.

So seeing that King Arthur is a fabricated mythical figure does that mean this “saint” is also not a real person?

More stoopidity expressed by the Master of Stoopidity, Poor Jimb; keep trying.

Maybe ONE day you, jimb, will gain some insights and your logic will improve. BUT I certainly am NOT holding my breath.

[Dukasaur]

Under “Saint” David monks can’t have possessions…

So “St. David’s Day” is heretical by definition.

What convoluted Logic; that makes NO Sense. BUT, Nothing New Here.

“St. David’s Day” is a statement of possession.

The use of a possessive pronoun does not necessarily imply possession.

Hansen's Disease is not a disease owned by Hansen; it's a disease described by Hansen.

Martha's Vineyard is not owned by Martha, it's likely named after the deceased daughter of English pirate Bartholemew Grosnold, who discovered the island.

Louisiana's last hurricane is not owned by Louisiana, it just happened to pass overhead.

[KoolBak]

I really enjoyed that...

[jusplay4fun]

Under “Saint” David monks can’t have possessions…

So “St. David’s Day” is heretical by definition.

What convoluted Logic; that makes NO Sense. BUT, Nothing New Here.

“St. David’s Day” is a statement of possession.

The use of a possessive pronoun does not necessarily imply possession.

Hansen's Disease is not a disease owned by Hansen; it's a disease described by Hansen.

Martha's Vineyard is not owned by Martha, it's likely named after the deceased daughter of English pirate Bartholemew Grosnold, who discovered the island.

Louisiana's last hurricane is not owned by Louisiana, it just happened to pass overhead.

Need I say MORE?

QED X 2

[jimboston]

The reality of Arthur is a tricky question.
But so far as I can judge, both the saints were real.
One story has Julius Caesar being the father of Oberon, King of Fae, but that doesn't mean Julius wasn't real.

Yes.. I realize. Just being contrarian.

Many Roman emperors supposedly “traced” their lineage to Zeus or Hercules or other mythical characters.

Obviously the ‘story’ of Arthur is myth/poetry… but it is possible he started out as a real person (or people).

Just because George Washington never cut down a cherry tree doesn’t mean he never existed.

[jimboston]

I’m going to call it…

“A day to celebrate St. David”

I feel it’s more in the spirit of his religious beliefs.

You all can be lazy and assign a possessive modifier to the day, but I feel he would appreciate my point.

Furthermore…the idea that any human on earth is capable of KNOWING with certainty that some dead human is or isn’t in Heaven is a ridiculous idea and very presumptive… even for a Pope or a Council of Bishops.

[jimboston]

Under “Saint” David monks can’t have possessions…

So “St. David’s Day” is heretical by definition.

What convoluted Logic; that makes NO Sense. BUT, Nothing New Here.

“St. David’s Day” is a statement of possession.

The use of a possessive pronoun does not necessarily imply possession.

Hansen's Disease is not a disease owned by Hansen; it's a disease described by Hansen.

Martha's Vineyard is not owned by Martha, it's likely named after the deceased daughter of English pirate Bartholemew Grosnold, who discovered the island.

Louisiana's last hurricane is not owned by Louisiana, it just happened to pass overhead.

I wouldn’t want to own a disease either.

Lazy language.

If the possessive form doesn’t imply possession then it has no meaning.

In the case of Martha’s Vineyard… I just assumed some lady named Martha owned it at one time.
Maybe it should now be called… “The Island Once Owned by Martha”?

“Louisiana’s last hurricane” could instead be written as “the last hurricane to hit Louisiana”.

Lou Gehrig’s Disease should be referred to as its proper name… ALS.
Hanson’s Disease should be called Leprosy.
The use of these shortcuts is lazy and inaccurate.

Just because some people like to be lazy doesn’t mean it’s correct.

Just ask JP4 when he criticizes my typos.

[jusplay4fun]

Under “Saint” David monks can’t have possessions…

So “St. David’s Day” is heretical by definition.

What convoluted Logic; that makes NO Sense. BUT, Nothing New Here.

“St. David’s Day” is a statement of possession.

The use of a possessive pronoun does not necessarily imply possession.

Hansen's Disease is not a disease owned by Hansen; it's a disease described by Hansen.

Martha's Vineyard is not owned by Martha, it's likely named after the deceased daughter of English pirate Bartholemew Grosnold, who discovered the island.

Louisiana's last hurricane is not owned by Louisiana, it just happened to pass overhead.

I wouldn’t want to own a disease either.

Lazy language.

If the possessive form doesn’t imply possession then it has no meaning.

In the case of Martha’s Vineyard… I just assumed some lady named Martha owned it at one time.
Maybe it should now be called… “The Island Once Owned by Martha”?

“Louisiana’s last hurricane” could instead be written as “the last hurricane to hit Louisiana”.

Lou Gehrig’s Disease should be referred to as its proper name… ALS.
Hanson’s Disease should be called Leprosy.
The use of these shortcuts is lazy and inaccurate.

Just because some people like to be lazy doesn’t mean it’s correct.

Just ask JP4 when he criticizes my typos.

by your (lack of even more) logic, DON;t call me JP4...!

Shortcuts in language are an inherent part of it. How do you think contractions developed? Don;t [sic X2] even THINK about it; your brain will explode, jimbo....I mean jimboston...NAWWWW..!! jimbo

[jusplay4fun]

I’m going to call it…

“A day to celebrate St. David”

I feel it’s more in the spirit of his religious beliefs.

You all can be lazy and assign a possessive modifier to the day, but I feel he would appreciate my point.

Furthermore…the idea that any human on earth is capable of KNOWING with certainty that some dead human is or isn’t in Heaven is a ridiculous idea and very presumptive… even for a Pope or a Council of Bishops.

jim is correct on one POINT: no one knows FOR SURE. But get a group of 100 people who look at evidence (or even as few as 12, in a jury trial) and most rational individuals can come to reasonable conclusions most of the time, even up to and exceeding 90%. How many times have your heard of a jury getting it WRONG? Most of the time, they are right. The media will cover the VERY FEW times a wrong conclusion was reached and made the wrong decision. I would argue this is RARE, as otherwise there would be a MASSIVE call to reform that part of the Justice System. Those few wrong (and egregious) decisions are highlighted, but we fail to acknowledge the 99 or 98+% correct ones.

BUT jimbo would not know about that as he is nearly always "contrarian"; i.e., Full of Bull to argue something. AND he felt a need to do a THREE-fer to "prove" his point after he was shown to wrong and NOW claims instead to be contrarian after he was PROVED WRONG again.

And, jimb said:

Yes.. I realize. Just being contrarian.

He used shortcuts (above, more than one in 6 words) and then later criticizes their usage. What a hypocrite.

And, another shortcut used by jimbo:

Lou Gehrig’s Disease should be referred to as its proper name… ALS.

[jimboston]

[But get a group of 100 people who look at evidence (or even as few as 12, in a jury trial) and most rational individuals can come to reasonable conclusions most of the time, even up to and exceeding 90%. How many times have your heard of a jury getting it WRONG? Most of the time, they are right. The media will cover the VERY FEW times a wrong conclusion was reached and made the wrong decision. I would argue this is RARE, as otherwise there would be a MASSIVE call to reform that part of the Justice System. Those few wrong (and egregious) decisions are highlighted, but we fail to acknowledge the 99 or 98+% correct ones.

HAHAHAHAHAHA

Your logic fails.

In sooooo many ways.

The analogy doesn’t hold up for one.

Even if it does the logic still fails.

Prove a negative.

I’ll leave it to others to expand on this and come back later if no one takes it up.