The Good Samaritian

[Drich]

Again you keep dancing, but you use of the word lie all hinges on intent. To call someone a liar you must show an intent to mis lead or to intentionally deceive. Can you do this? Yes or no.

Drich stamping his feet, chucking a tantrum and blocking his ears. This is from my last post, " Whether you have intent or not only you can answer that if you have insight into your conscious and subconscious."

You have stated again that lie must have intent by saying "lie all hinges on intent". I have already shown you that it does not.

Definition of LIE

intransitive verb
1: to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
2: to create a false or misleading impression

Since you can not dispute definition 1 we must be talking about definition 2. I pointed out that creation is not possible again without intent. Your arguement you 'showing me it does not' amounts to little more than you saying "I don't know if creation denotes intent." What a cop out. Since you don't know allow me to educate you a little further.

Let's look at a few other definitions.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lie

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/lie

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lying

In EVERY Single instance a lie is primarily defined as an intent to mislead.

This means in order to Honestly classify someone as a liar you must show an intent in that person to mislead or hold back information.

person A says 1 + 1 = 3.1234567890353535352243244
Can we say person A has lied? We can not know intent especially from a liar, so number 1 definition cannot be established. Lets look at number 2 definition. Did person A create something and is it false. Yes therefore person a has lied without intent being shown.

wow what is wrong with you ? it simply means the person is wrong. One can not classify this person as a liar in this instance till you have established he understands basic math and has decided to push this answer anyway.
Wow, your dad must have really screwed you up when helping you with your math home work if you think the person who does not know basic math is a liar simply because he got a wrong answer. Either that or your so desperate to win an arguement your willing to say anything no matter how foolish you look.

That is unless you are indeed the poor aboriginal clansmen who simply does not understand the difference between being deem wrong in the English and being rightfully classified as a liar.

Notice how you avoided my question after I tried to answer yours in my last post.

Look sport you will be ignored and rightfully so because your base arguements are based in logical fallacy. You don't seem to understand the basics of lying so we must go back and learn the definition, so that in your next post when you ignore all 5 material references (that more than well establishes the primary definition of a liar as someone who intentionally misleads) in favor of your personal interpretation of a definition. With the intention to mislead me from the stated definition of all 5 references it will be I who gets to call you a liar. Over and over and over again.

Because In The light of 5 references who's primary definitions define or describe a liar as someone who intentionally deceives, your obstinance to push your spin on the definition provided, makes a hypocrite and the liar.

And everything you say and then subsequently do, can be rightfully dismissed. Everything you said and done for the last month then becomes meaningless. Why? Because you will have been proven a liar several times over. What's more you will have been proven a hypocrite as well. Especially if you choose to argue all five definitions provided and hold fast to your piecemealed definition or choose to piecemeal another one together. Your done old sport, the only thing left is to see if your pride will allow what integrity you have left to admit to being wrong.

If you can admit to lying we can move on. If not then know I can not hold any further discussions with a hypocritical liar. I know I said I'd go line by line with you, but that was before you were proven to be a hypocritical liar. See when one can rightfully deem another a hypocritical liar, everything the hypocritical liar (In this case the hypocritical liar will have been well established as you) is now suspect. As such every principle and precept discussed with the hypocritical liar can not be established because the hypocritical liar is more than willing and capable of saying or changing anything and everything he says to 'win' a discussion. Because of this it is like me throwing pearls of wisdom before a swine. That being the case we have a direct command not to do this.

So again if you try and push your deception past the five listed references you will be deemed a hypocrite and a liar, and I have been given a command to shake the dust from my feet and move away from people like you. In which case the only discussion we can have is the occasional attempt to determine if you have put away your hypocrisy and/or lying. If and when you can turn from these deal breaking sins, we can and will continue, Lord willing. If not, then I reserve the right to randomly point out that your a hypocrite and a liar when the occasion comes up.