Christianity

[iambiguous]

Cause you're going to do one of your polemic rants and there won't be a discussion of any merit.

Ah, back to Stooge mode again.

Now, why don't you actually respond to the points I raised above regarding the other accusation you leveled at me.


Note to others:

Larry and I go way back. He just doesn't like me. Why? Because I suspect that, chip by chip, I am chiseling away at his own murky "rooted existentially in God" moral objectivism. The Christian God I suspect.

Just don't ask him to being his own God or his own moral philosophy down to Earth.

Or, sure, maybe he will do that for you.

He has said several times that he does not want to be attacked.

But you are going to attack him if he says anything remotely 'incorrect'.

I'm a stooge for pointing this out??

I don't think so.

You're an idiot because you can't recognize and admit to what you are doing.

Right. And in no way has he ever attempted to attack me in turn?

What happens is ‘you-plural’ get overwhelmed by hysteria. Personally, I think you’ve been trained (brainwashed) so that certain topics push you over an internal edge. It is really amazing to me. And I have nothing more to say on the topic at this time.

Why don’t you pass the time playing a little solitaire?

I'm said to be hysterical here. Also straight out of the Manchurian Candidate: dangerously brainwashed?

And, what, in no way should black, brown and red folks feel attacked by him when he argues that the Northern European white stock is scientifically superior to them in intelligence? Because it's all just "theoretical"? What I am curious about is whether he avoids bringing his intellectual contraptions down to Earth because he has never given that part much thought, or if he does, we'll find out that he is a lot closer to the Nazi narrative than some here figured.

I'm not arguing that he is only that he won't clear up just what he does think ought to be done politically and legislatively to stem the "demographic crisis" in America

Now, let's get back to you responding substantively to the points I raised above...instead of popping up from time to time [as you did at ILP] in order to make me the issue. That is where the Stooge part comes in.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Ah, back to Stooge mode again.

Now, why don't you actually respond to the points I raised above regarding the other accusation you leveled at me.


Note to others:

Larry and I go way back. He just doesn't like me. Why? Because I suspect that, chip by chip, I am chiseling away at his own murky "rooted existentially in God" moral objectivism. The Christian God I suspect.

Just don't ask him to being his own God or his own moral philosophy down to Earth.

Or, sure, maybe he will do that for you.

He has said several times that he does not want to be attacked.

But you are going to attack him if he says anything remotely 'incorrect'.

I'm a stooge for pointing this out??

I don't think so.

You're an idiot because you can't recognize and admit to what you are doing.

Right. And in no way has he ever attempted to attack me in turn?

What happens is ‘you-plural’ get overwhelmed by hysteria. Personally, I think you’ve been trained (brainwashed) so that certain topics push you over an internal edge. It is really amazing to me. And I have nothing more to say on the topic at this time.

Why don’t you pass the time playing a little solitaire?

I'm said to be hysterical here. Also straight out of the Manchurian Candidate: dangerously brainwashed?

And, what, in no way should black, brown and red folks feel attacked by him when he argues that the Northern European white stock is scientifically superior to them in intelligence? Because it's all just "theoretical"? What I am curious about is whether he avoids bringing his intellectual contraptions down to Earth because he has never given that part much thought, or if he does, we'll find out that he is a lot closer to the Nazi narrative than some here figured.

I'm not arguing that he is only that he won't clear up just what he does think ought to be done politically and legislatively to stem the "demographic crisis" in America

Now, let's get back to you responding substantively to the points I raised above...instead of popping up from time to time [as you did at ILP] in order to make me the issue. That is where the Stooge part comes in.

When you get it all worked out be sure to let me know.

I’ll be here waiting patiently.

If you can calm down it will make communication possible.

Phyllo said: He has said several times that he does not want to be attacked.

To be misquoted, misrepresented, re-written, and rephrased is what I object to. This is a terrifying game of Left-Progressives (again, a convenient word for a more complex thing).

NOTE TO OTHERS:

Ummmm … I forgot! Maybe it’ll come back to me tomorrow!

Absolutely shameless!!

[iambiguous]

iambiguous and I have had our fair share of disagreements and do not see eye-to-eye on certain metaphysical issues.

And even though I strongly disapprove of him (or anyone) casually using denigrating and hateful words such as "C_nks" in this conversation,...

Simply unbelievable. As I noted to phyllo above, I wasn't calling anyone a "slant eyed Chink", I was noting that "As some prefer" was my point! In other words, making a distinction between those who broach race up in the theoretical clouds like AJ and those who are more, shall we say, colorful...or "down to earth"?

Sometimes white folks will use the N word to make a point that is an actual attack on prejudice and stereotypes and discrimination: https://youtu.be/j5RuCEhHcG4

[Dubious]

If there is no Christ in a specific sense there is no anti-Christ in that specific sense. But there is a falling away from the core metaphysics that Christ symbolizes. What is alluded to by “Christ” or what stands behind that — that needs better definition.

What specifically about Christ and the whole Christ saga can be connoted metaphysically? Are you trying to supplant the religious with symbolic value now that Christianity has lost most of its value? Is this a new "resurrection" attempt based in philosophy?

Except in Dubious’ world: a diagram of galactic becoming.

Don't know what you mean here by 'galactic becoming'. It seems to me likely a state of becoming is more entrenched in Seed's somewhat visionary thoughts. To me the graphics, which I like, are especially indicative or reminiscent of an ongoing process.

Can you define what must needs emerge from ‘religiousness’? The next step for New Man?

No! We are here to see what we can see without any predefined formats of what can or will be seen...or, as the saying goes, time will tell.

Prophet-wise what Yeats saw has emerged. Literally “loosed upon the world”.

...and pray, what may that be that was "loosed upon the world"; not least, what the hell "loosed" it?

If Dubious can define ‘relics’ — what then is Dubious?

One who has no use for relics unless they yield information to its examiner.

[attofishpi]

As intellectuals that read and read and read....you do real eyes eventually that you do what I do, right?

That you mine minds.

My way is more efficient, but as Lucifer said to the slow, carrion.

[Lacewing]

...

So, I asked you very nicely for clarification in our last exchange, and I think you just ignored it?

I have TESTED God re the below - in fact this entity 'God' tested me...and it was the worst test I have ever had to do...but I called it -at the time of the test :NOW! (this was after a fought knight of Gods testing - the final test) - the FAITH test was ""NOW"" to burn in HELL. (*sorry sounds ridiculous I know)

Okay, so am I understanding correctly that: Our life right NOW is the 'Hell'?

Maybe it is for some people? Or maybe life has bits of Heaven and Hell in it... for us to learn to navigate and survive?

What do you think?

I also said this...

I am truly sorry you've had such horrific 'testing'. I don't know who is doing the testing. Since I don't believe in God, I can only imagine your testing is from a part of yourself, or some kind of energy that is not showing you much kindness or compassion or love. Our own energy could be creating our own experience within the Universe.

I hope you don't take offense to things I say. I truly think these contemplations are fascinating. I just don't believe in a God, so I have no interest in attributing anything to that idea.

Any thoughts? Or are you just going to get drunk and be pissed off? In which case, how does that demonstrate that you have any mastery at all? Just sayin'. What do you expect people to base their perspectives on? Just what you claim?

[attofishpi]

...

So, I asked you very nicely for clarification in our last exchange, and I think you just ignored it?

..and apart from this, I will likely continue to ignore you.

[seeds]

iambiguous and I have had our fair share of disagreements and do not see eye-to-eye on certain metaphysical issues.

And even though I strongly disapprove of him (or anyone) casually using denigrating and hateful words such as "C_nks" in this conversation,...

Simply unbelievable. As I noted to phyllo above, I wasn't calling anyone a "slant eyed Chink", I was noting that "As some prefer" was my point! In other words, making a distinction between those who broach race up in the theoretical clouds like AJ and those who are more, shall we say, colorful...or "down to earth"?

Sometimes white folks will use the N word to make a point that is an actual attack on prejudice and stereotypes and discrimination: https://youtu.be/j5RuCEhHcG4

Good grief, I might have known that in my effort to come to your defense against phyllo's misinterpretation of your stance on racism, you would somehow manage to find the one thing in my post to use in order to find fault with me.

As you said - "simply unbelievable".

And no, out of simple respect and decency, white folks should never use the "n" word or "Ch_nk" (in their fully written or spoken form) under any circumstances (unless perhaps it's for some sort of historical or academic journal reporting on the use of hate speech).

And your John Lennon song example is ridiculous and shameful.
_______

[Lacewing]

...

So, I asked you very nicely for clarification in our last exchange, and I think you just ignored it?

..and apart from this, I will likely continue to ignore you.

Ah. Then I will remember that if you decide to talk to me again, this is how it will end up, so I won't bother with it. Good luck to you.

[attofishpi]

(you wouldn't think by the above that I know God rather personally)

Does the God that you are acquainted with bear much resemblance to the God in the Bible?

To be honest, it still is difficult to answer since I am still alive! - and also there appears to be more in store until death..

In 1997 when this 'God' entity made me aware of its existence, I decided to pick up a Bible and have a gander.

So in answer to your question. I tried to read some OT stuff - and found it boring tedious ridiculous.

So I decided to read the NT - the Gospel of Matthew - which read like a normal book. I'd do this each night before bed, and I read all the Gospels in the end (over time)

Back to your question. Years ago I did an internet search on all the EVIL of God in the Bible - of course it was the OT.

Well. The wrath of God I had been subjected to - that was the EVIL of God, very hard to LIVE (Evil livE)

When it comes to Christ - well, I've said it before, I would have rather been crucified than what I was put through for months at a time. I attempted suicide in 2003 - perhaps I was resurrected! ...since I awoke in bed and the car that had the pipes from the exhaust hooked up to the interior had rolled and hit the shed. There's more to that story, some of which is a little humourous.

Don't worry about that. Fact is God is a nasty piece of work - just like in the OT. I had abortions with a girl while rather young and when God started screwing with my REAL_IT_Y I told the kunt that I'd take full responsibility for that action - since even though we had split up some months earlier, I didn't want her to be subject to what I was experiencing.

OK..

So as a Christian and many many times wishing to be crudified and dead - I'd get rather angry to the point of calling Christ every nasty name under the Sun, and it's a catch 22 - since then God would become a superkunt. "You crossed the line"

There's another side to God ...and certain things from the aether this sage has spoken to me, which is very nice 'heaven' - that side is pretty darn cool.

As it stands right now - I just had almost two weeks where I never heard a peep out of God or sage....and it is REALLY weird, being 'normal'

But today, while on the throne having a crap - a voice called out "get Catholic" (which tends to mean, I have to confess to calling Christ all those nasty things - and then clean my act up otherwise that catch22 where ...woteva, repeat repeat repeat - )

So.

GOD IS NOT WHAT PREACHERS PREACH - ALL LOVING AND FORGIVENESS - THAT"S TOTAL BOLLOCKS.

THE OT KUNT GOD IS CORRECT - AND I'M STILL HOPING CHRIST WASN"T A WASTE OF NAILS...

I hope that clarifies (of course it doesn't)

[promethean75]

"I would have rather been crucified than what I was put through for months at a time. I attempted suicide in 2003"

if i may ask, what wuz/wur the reasons for the attempted suicide? something traumatic happened that plunged u into depression?

among the list of typical suicide reasons i find:

breakups, loss of a loved one, failure to get a job or loss of a job, terribly bad credit hence denial at the BMW car dealership, avoiding a life sentence, terminal illness and/or excessive suffering, not being able to get Brittney Spears tickets, overwhelming boredom and feeling of anomie, ennui, etc., running out of drugs and money, being bullied, waking up one morning and discovering that u mysteriously became a catholic priest over night, not geting the part, sacrifice for some cause.

that's all that immediately come to me.

[tillingborn]

You're a quarter right in your claim but also three quarters wrong.

I'm four quarters right: Nagel does not deny evolution. The problem is that you do not want to understand the difference between evolution and "Evolutionism". It is conceivable that you are too stupid to understand, but frankly very few people are when it is explained to them as often as it has been to you. Perhaps you will fare better with an analogy. Gravity is the name we give to the cause of a range of phenomena; things falling to the ground in our everyday experience; more generally the attractive force between massive objects. There are different theories to explain gravity, but even if they are all wrong, massive objects will still be subject to gravity. Likewise evolution is the name we give to the demonstrable fact that generations of living organisms adapt to better exploit an environmental niche. There are different theories to explain how this happens, but even if they are all wrong, it is still a fact that organisms evolve.
"Evolutionism" is a bogus theory of evolution invented by dishonest creationists - nobody actually believes "Evolutionism". The function of "Evolutionism" is to fail; this is ensured by making preposterous claims, for instance, that we should be knee deep in perfectly preserved fossils of at least one example of every link in the chain joining protozoa to homo sapiens. Having ensured the failure of a theory they invented, creationists insist on what in any case is an invalid conclusion that because a theory about evolution is false, evolution does not happen. The only people who see any merit in this creationist nonsense are creationists; nobody else is fooled.
Anyway, what Nagel is presenting is a theory of evolution which basically includes what amounts to a version of panpsychism. His motivation being, as you point out "It is prima facie highly implausible that life as we know it is the result of physical accidents together with natural selection." Be that as it may, the reason you infer that Nagel doesn't believe in evolution is that he doesn't believe certain theories about the fact of evolution, and you can't tell a theory from a fact.

[promethean75]

"this is ensured by making preposterous claims, for instance, that we should be knee deep in perfectly preserved fossils of at least one example of every link in the chain joining protozoa to homo sapiens."

yo T. Born I tried to tell em that months ago bro. He ain't tryna hear it.

In related news, when comrade Rosa Lichtenstein wuz aksed the following:

"My atheist friend frantically covered his ears when I started playing a recording of a sermon from my phone, which proves that atheists are insecure in their belief and know they can be swayed. Atheists, what do you have to say for yourselves?"

She summarily replied:

"I am sorry, I don’t believe you. We’ve had rather too many theists on here posting ridiculous or totally made up questions trying to embarrass us atheists.

Of course, if you are lying, this is what you can look forward to (if the Bible is to be believed):

“But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.” [Revelation 21:8. Bold added. Trump and George Santos are screwed then.]

But, even if you are to be believed, how is what one atheist allegedly did proof that “atheists are insecure in their belief and know they can be swayed”? From one alleged example you extrapolate to atheists in general?

Logic clearly isn’t your strong point. No wonder you’re a theist."

I believe the lesson here is that we might not always be able to expect the degree of reason required to understand the legitimacy and credibility of the theory of evolution to be present in our interlocutor if be he a theist.

In your particular example, it would seem like IC should know that an entire fossil record of every organism that ever lived is not only impossible, but also unecessary to sustain the theory of evolution.

Alas.......... he does not.

[attofishpi]

"I would have rather been crucified than what I was put through for months at a time. I attempted suicide in 2003"

if i may ask, what wuz/wur the reasons for the attempted suicide? something traumatic happened that plunged u into depression?

among the list of typical suicide reasons i find:

breakups, loss of a loved one, failure to get a job or loss of a job, terribly bad credit hence denial at the BMW car dealership, avoiding a life sentence, terminal illness and/or excessive suffering, not being able to get Brittney Spears tickets, overwhelming boredom and feeling of anomie, ennui, etc., running out of drugs and money, being bullied, waking up one morning and discovering that u mysteriously became a catholic priest over night, not geting the part, sacrifice for some cause.

that's all that immediately come to me.

Ok. I have very very rarely suffered depression, thank fuck.

U hit the nail with being bullied. Now all you need to do with your atheist mindset is switch the concept of 'the bully' to the Operating System that governs ALL REAL_IT_Y ...(GOD) ...and real eyes when this KUNT is bullying you, you can't point the finger at anyone and ALL this KUNT does, is render you a DELUSIONAL FOOL to anyone you attempt to talk to.

Now.

Do you understand Y I attempted suicide without feeling depressed? (of course you dont - U need to understand that this bully entity IS ALL reality - and what it can do, without anyone around you able to WITNESS)

(perhaps also people might comprehend Y I drink like an attomicfish)

[promethean75]

Alright so your biggest problem wuz the voice u heard in your head, who u thought wuz god, saying mean things to u?

Bloody hell how did u pull through that mate?