Philosophy Now Forum

So your contribution to the Bible is the valuable bit, and Jesus' stuff is shit?

FlashDangerpants wrote:So your contribution to the Bible is the valuable bit, and Jesus' stuff is shit?

No, in the book of Revelation, God's unified message to mankind is transmitted by Christ's letters to the seven churches, representing the seven continents of the world from a spiritual standpoint.

bobevenson wrote:No, in the book of Revelation, God's unified message to mankind is transmitted by Christ's letters to the seven churches, ...

Er!? He was dead, if he ever existed that is.

representing the seven continents of the world from a spiritual standpoint.

You're making this bit up to fit your numerology.

Arising_uk wrote:

bobevenson wrote:No, in the book of Revelation, God's unified message to mankind is transmitted by Christ's letters to the seven churches, ...

Er!? He was dead, if he ever existed that is.

representing the seven continents of the world from a spiritual standpoint.

You're making this bit up to fit your numerology.

Yeah. Eurasia makes six continents. And Antarctica is just too bloody cold, so we can discount that one as well. Down to five....

Arising_uk wrote:

bobevenson wrote:No, in the book of Revelation, God's unified message to mankind is transmitted by Christ's letters to the seven churches, ...

Er!? He was dead, if he ever existed that is.

representing the seven continents of the world from a spiritual standpoint.

You're making this bit up to fit your numerology.

No, you're the one who's dead, and I mean brain-dead! John on the isle of Patmos was writing about his visions of Christ in the book of Revelation. As for myself, also a divinely inspired prophet, I make up nothing.

bobevenson wrote:No, you're the one who's dead, and I mean brain-dead! John on the isle of Patmos was writing about his visions of Christ in the book of Revelation.

So not Christ's letters then but the delusions of a schizophrenic.

As for myself, also a divinely inspired prophet, I make up nothing.

I believe you as you are a schizophrenic too.

By the by,

bobevenson wrote:Theist, agnostic, atheist. As Bob the Baptist, I can tell you that the first and third are fools, and absolute fools at that.

bobevenson wrote:Anybody who isn't an agnostic is a fool.

So tell us oh 'prophet', given you appear to be a theist does this make you absolute fool?

If not and you are an agnostic where does this leave this 'divinity' of yours?

Arising_uk wrote:

bobevenson wrote:No, you're the one who's dead, and I mean brain-dead! John on the isle of Patmos was writing about his visions of Christ in the book of Revelation.

So not Christ's letters then but the delusions of a schizophrenic.

As for myself, also a divinely inspired prophet, I make up nothing.

I believe you as you are a schizophrenic too.

By the by,

bobevenson wrote:Theist, agnostic, atheist. As Bob the Baptist, I can tell you that the first and third are fools, and absolute fools at that.

bobevenson wrote:Anybody who isn't an agnostic is a fool.

So tell us oh 'prophet', given you appear to be a theist does this make you absolute fool?

If not and you are an agnostic where does this leave this 'divinity' of yours?

Send your goofy post to the nearest psychiatrist, and let him decide who's schizo!

bobevenson wrote:Send your goofy post to the nearest psychiatrist, and let him decide who's schizo!

The only goofy thing about my post is you bob.

Arising_uk wrote:

bobevenson wrote:Send your goofy post to the nearest psychiatrist, and let him decide who's schizo!

The only goofy thing about my post is you bob.

I guess you figure the spokesman from the Spiritual Counterfeits Project is goofy, too, huh? In fact, anybody not in tune with your jaded outlook must be goofy.

bobevenson wrote:I guess you figure the spokesman from the Spiritual Counterfeits Project is goofy, too, huh? ...

If I think of him at all I think him just another goofy godbotherer but I definitely feel sorry for him having to deal with loons such as you.

In fact, anybody not in tune with your jaded outlook must be goofy.

Anybody can be in tune with whatever outlook they like, I just like Philosophy as a response . Although you with your 'God' talks to me in a black voice are clearly at the goofier end of times.

Arising_uk wrote:

bobevenson wrote:I guess you figure the spokesman from the Spiritual Counterfeits Project is goofy, too, huh? ...

If I think of him at all I think him just another goofy godbotherer but I definitely feel sorry for him having to deal with loons such as you.

In fact, anybody not in tune with your jaded outlook must be goofy.

Anybody can be in tune with whatever outlook they like, I just like Philosophy as a response . Although you with your 'God' talks to me in a black voice are clearly at the goofier end of times.

Again, your post shows just how goofy you are. Obviously, the spokesman for the SCP would laugh in your face for making such a stupid observation. And then you double down on your obtuseness by implying that religion is not philosophy. You might want to take that up with Rick Lewis and suggest eliminating the "Philosophy of Religion" section.

bobevenson wrote: Obviously, the spokesman for the SCP would laugh in your face

I certainly hope he'd laugh in mine. The last thing I need is to be considered an equal by a cabal of lunatic religious zealots.

bobevenson wrote:religion is not philosophy.

Religion is both a psychological and a sociological phenomenon and as such it is a legitimate subject for philosophical discussion on these terms. However the existence or non-existence of the supernatural is not a legitimate subject for philosophical discussion because this topic places itself beyond the reach of philosophical enquiry by its own definition.

I trust this clears the matter up, Bob.

Obvious Leo wrote:

bobevenson wrote: Obviously, the spokesman for the SCP would laugh in your face

I certainly hope he'd laugh in mine. The last thing I need is to be considered an equal by a cabal of lunatic religious zealots.

bobevenson wrote:religion is not philosophy.

Religion is both a psychological and a sociological phenomenon and as such it is a legitimate subject for philosophical discussion on these terms. However the existence or non-existence of the supernatural is not a legitimate subject for philosophical discussion because this topic places itself beyond the reach of philosophical enquiry by its own definition.

I trust this clears the matter up, Bob.

It definitely clears the matter up; neither you nor Arising have the slightest idea of what you're talking about; you're just a couple of foreign tag teamers who deserve to be hit over the head with a folding chair by some ringside wrestling fan shill!

This is a very ungentlemanly response from a bloke who has been touched by the divine, Bob. I was only trying to be helpful.

Obvious Leo wrote:This is a very ungentlemanly response from a bloke who has been touched by the divine, Bob. I was only trying to be helpful.

If you want to be helpful, I'll tell you what to do with that boomerang of yours that doesn't involve throwing it!