Page 3 of 3
Re: In Defense of God
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2025 2:03 pm
by Fairy
attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 9:06 am
Phil8659 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 03, 2025 1:03 pm
In Defense of God
One of the first things sage via GOD (*aether) stated to me was "God needs nothing".
Thus, certainly doesn't need any defence.
God needs nothing, because God is everything, including the defender, the defensive, and the defence.
That's what sage via GOD stated to me.
Re: In Defense of God
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2025 3:32 pm
by promethean75
Hey somebody do me a favor and create a thread called In Defense Of Zod and then we can keep it bumped so it stays right beside this thread. We don't even have to post anything in it. The point is to immediately make a mockery of any religious discussion here in the eyes of a new possible member browsing the forum. You know what I mean?
Some staunch garden variety christian know-it-all wants to set up shop somewhere and he's like "In Defense of Zod? Is this a joke or something?" Lol you see it in your head don't try not to laugh.
C'mon man I'd do it but I have a phobia for starting new threads. It's an OCD thing because I feel like there's already too many threads and I don't want to add to the chaos.
Re: In Defense of God
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2025 3:36 pm
by promethean75
Wait! We could post thar Pic of Zod in the White House... the original Superman movie one... the Bee Gees lookin guy... with the caption: gotchu sucka!
Just that post in the thread. Oh c'mon man. Rick let us do it.
Re: In Defense of God
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2025 4:50 pm
by Fairy
promethean75 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 3:36 pm
Wait! We could post thar Pic of Zod in the White House... the original Superman movie one... the Bee Gees lookin guy... with the caption: gotchu sucka!
Just that post in the thread. Oh c'mon man. Rick let us do it.
Absolutely, why wait. Do it now if that’s what’s wanted. Any narrative will do.
The In the Defence of Zod seems like an excellent idea. Go for it.
Re: In Defense of God
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2025 5:03 pm
by promethean75
No i just told you I can't do it because of my obsessive organization disorder. Sister, I'm two beers short of a full-blown VA. There's too goddamn many lists, and we need a GUT-FSK, FFS. One final axiomatically complete self-referential non-cantorean self-halting symbolically recursive tripartite coding system to navigate our four dimensional emprio-conceptual time/space brane. And all these threads littered about this site are NOT contributing to that task.
Re: In Defense of God
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2025 5:33 pm
by Fairy
promethean75 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 5:03 pm
No i just told you I can't do it because of my obsessive organization disorder. Sister, I'm two beers short of a full-blown VA. There's too goddamn many lists, and we need a GUT-FSK, FFS. One final axiomatically complete self-referential non-cantorean self-halting symbolically recursive tripartite coding system to navigate our four dimensional emprio-conceptual time/space brane. And all these threads littered about this site are NOT contributing to that task.
There’s too many leaves to count lying all over the ground, I guess that’s just the nature of the fall, oh well.
Re: In Defense of God
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2025 10:34 pm
by promethean75
"No problem, I know a lot of people cannot scrape up a thought of their own and just point to some pile of shit, thinking that because they stepped into it, it might be nice to share it."
Well played, Phil.
It's worse than you think. If you didn't check the video info, you wouldn't see that that's a dubbed video, and those people are actually sick and disabled people. That host got into some serious trouble for that shit. Watch the vid in the info.
I love the video, and whoever thought to do that is brilliant. Knowing to make the connection between that guy and how a Nietzschean would behave in those people's presence and around talk of Plato and Marx. There couldn't be a better video... at least until you realize it's dubbed.
Re: In Defense of God
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2025 10:48 pm
by promethean75
It's that maniacal laugh and loss of all composure. The real laughter of madness. When the absurdity of something is matched only by your own sense of superiority toward it. Caught in it, as it were, and flailing about barely able to breathe. The melodic cadence and tonality of the laughing. That's dionysus in there. That's the madman, the artist, the ubermench, bro.
What's so authentic about it is that there's a cruelty in it that is so deep, so instinctual that he isn't able to keep a lid on it, and it blows out of him. That poor guy with the throat surgery and the sexy wheelchair girl in the 80s black and purple body sweater. She literally started crying and this guy is out of control laughing.
How could you not love this video if you know anything about N? I simply don't get it.
Re: In Defense of God
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2025 10:56 pm
by promethean75
... especially in the last moments of the laughter after Marx guy with the Darth Vader voice starts talking. That highest pitched sustained note right here: ahhhhh-ha-ha haaaaaaaaa.
Right at the last bit after the hand on the knee. He is completely and utterly free in that moment.
That right there is without a doubt the greatest sound byte of laughter I have ever heard. I understand it so dearly that I can't put it into words.
Re: In Defense of God
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2025 11:07 pm
by attofishpi
accelafine wrote:--
--
I thought I'd bring the language nazi into this, I hope you don't mind.
Why do Americans use the spelling DEFENSE instead of the correct English spelling of DEFENCE...seems odd where they are attempting to 'simplify' our beautiful language by attempting to use phonetic transcription.
Defense = de fenz (incorrect sound)
Defence = de fence (correct sound)
Re: In Defense of God
Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2025 2:25 am
by Phil8659
puto wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 9:59 am
Using, peer-reviewed material, you would know what the term
god meant. Scholars go through rigorous learning, not just look-up and then pawn it off as your own (without any research and peer-review.) The internet is one big lie, for the most part. You only get what you pay for and put your time into is what you get out of it. The internet can give you 100,000 searches in an engine, a librarian can give you one, the correct one. Plus, the magazine has an internal search engine on terms, and if you read them-you may learn something. Remember that you only get out of it what you put into it. Academics is the truth a justification-why I am a sceptic-a belief is infallible that is most of the beliefs on this thread as well as the message board. "When you argue with an idiot, then there are two."
You make a good point, therefore I shall hide my laughter, and my critiques. However, I am almost positive, that there are people who do think, who would take exception to calling Socrates, Plato and Aristotle fools.
Now, if you go to the other side of the coin, and take such works as the Bible, your statement would piss them all off, calling what they think of God as a Fool, for centuries of arguing with mankind.
But I am sure you are right. We should all hire a Gypsy fortune teller to inform us as to whom is a peer we may argue with such that neither of them fear not but a tie so that neither one of them would end up a fool.
Re: In Defense of God
Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2025 5:19 pm
by Perspective
Phil8659 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 10, 2025 5:14 pm
Perspective wrote: ↑Mon Mar 10, 2025 4:36 pm
When I teach grammar, I regularly use philosophy quotes for students to point out the different parts of speech. 2-for-1 deal!
I am slowly working on a 4 in 1 deal for grammar teaching, a product of the result of binary processing which gives us a grammar Matrix: Common Grammar, Arithmetic, Algebra and Geometry. So that mankind becomes aware of, as Plato noted, the similar idea in the many examples.
You beat my deal!
Re: In Defense of God
Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2025 5:23 pm
by Perspective
promethean75 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 11, 2025 3:32 pm
Hey somebody do me a favor and create a thread called In Defense Of Zod and then we can keep it bumped so it stays right beside this thread. We don't even have to post anything in it. The point is to immediately make a mockery of any religious discussion here in the eyes of a new possible member browsing the forum. You know what I mean?
Some staunch garden variety christian know-it-all wants to set up shop somewhere and he's like "In Defense of Zod? Is this a joke or something?" Lol you see it in your head don't try not to laugh.
Why are you so biased and hateful of a particular branch of philosophy?
Do you feel similarly about ethics?
Personally, I don’t love every branch of philosophy equally but I wouldn’t set up to mock one. What would be the point - to prove the inability to acknowledge that branch?