Philosophy Now Forum

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 2:51 pm

Alexiev wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 2:41 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 2:33 pm
But I did not insinuate God has a penis.

For Christians, God (aka Jesus) did have a penis. And of course Zeus had all of those mortal children, conceived through sex (although Helen was hatched from an egg, because Zeus raped (or seduced) Leda while in the form if a swan.).

Leda and the Swan by W.B. Yeats

A sudden blow: the great wings beating still
Above the staggering girl, her thighs caressed
By the dark webs, her nape caught in his bill,
He holds her helpless breast upon his breast.

How can those terrified vague fingers push
The feathered glory from her loosening thighs?
And how can body, laid in that white rush,
But feel the strange heart beating where it lies?

A shudder in the loins engenders there
The broken wall, the burning roof and tower
And Agamemnon dead.
Being so caught up,
So mastered by the brute blood of the air,
Did she put on his knowledge with his power
Before the indifferent beak could let her drop?

I accept what you say; I forgot about Jesus Christ. Trinitarian God and Zeus both have penises.

However my main point , despite Yeats's amazing sophistry, remains , that gender is a cultural matter.

There's no such thing as 'gender'. The word is SEX.

accelafine wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 2:56 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 2:51 pm

Alexiev wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 2:41 pm

For Christians, God (aka Jesus) did have a penis. And of course Zeus had all of those mortal children, conceived through sex (although Helen was hatched from an egg, because Zeus raped (or seduced) Leda while in the form if a swan.).

I accept what you say; I forgot about Jesus Christ. Trinitarian God and Zeus both have penises.

However my main point , despite Yeats's amazing sophistry, remains , that gender is a cultural matter.

There's no such thing as 'gender'. The word is SEX.

I guess I have not made my point clear enough.
By gender I refer to behaviours and attitudes that are commonly associated with sex.
I gather that you associate an obnoxious set of behaviours with masculinity. While I quite understand your point of view there are people such as myself who associate masculinity with both good and bad behaviours.

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 3:14 pm I guess I have not made my point clear enough.

The tenor sax sound is definitely masculine.
Phil Woods could soften up the sound to alto, make is more cozy than honking.

Walker wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 3:33 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 3:14 pm I guess I have not made my point clear enough.

The tenor sax sound is definitely masculine.
Phil Woods could soften up the sound to alto, make is more cozy than honking.

To trivialise is to be sarcastic

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 3:14 pm

accelafine wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 2:56 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2024 2:51 pm

I accept what you say; I forgot about Jesus Christ. Trinitarian God and Zeus both have penises.

However my main point , despite Yeats's amazing sophistry, remains , that gender is a cultural matter.

There's no such thing as 'gender'. The word is SEX.

I guess I have not made my point clear enough.
By gender I refer to behaviours and attitudes that are commonly associated with sex.
I gather that you associate an obnoxious set of behaviours with masculinity. While I quite understand your point of view there are people such as myself who associate masculinity with both good and bad behaviours.

I guess I have not made my point clear enough. There is no such thing as 'gender'. You seem a tad confused. Of course men behave differently. They have all that testosterone. Why do you think violent offending is committed by nearly 100 percent males? Nothing particularly 'cultural' about that.

xxx

Fairy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 3:29 am

accelafine wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 3:05 am

And, 'we' know who the 'usual suspects' are. Alluding to a perceived wrong doing, and criticizing another for just making a 'mistake' only, can and does drive some people crazy or insane.

"accelafine" and "vegetariantaxidermy" did this quite often.

Fairy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 3:48 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 3:43 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 3:35 am

You told me to call the police just for having an argument with Harbal ..that's taking the piss.

You were alleging sexual exploitation, were you not? That's criminal...here, if not there.

We were both consenting, so I have no idea what you are on about. You must be reading me wrong. Or I am explaining things wrong which I seem to do all the time apparently.

"Immanuel can" is reading you Wrong, once again.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 3:54 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 3:48 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 3:43 am
You were alleging sexual exploitation, were you not? That's criminal...here, if not there.

We were both consenting...

Well, then the cops won't help. But no, I was not "taking the piss."

This thread's turned into a bizarre soap opera. I'm out.

Partly because of your misunderstandings and misinterpretations, once again.

accelafine wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 4:19 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 2:35 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 2:33 am Please stop hating us women you horrible men. It's you that are the evil ones, but then you blame the woman for being evil. Please stop with the mental abuse, please, my own father mentally and sexually abused me for years, please stop it. .please make it all stop.

None of us is your father. We're not abusing you. We've been disagreeing with you. It's quite different.

If that's how it has been for you, all I can tell you, with all kindness, is you need counselling help. Nobody gets over a history of abuse by suppressing or denying it. You get through it by dealing with it, and you need help to do that.

And everyone knows that 'counselling' is the cure for everything

Do you know what is better?

In fact do you even have one suggestion only, let alone a better suggestion?

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 9:24 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 18, 2024 11:09 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Sep 18, 2024 10:40 pm
Now it seems you're only playing word-games, and with nothing at stake. I'll forgo further comment on that, therefore.

Seriously I just give up. This is pure torture.

I'm so done with this BS

IC, just leave me. I don't want you to stay with with me anymore. It's nothing personal you understand, it's just that we seem to have a huge language barrier you and I and that doesn't look like it will ever change any time soon. I'm not even interested any more in trying to reconcile with you about anything to do with the subject of God that we can both agree on. It seems we are living on two different planets. And the gaping big gap between both our unique understandings of what we are each trying in vain to show each other seems to be getting wider and wider, looking almost like it will never close ever, even if it had an infinitely eternal amount of time in which to close. It's obvious it's never going to happen. So be it. I'm done, my work is done. It is finished.

Yes, playing word games confuses reality with imagination. Just because the word “unconditional,” exists, does not mean that the condition of unconditional exists, although there is evidence that it does exist in the conceptual, dualistic, and limited interpretation of events.

Just because the words dark energy and dark matter exist does not make it true, although there is scientific evidence that it is true, and there is evidence in the conceptual, dualistic interpretation of events.

What is 'it' here, exactly, which is supposedly true?

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 9:24 am For most of human kind, just because the concept of human flight existed did not make such a notion true or possible, and now there is empirical evidence that it is possible.

To be understood, unconditional love must be unconditionally understood, i.e., accepted by faith as true.

For example, to understand why God loves even the denizens of Sodom and Gomorrah is to understand why a loving God would allow a body to be harmed, even to the extent that it begins the process of returning to its constituent elements within the cycle of life. Understanding of unconditional love is usually conditioned by conceptual, dualistic Notions of Nice, which is perfectly natural.

Imagining oneself as one who loves Unconditionally is to seek God-like justification for any action, however that requires God-like perspective which for human beans places Ego before God in the ordering of dualistic worship.

Wrong, again.

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 10:02 am

Fairy wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 9:45 am

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 9:24 am
To be understood, unconditional love must be unconditionally understood, i.e., accepted by faith as true.

Well that's just basically 99% a mistake that christians think. That faith means being a better christian, trying to do less sin, trying to become a better human, trying to serve god and be good enough etc. BUT THAT'S FOCUSING ON YOURSELF, NOT GOD

It's more like, walking in the footsteps of God, as taught of Jesus. A Christian follows the tracks in the snow sprinkled through the Bible.

LOL So-called "christians" do not even agree on an interpretation of the bible. In fact it is absolutely hilarious you people, and even the so-called "christian" ones, could not even agree on what a so-called "christian" even is, let alone agreeing upon the purposely written riddled stories within the bible.

The bible was written in a way so that 'one day' you human beings will come-to-know, and understand, also, the True intentions behind 'the words' and 'stories' within the bible.

In other words when you human beings had evolved enough to be able to 'read between the lives', then, and only then, you will begin to see, and understand, the True and whole picture of all-there-is, too.

Until then you will remain exactly where you all are 'now', when this is being written.

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 10:02 am You know, when I posted the above, I had not read in the thread past what I commented on.

So I did and see all the drama. About that I say, for you, there is peace in Christianity but to analyze it is both exceedingly complex, and also absurdly simple, depending on the frequency of the receiver. One word can be enough to find peace, but the word depends on the receiver. This is why Sanskrit is called a conscious language. It's more objective. The vibrational sounds of the words correlate, in a fashion, with the effect upon conceptual mind, which in turn filters perception into meaning.

However, 'that language', also, has not yet united you human beings into the One peaceful and harmonious Being, which is what is needed in order to create and cause 'the world' that you all want to live in, and share.

So, once again, there is absolutely no use in 'trying to' persuade anyone to look at and/or follow one particular language, religion, nor teaching.

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 10:02 am There are key elements, all true such as the path to peace begins with the first step, and when each step is what must be done then the first step is always the next step. (The irony of self-help word games ... )

And, the first step is 'Admitting' your Wrong doing. Accepting responsibility.

While, the second step is 'Wanting' to change and actually doing what is needed to change "yourself". Taking responsibility. Which is actually seeking out help, and being absolutely Truly 'Open' and 'Honest' about absolutely every thing, in order to help "yourself", first and only, to change for the betterment of not just 'you' but for the betterment of every one 'around you'.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 10:52 am

Walker wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 9:24 am
To be understood, unconditional love must be unconditionally understood, i.e., accepted by faith as true.

Illogical batshit """"christian""" bollocks.


What are 10 commandments if NOT CONDITIONS?

Ten commandments written by human beings, and Falsely passed off as 'God's word', or 'God's laws/rules,' is a prime example of the actual irrefutable Truth just being twisted and distorted by human beings presumptions and beliefs.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 10:52 am God's love according to simpletons such as Walker: Believe in me, I have unconditional love (ergo, forget my 10 commandments) and I will not BURN YOU IN HELL FOREVER...just as long as you believe in me.

Here is another prime example of one's own twisted and distorted beliefs preventing and stopping it from learning and seeing, and understanding, what the actual Truth is, exactly.

Yeah. Your idiotic version of God is FULL OF HYPOCRISY/IRONY where it comes to the concept of "UNCONDITIONAL LOVE"

ERGO, GOD does not love you Walker, not you, not me, not any kunt with anything remotely akin to "unconditional love"...

attofishpi wrote: ↑Thu Sep 19, 2024 10:52 am
PS. Sorry to ruin your "christian" faith.

Just for your information the ten commandments are not God's commandments.

For God does not 'command' absolutely any thing.

God just guides, instructs, and tuits, from within, while allowing all of you to do absolutely any thing you like and want to do.

And, if anyone all of you just do not like to nor want to LISTEN, and LEARN, then so be it. you are all absolutely free to choose whatever you want to do.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Fri Sep 20, 2024 4:31 am ..it's OK. Just glad you under_stand the point I am making and the point of GOD per what CHRIST went through.

What that one human being named "jesus christ" 'went through' was relatively nothing compared to what a lot of children 'have to endure' and 'go through'.

accelafine wrote: ↑Fri Sep 20, 2024 9:48 pm

Fairy wrote: ↑Fri Sep 20, 2024 9:45 pm

accelafine wrote: ↑Fri Sep 20, 2024 9:26 pm I have a particular dislike for people who threaten suicide to get attention or manipulate others into giving them what they want. There were people on here who were genuinely worried. You make me sick.

All I can say is that some people are VERY easy to please...

You were worried about me and yet I make you sick…ok, that makes perfect sense.

I wasn’t seeking attention I was being real in the moment. I was generally feeling in that moment that I wanted to die. I wasn’t looking for anyone’s sympathy or concern for my well being. If you really care about my well being, then love me now.

Right now, can you love me? Can you genuinely care about me? Right now am I giving you concern to worry about me?

I’ve told you, right now I’m fine, in love and feeling marvellous…can you be happy for me right now?

Or do I still make you sick? And is that being genuinely concerned for someone’s well being?

I don't like you at all. I can't stand manipulative people. I don't dislike children when I see them having a tantrum, but you are not a child.

Obviously 'this one' does not yet fully understand nor can it recognize and see what is actually happening and occurring here.