Total posts: 2,869
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Capital G God is true and authoritative no matter what anyone thinks, is eternal, and NOT created.
I think he gets that, which is why he made the distinction in the OP. He was specifically referring to gods with a lower case, which would be a demi-god/incarnation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
the Bible puts the Earth and humanity as the focus of creation.
Well not necessarily (because it doesn't actually say that), but certainly the Bible's focus WOULD be this planet and humanity, otherwise what meaning would it have for those who inhabit it?? the text is supposed to apply to us, not another galaxy or planet but that doesn't mean humans are the only focus in the entire universe as there could be many galaxies that have inhabitants IMO, then there are the heaven realms beyond the physical.
According to Genesis, God spent nearly all His time creating and populating the Earth.
Again how do you deduce that? No txt says that and I don't see how it follows that God is not doing other things and other things within our universe.
Billions of stars were thrown in almost as an afterthought at the end of day 4.
I'm not a Genesis literalist so there's no reason for me to assume that God had/has no process of creating the universe and I have no reason to assume that stars aren't for other planets as well. Another conclusion that doesn't really follow.
And their purpose? To provide light for the Earth.
Provide light for the earth and any other planet that needs light.....as well as seed the entire universe, again no reason to believe humans are the only ones that occupy the universe or that God is not using stars for other planets.
If that is not egocentric, I don't know what is.
The txt is referring to us because its' about us in the same way you'd want to learn about something that is relevant to your experience, that doesn't mean that the stars only purposes are JUST for earth alone, even if it were that's how God wanted it. However I don't need to make any extra assumptions when not necessary. In what way are you referring to "egocentric" anyways? because there's a difference in understanding that God did in fact create the universe for all forms of life but in no way does that equate to "without regard for the feelings or desires of others; self-centered." It's not our fault God created stars for planets, so that it would play a role in sustaining life. So who or what are you claiming is egocentric?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
I don't really care even if he behaves like a good little bully boy, we all know his intentions and that's not gonna change. So, while he's being a good boy he's still going to follow us around doing everything he does without the things that will get em banned. It's a bummer either way lol, but I'll have to live with it I recon and we all will. Willows the same thing.
It doesn't help this board any either when trolls from other sites plan to sabotage the forum, I spotted two geeks planning to attack the religious and "right-wingers" on debateart. I don't know who they were because of the names but I might have a clue do to the immature writing styles. We have enemies even outside this forum!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
What are the attributes something has to have to count as 'a god'? I don't mean capital-G God, but a member of the class 'gods'.For example, does a god have to be immortal or unkillable? Many myths invovlve entitities that have powers that fall well short of omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence, but still get called 'gods' or 'godesses'.
You're referring to demi-gods/incarnations. There are many of them and they rule as overlords within divisions of the created worlds including this one. I would say status, knowledge , power and ability is what classifies a being as a god or demi god. There exists a hierarchy of the manifestations of the Creator each one being more stepped down than the one before it, and there are the correlating realms stepped down as well being more limited than the one before it and the physical being the outer most layer.
So basically you have the god of the lower created division which is the physical and astral worlds, again a demi god of the very next planes higher up which would be the causal and mental, then the etheric layer which is the upper mind division and even then once you leave the lower grand division of creation altogether you have the upper pure conscious realms and so on. BTW all beings and all created souls are immortal including yours so that's a given.
What happens is the first Source needs an embodiment to channel Its power, energy and creativity and It does so through these spiritual beings however these entities develop their own personalities they are not all the same...in form nor in conduct. These beings are permitted to control and or rule each layer, the reason they are considered gods by humans is pretty obvious. Their status, knowledge and abilities FAR exceed any humans however even the human soul is of the very same nature only the human soul is way far down the pecking order. It's not a hierarchy of tyranny though, it's just a natural process and progression of creation and for each individual soul. Basically you're on a journey that you couldn't even comprehend the span of as well as all other souls.
Does a god have to be conscious or sentient? Must he/she/it be able to plan ahead and delibately act to bring about their desired goal?
In my opinion yes. I don't see how anything unconscious could manifest/act anything at all. Could be wrong maybe, perhaps if you were to provide an example of something unconscious that could produce conscious results? I'm going to go with my first answer.
As an atheist, obvuously I don't believe in capital-G God, but really I don't believe there is any thing 'god-like'.
Obviously lol, but then again you are limited by your own perceptions and form unless you exercise those abilities you have spiritually speaking. I believe that you believe in the things that you accept because you've never observed anything and I respect that, but "spiritually" based things (inner based things) and higher conscious experiences are acquired as opposed to the outer experience which would be your physical perceptions and all you have to do is look around there's not much to it. But the spiritual and inner experienced is a trained progression like with anything you wish to study and master, it's a little more complex than just looking out and seeing everything around you that's not how spirituality, the inner experience operates. The physical perception alone must be transcended and this requires activity and your participation.
Anybody can excel in this area but it depends upon the individual and what they're willing to do and or accept. And no I don't mean blindly accept because spirituality is an observation not a belief but it's also a cultivation.
.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Are you serious? what a let down, he'll be counting the seconds til he can get back on here for sure. It's pretty obvious what he wants to do with the remainder of his years on earth, I really think this has become his life and sole purpose of enjoyment harassing Theists. How sad.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
Given the vastness of the universe, the idea that its creator takes special interest in our daily lives, that the entire thing was created with us in mind, strikes me as absurdly egocentric.
The universe wasn't created with just us in mind, it was created for ALL of us in mind to have experiences.....whether that be here or in some other galaxy or planet, why do you think God creates planets? The vast expanse of the universe is just a canvas, with unlimited potential, it's there but it means nothing in relation to your significance as an individual unique soul. If ANYTHING it's the soul itself that is significant, not the universe. The universe is marvelous, but the soul is significant and why not? it is an expression of the Creator, you have been afforded the highest level of consciousness within this realm so that you can enjoy this world as it is and see the wonder in it and know that you are indeed significant in such a vast reality and that's part of the point as well....that we look out in space and see just how incredible creation is.
I can see how you would think its absurdly egocentric but you're judging it based on the fact you think no God exists, and do not see the significance in souls....and if that is not the case then I'll ask you the same question I asked Keith...why would you think that the creation of your soul has no significance to God simply due to where you are placed in our universe and the size of it?
I have no idea whether a God exists, and don't think anyone else does either.
And that would be why we are discussing Theistic topics and probably the reason it seems absurd to you. But that's just perspective, it's actually not absurd at all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
It's funny people use the size and expanse of the universe to attempt to argue against a Creator. That's a strange position to take when in fact it should be the opposite, the fact such a vast grand scale universe exists should invoke the wonder and certainly the curiosity of God. Of course this is not my argument for God, but it's your argument against the Creator, so I'm only flipping it around. But tell me, how does the size of the universe make our experiences on planet earth insignificant to a Creator? can you explain how that would follow? what does size mean to an omnipresent reality in any way?
You realize that galaxies and planets "out there" exist for the purpose of housing creatures right? no, no Keith it's not empty, at all. It may seem like that from our perspective not being able to reach and examine what is living in other galaxies but make no mistake about it, you are not alone lol. This too has no real bearing on our significance, all souls are unique and all souls come out of the heart of God, where they go, where they live, where they have their experiences is entirely irrelevant. Souls are unique in and of themselves and so they are all significant, doesn't matter if there's a billion miles of space between planets or not. Another non-sequitur TBH.
My next question, why would you think that the creation of your soul has no significance to God simply due to where you are placed in our universe?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
But is there any particular reason Panzram is worse than for instance Luis Garavito
"The detailed description of his killings brought Garavito to tears.
Garavito was sentenced to 1,853 years and 9 days in prison, the lengthiest sentence in Colombian history.[9] However, Colombian law limits imprisonment to 40 years—and because Garavito helped police find the victims' bodies, his sentence was further reduced to 22 years.[10]
Garavito is serving his sentence in a Colombian prison, the exact location of which is unavailable to the public. Worried about his safety and well-being, Garavito has made an arrangement with police. Police cooperation and his continued good behavior have ensured Garavito's safety within the prison walls. He is held separately from all other prisoners because it is feared that he would be killed immediately. He is paranoid of being poisoned. Therefore, he only accepts drinks given directly to him by individuals whom he trusts. His guards are on very good terms with Garavito because he is relaxed, positive and respectful towards them. He is considered to be a well-behaved inmate with a positive attitude. He is scheduled to be released in 2021."
Garavito is serving his sentence in a Colombian prison, the exact location of which is unavailable to the public. Worried about his safety and well-being, Garavito has made an arrangement with police. Police cooperation and his continued good behavior have ensured Garavito's safety within the prison walls. He is held separately from all other prisoners because it is feared that he would be killed immediately. He is paranoid of being poisoned. Therefore, he only accepts drinks given directly to him by individuals whom he trusts. His guards are on very good terms with Garavito because he is relaxed, positive and respectful towards them. He is considered to be a well-behaved inmate with a positive attitude. He is scheduled to be released in 2021."
This description above (despite the sickening crimes) makes Garavito look like someone's Grandma compared to the nature of Panzram. You won't find any tears, or testimonies of guards of good behavior lol. Not even close. Am I reading this correctly? this sicko gets decent treatment and pats on the back on the account of good behavior after slaughtering almost 200 CHILDREN? please tell me I'm dreaming.....
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
And still, you arrogantly and ignorantly refuse to address the topic and instead push your hideously, vulgar, despicable and evil agenda of what you call "truth".You are part of the scum and dregs of society, nothing more.That is ignorance and arrogance in the extreme.You are a nit wit.
Mopac, in all seriousness these comments to you made by Willows needs to be reported and dealt with. I'm doubting the moderation of this place but this kind of garbage needs to go and stay out. If you don't report it I will. This guy and vagabond are trolls from DDO, they just try and make you feel whatever negative energy they wish to project, they are not interested in honest discussion and debate. They're gonna spend the next 10 years of their pathetic lives destroying this site and harassing the Theists in the religion section.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
Okay now I can't look at it without wanting to laugh.
Me neither, we've turned what Bully meant for an assault into a laugh, I like that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
But Father Fuckface clutches it tighter like "no me nice bear" in the creepiest way, until the baby has to be physically pried from him.
Yeah, and no one can see from the angle the pressure he's using, squeezing the babies face, probably putting more pressure on the part of the baby we can't see in the footage while he's forcing the baby to his face, notice you can't see the Priests right hand when the baby is flailing about in pain. I think that's why he was holding on because he was trying to harm the baby as long as he could, this guy is seriously sick, needs to be dragged out of that church pronto.
but there's weirdly no reaction on anyone's face,
Actually if you watch it again, the father can't see what's going on but when he hears the slap look at the fathers reaction. I just don't think he knew what was happening before the slap.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
The OP did say "caught" your interest. 😋 Meaning something that crossed your path, not something you independently went looking for. I think most of us hear about serial killers while we're watching or reading something else, since they're not uncommon in media, and then we look it up.
Lol, that's exactly what happened, I saw Panzram's name and then unfortunately looked it up.
Anyway, I haven't read his writings yet. I'll try to find them. Just glancing at his claims, I will say that 1,000 instances of sodomy on men, especially if he meant they were all nonconsensual, is hard to believe.
The "I've raped a 1000 men" is probably Carl's way of saying he's sodomized so many victims he's lost count. So I wouldn't count that as being something totally accurate. It's more of an arrogant, broad sweeping statement that he's committed more crimes than he could count....but at the same time has truth to it, the numbers being irrelevant. I'm sure when you read his confessions in detail you will have no doubts about his crimes, they are very descriptive.
But is there any particular reason Panzram is worse than for instance Luis Garavito or Gilles de Rais?
Not by anything really significant since they were all obviously nuts. But I don't base the level of wickedness off of body counts, because to be honest had any one of these sick jerks not been subdued they would have freely committed as many murders as they could have....example being Ted Bundy, escapes from jail only to race to the nearest college dorm to collect even more victims and as many as he could before being caught again. I base their level of evil from the words they use and the expressions they use, Carl had only one thing to say and that was hate, nothing else ever. Many serial killers still have some trace of a small amount of humanity left in them, they may have had love for a wife, had children whom they would never harm....or had some aspect of life that was meaningful to them. Not Panzram, this guy by the end of his journey and before had not one good thought or hope left he was completely evil, no good left and you see that in his confessions.
Even some killers like that loony John Wayne Gacy, after they're caught have made expressions of remorse, Bundy, even though had no remorse for his victims was still pleading for his own pathetic life, scared and had kids and a family. Panzram not only hated his own life and existence he hated those who tried to keep him from the death penalty by claiming he wished he could strangle all of them and made it clear he hated all of mankind, as well as God. He saw them ALL as being something he could torture.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stronn
Is that racist?
I would say it would depend on whether it's a preference or an ideology. If it's just a preference then no, preference being an attraction, ideology being a system of ideas about a particular group or race.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
I'll admit it is second in line in sounding cool, but it's not really suited for this site. DDC works better I think.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
Next you'll tell me you preferred the early maniac Daffy Duck to the later comedic lisping Daffy Duck.
I like THIS Daffy Duck! I don't know which one that is. I used to draw him when I was a kid.
jk jk. While I do have a preference, I'd be willing to go with any of these so long as we all just picked one and went with it.
Yeah I agree. I just don't like anything other than DDC for some reason.
Created:
Posted in:
….General Lee.
Who ya got, knight Rider car or General Lee from the Dukes of Hazard.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Imabench
I think we should do what needed to be done for DDO for yearsNuke the religion forum
Was the religion forum part of DDO, was the religion forum one of the main attractions on DDO and one of the most visited forums? perhaps it should be the other way around, just look at what "your" people have caused already, multiple bans....insistent drama...segregating of other forum posters. Look at the facts, it's not the religion section that needs to go.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
What do I have to do to get you to change your profile picture. His stare is creeping me out.
I'm afraid you just solidified his choice. He'll be licking his chops at that one. Somehow though it reminds me of Bullproof looking at himself in the mirror...so perhaps it's suited for em.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
It's easy for us to accept that the Creator, or God, or the first Source is the culmination of all truth and reality because we've already accepted premises and logic for why God exists. However, when speaking with a materialist/naturalist you have to find a way to bridge that gap like he kept suggesting. He's right, only that you aren't helping him not that you're wrong. To bridge the gap, you have to show WHY it's a superior belief that God is the source of truth and reality and I gave him something to consider.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
It's competing with DART for my affection which is a hard horse to beat. I also don't like that it doesn't work the "art" into it.
But you said you were going for what was COOL lol, it may not be proper but it's cool, DART, I'm afraid does not have any cool in it. Debateart. Dot. Com....see it's still in there!! just hiding.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
But you don't believe we have individualized from the source state... i do. I believe we have evolved out of the source as an individual source.
EtrnlVw wrote....."LOL, however true when a person understands the nature of conscious awareness, soul and an omnipresent reality like we deduce. Souls are an extension of the first Source, by nature there is no distinction. Hey have you watched a move called "The Thirteenth Floor"?"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
but it is a vessel carrying the individual called Outplayz. This individual is part of this infinite consciousness, and when it goes back to the source... it is not me anymore. I have to individualize to be me. I can't be everything and still be who i am now and/or who i am as an individual... by definition. That is why i know i am not going to stay in the source state...
None of what you wrote above have I said otherwise. Not sure how you didn't know that I believe in the projection of the soul, which is an individualized expression of the infinite. I thought we had that covered :(
But you don't believe we have individualized from the source state... i do.
Then at this point I know you haven't even listened to what I've said, wow. I've said that over and over, that we are an individualization. How did you not know that?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
demonstrate where my logic doesn't make sense.
NOTHING-
not anything; no single thing.
AWARENESS/AWARE-
knowledge or perception of a situation or fact
the quality or state of being aware : knowledge and understanding that something is happening or exists
CONSCIOUNESS-
the state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings
the awareness or perception of something by a person
the fact of awareness by the mind of itself and the world
Number one, you're asserting that everything, having all knowledge means that it's somehow a nothing. You're saying it but you're not showing it, with the understanding of terms. If the first Source is both aware, and conscious then by definition it can't be nothing. It's simple really and I don't see what your problem with accepting it is. I can except it's non-dualistic, if that's what you mean, but again this reality is more something than anything projected from It.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
I can say the same thing to you.
Before that happens you will have to tighten up your understanding of terms and what those terms mean. So far that's not happening. So it follows what I'm saying is logically and technically more accurate.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
If you don't accept that God is the ultimate reality,
Show me where I said that. That god is NOT the ultimate reality. What I said was, is that you gave the poster no reason to accept that truth and ultimate reality are God. I did not say I don't believe in God, and that God is not that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
Whatever you want brother, I'm just trying to find ways to bridge the small gaps between our beliefs with simple commonsense. It's cool I'll just leave it be it doesn't really matter. I don't think it's me being too literal, rather your usage of terms and words are inaccurate. That's not an insult I'm just saying I'm using correct definitions while also making sense, and using logic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SamStevens
Johnson should have stepped up his game.
Is it just me, or did you think Cejudo actually WON that fight? I think he earned what he earned, but Johnson lit him up pretty good. The only thing Cejudo did that was barely significant was get Johnson off his feet. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of new story line, but I think Johnson could come back and easily beat him so I'd like to see someone really take it to Johnson.
their prized pony(Cody) failed twice and they are having issues with coaches leaving, etc. Hopefully, Dillashaw picks up where he left off and has a successful title reign.
Ya know, I think Dillashaw beat him worse the second time. I like his style better but the guy is kind of weird really, but his distance and range is pretty much unmatched in that division TBH. I thought Cody might win by heart, perhaps that was due to good advertisement but I wish Dillashaw good luck. He is definitely one of my fav strikers.
Hey, I almost threw up when I heard Liddell was coming back...whatcha think?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
It is nothing in the sense that it is everything. You become the start and finish, know every beginning and end, are everything. So by extension you are also nothing. You're not the same person you are now, a limited entity. You will be unlimited. And, to be unlimited isn't sustainable for your current self. It isn't living when you know the story from beginning to end. Every story you have ever lived or could live. You become truly infinite and bc of that, you aren't truly existing.
Since when does everything become nothing? It's not nothing, rather just a singular reality and that is not a nothing. If it was a nothing It would have no ability to project anything, create anything or desire the experience of anything. Having all knowledge does not equate to being nothing IMO, I don't see how that follows. If you are a projection of the first Source you are just a limited, smaller version. Then it follows that if you're something (not nothing), than this reality is even more of a something. Correct? how can you call everything that you ARE a nothing, do you know what that word means? Nothing- "not anything", conscious awareness whether embodied or not is not a nothing, it exists therefore IS a something.
You got it a bit wrong. I don't believe you will stay as the source for long for the reasons above. You will likely momentarily be within the source but soon "wake up" back to your individual source.
Not at all, you have it a bit wrong. While in the embodiment you are not in the fully awake state, no no. It's when you leave the embodiment that you wake up, not the other way around. You seem to get confused in the positioning of you...vs the higher awareness. YOU are the one that's limited and projected, therefore it's YOU, in this body that wakes up. These bodies are not us, they are simply a temporary vehicle, likewise our experience in these bodies are in a lowered state of awareness much like sleeping, this reality is not the ultimate reality, it is a simulation of types only on a grand scale.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
I know lol, what did you think I thought?? nvmnd don't answer that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Eww yeah I wouldn't want to do that now....
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
Personally no, I don't like it.
I don't believe that. Say DDC again lol. It rubs off on ya.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Smithereens
Lol, man I could still watch Nemo, what a great movie. "NEMO is swimming out to thea!".
"All the animals have gone mad!!!".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
But, I have no idea what this extra stuff is and I don't believe in it. I don't believe there is anything more or greater than simply the sum of all things that are true. I am an existentialist and believe that existence precedes essence, which is little more than our conscious abstractions of things that exist.
Here's what I'm getting from his "argument".
1) He's defined God as Truth and Ultimate reality (or perhaps it's the dictionary that defines God as having those aspects) either way....
2) Truth and reality exist therefore God exists
3) If you deny God exists then you deny truth and ultimate reality exist
So you would be right in thinking it's a circular argument. However, to make things more simple for him, if God does indeed exist would you then agree with those terms or disagree? since he's given you really no reason to accept an extension of truth and reality (being God, or vise versa) you have no reason to buy into it. However, just to spice things up, why don't we elaborate on WHY truth or reality exists the way it does and why those things exist at all. What if we said that truth and reality could only logically exist by that of a medium which could manifest such things, well obviously truth and reality have no relevance without a conscious observer, and it's more logically reasonable to consider that truth and reality come from an intelligent or conscious aware reality. Again though, I'm giving you no reason to accept this extension other than commonsense. Could you start with that platform and work with it? after all what would truth and reality mean without any observer? how does truth and reality produce alone or by themselves.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that is we disappeared truth and reality would not exist, but if the Ultimate reality, conscious Observer disappeared then how could they exist as a thing or reality? this is more of a reasoned proposition so you have to be a bit more flexible if you want to progress at all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Willows
Sorry Willy, you're going to have to up your game in this forum if you want me to accept your assertions and opinions as more than that. Back to your old trolling ways, I guess Debateisland wasn't doing it for ya was it? grow up.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
I believe i will become god for a moment, but very quickly after i will be me again... a mortal experiencing another mortal experience.
That's entirely possible, if that's what your desires dictate but as I said you may not want to come back here so soon or at least in this realm once you see how grand it is away from the body. I agree that the infinite consciousness would eventually want to be isolated/projected away from a singular reality and that's why all this exists, to simulate the experience of duality, contrast and separation so that the soul can experience. The downside is that the infinite reality where you fall back to always exists, the upside is that all your inner being never disappears...it's a double sided coin really but it is what it is, the Creator or first Source can never erase Itself it can only hide through you. In that sense it could be said "an Immortal experiencing a mortal experience". What do you think about that?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
You can call this point god if you wish... but, it is nothing, it is emptiness... immortality is correlative to hell for me and i suspect everyone else living here.
I wouldn't exactly say it's "nothing" because if you are That, and It is you It's the reason you are here so you would be a projection of That. So by extension That's not a nothing and not really an "IT", because It (your higher state of being) had a desire for you to be here, It created the environment for you to be projected into. That's a creative conscious awareness, which IS something and not emptiness except if by empty you mean disassociated or indifferent. If the higher reality has a desire and an ability to create then "It" could be considered an Entity, or disembodied consciousness like we talk about and if it's intelligent then I don't know if it's accurate to call the Creator an It. I only use "It" as in indicating that there is no male or female role (He/She) not that there's some inanimate/mindless reality where everything originates.
Everything else I'd pretty much agree with except you may not feel immortality is hell if you truly knew you would no longer exist when you die, and how this infinite conscious awareness has created many realms and planes to experience in and through, including the ones you will create as we progress on this spiritual journey. Or possibly before or after this journey. It's really an endless potential and since you are in fact here and exist it's one to be excited about. Remember if you no longer exist, then that would mean everything about you would be lost, your individuality, passions, uniqueness, your hobbies and everything you've worked for both materially and on a conscious level. Luckily for you that is not what happens and when you leave this physical form you will remember how beautiful it is away from a material body and how much less limited you are. You won't be horrified trust me lol.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SamStevens
What did you think about Johnson finally loosing his belt, and Garbrandt losing to Dillashaw twice? I enjoyed seeing Johnson finally lose but even though I was going with Dillashaw the first time I was with Cody the second time, seemed like he really wanted it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
When a person feels uncertainty about the world they also have 2 choices. Address the logical fallacies or escape in a delusion of a God fantasy.
Spiritual/Theistic beliefs are not built around uncertainty, rather observation. It doesn't follow that experiences, observations, reasoning, commonsense and logic about the reality of God are due to uncertainty, non-sequitur.
Created:
Posted in:
Seriously, no one likes DDC? I'm not going for what is proper, but it has a nice ring to it. It rolls off the tongue as easy as DDO did. Not to be mean but DART sounds kinda dumb. I'll go with the majority vote but DDC sounds good...."Debateart Dot Com".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
Correct, and then went and purchased a yacht with I believe 3000$ worth of money stolen from the same house, then preceded to commit horrific crimes with both the boat and the gun. I mean if you read what the guy got away with in his criminal history it's incredible. He was not very good at evading arrest but he was sent to prison over the coarse of most his life.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
I wonder how much of what he wrote about himself was true. Serial killers tend to lie, change their stories, claim different body counts at different times.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
If you read up on him, doesn't that mean he caught your interest?
I knew you were going to ask that lol, "interest" in serial killers sounds a little creepy to me but mostly I'm just being silly I get it. But anyways his confessions are disturbing, I'm going to go out on a limb and say he was serious, have you read anything he wrote? I'm pretty darn good at reading people, there usage of words, emotions and actions ect ect...he was definitely among the most horrifying people that have walked this earth.
His complete disdain and hate for humanity, as he so eloquently puts it in writing, at his level is higher than others I've read about. Just my opinion but even though I don't recommend it, you can read his confessions for yourself and some of those confessions were collaborated if I'm not mistaken. However, his killing spree was perpetrated over serval states in which he got away with. He would sodomize and murder hobos that were traveling the railroads which is why I believe he got away with many of the killings.
However, if you read the sources available about him he was sent to prisons many times in which he escaped, each time committing worse crimes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@linate
of course, it's possible to read one as if it's the other,
I would tend to go with that really, I mean why can't they both be applied? in essence if I love my neighbor as myself it would be akin to doing unto others what I would have them do to me. Love seems to keep a perfect balance and is in not contrary to any laws, because in love we can never break any law.
i don't expect people to give me everything of theirs so it shouldn't be expected for me to give everything
I don't think you have to give everything of yours to someone else to abide in love, that seems a bit of a non sequitur. So I think we're safe to say they are compatible.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@linate
Notice two things about that passage, first he was talking specifically to one person who asked a question, after Jesus answered the man became sad and went his way. So this is what I believe, that Jesus perceived that particular mans weakness, and that's why he went away sad because perhaps that particular man idolized riches. Another thing to note is that Jesus is a principle oriented teacher, and his examples and illustrations are for the purpose of prioritizing and while one person may not have a particular weakness for wealth, they may have a weakness in another area......so it's applied on an individual basis depending on what our needs are, what we prioritize, what we put first ect ect.i do know Jesus said to give away all that you own if you want to be perfect. i dont know if he was talking to just that person's calling in life, or if it's a standard for everyone
So while the basic principle of it is universal it doesn't really mean we ALL have to sell everything we have to be perfect, rather what is our priorities in life? I believe perhaps Jesus saw what the mans priorities were and then challenged him on it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
Hang on a min, note I said FRUIT first, as in mainly fruit and then secondary salads. Do you like fruits? ripe fruits? they are by far superior to veggies.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
The movie is kind of analogous to how we view a universal mind and an omnipresent reality where our experiences are "uploaded" from a higher observation point, or from another state of consciousness. It's kind of a neat concept they were able to create in the movie.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
LOL, however true when a person understands the nature of conscious awareness, soul and an omnipresent reality like we deduce. Souls are an extension of the first Source, by nature there is no distinction. Hey have you watched a move called "The Thirteenth Floor"?
Created: