Atheists... Your life is pointless

@spendius,

Quote:

It's my suspicious mind thinking that you will go to any lengths to point the finger at the Church and remind viewers of it's evil deeds, without which our world would not be, as, indeed, you again did in that reply.

I don't know about ci, but I still do not understand the part beginning at the word "without." Sounds like gibberish to me.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Those evil deeds created our world. That's what it means. Heresy, if allowed to flourish, runs in so many directions that no organised project can ever succeed which gives them house room.

A bunch of tweeting Tweetie Pies cooing sweetly on a gilded branch couldn't create a piss up in a brewery despite our admiration for their compassion and consideration. Have you a problem with tough love Frank?

No wonder you play golf. That's gentlemanly enough for Eric's Mum.

2 Replies

@spendius,

Setanta is an expert historian I am given to understand. Ask him what heresy does if allowed to run the gamut of its possibilities.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

Those evil deeds created our world. That's what it means. Heresy, if allowed to flourish, runs in so many directions that no organised project can ever succeed which gives them house room.

Precisely the reason I presumed, before mentioning the other fixation, that a secondary proposition is necessary to establish the juxtaposition of the tangential coordinates of that protocol, Spendius. And you have not addressed that. Not even once...not even in passing.

Quote:

A bunch of tweeting Tweetie Pies cooing sweetly on a gilded branch couldn't create a piss up in a brewery despite our admiration for their compassion and consideration. Have you a problem with tough love Frank?

Do I have a problem with “tough love.” Hardly! As Ovid noted in his The Amores

quis probet in silvis Cererem regnare iugosis,
10 lege pharetratae Virginis arva coli?

(Who would deem it well that Ceres should queen it o’er the wood-crowned heights, and that the tilling of the fields should be the quivered Virgin's care?)

Which, of course, presupposed that a rational approach to your question would prevent me from impartially suspending the précis necessary to properly address the issue. You knew that, Spendius…you were trying to set me up with the question you proposed. But I am not easily fooled. .

Quote:

No wonder you play golf. That's gentlemanly enough for Eric's Mum.

Ignatius of Loyola would recommend spiritual exercises to compensate for what Beatrice would foment over the arguments of Eric…and his Mum. And since I think this is one proposition on which we are in complete agreement, I think it is a good place to finish.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Got ya! Think I really do not need to understand anything else about your views...And I apologize about saying down the middle...

Think I understand it quite well...

Do you believe you can understand why others would label you closer to an Atheist by this??

Even though you do not...Think this way...

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Are you happy with who you are???

What did you do to shape yourself??

1 Reply

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

Quote:

Got ya! Think I really do not need to understand anything else about your views...And I apologize about saying down the middle...

Think I understand it quite well...

Do you believe you can understand why others would label you closer to an Atheist by this??

Discussing this would only cause the kinds of problems I spoke of when I suggested we discuss the issue without labels like "atheist" or "agnostic."

I think I will stick with that for now.

0 Replies

@XXSpadeMasterXX,

Quote:

Are you happy with who you are???

I am very, very satisfied with myself. Happy inside my skin. I consider myself to be an especially lucky individual.

Quote:

What did you do to shape yourself??

I'd love to take credit for some great effort on my part, but I really cannot. At some point I came to realize my limitations (particularly as to what I know and do not know)...and things just fell into place. Maybe it was just a lucky accident.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

I am very, very satisfied with myself. Happy inside my skin. I consider myself to be an especially lucky individual.

I am very happy you feel this way...I may be wrong, but even if you do not openly accept a God...Than I am grateful you have found yourself, and are a contributor...and look forward to conversations with you!

Quote:

I'd love to take credit for some great effort on my part, but I really cannot. At some point I came to realize my limitations (particularly as to what I know and do not know)...and things just fell into place. Maybe it was just a lucky accident.

That is exactly how I feel about how I was converted to Christianity...Crazy how the 2 could be different, but have the same kind of path in self-discovery....

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Precisely the reason I presumed, before mentioning the other fixation, that a secondary proposition is necessary to establish the juxtaposition of the tangential coordinates of that protocol, Spendius. And you have not addressed that. Not even once...not even in passing.

I would need to know what you mean by "the juxtaposition of the tangential coordinates of that protocol" before I could address it. The assertion that I have not addressed the matter is dependent on what exactly the juxtaposition you have in mind actually is. In the absence of such a definition the assertion is nonsense.

I have pointed out that the Church in the days you referred to was both a custodian of spiritual dogma and a practitioner of realpolitik.

It had never entered my head that I had presupposed that a rational approach to my question would prevent you from impartially suspending the précis necessary to properly address the issue.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Spendius, you quote my argument, “Precisely the reason I presumed, before mentioning the other fixation, that a secondary proposition is necessary to establish the juxtaposition of the tangential coordinates of that protocol, Spendius. And you have not addressed that. Not even once...not even in passing.”…

…and then respond by saying,

Quote:

I would need to know what you mean by "the juxtaposition of the tangential coordinates of that protocol" before I could address it. The assertion that I have not addressed the matter is dependent on what exactly the juxtaposition you have in mind actually is. In the absence of such a definition the assertion is nonsense.

More of the same, I see!

The words mean exactly what they mean, Spendius. If you choose to deal with the matter, fine. If not...that is also fine with me.

In any case, you followed that up with:

Quote:

It had never entered my head that I had presupposed that a rational approach to my question would prevent you from impartially suspending the précis necessary to properly address the issue.

Well then I am glad I brought it to your attention and I hope you make doing so a priority for future interactions, otherwise all argument will dissolve into babble.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

The words mean exactly what they mean, Spendius. If you choose to deal with the matter, fine. If not...that is also fine with me.

Nobody can deal with the matter unless they know what "the juxtaposition of the tangential coordinates of that protocol" is referring to. Is it the supervision of art? For example. Or the vernacular being used in religious ceremonies?

I don't even know "that a secondary proposition is necessary to establish" the juxtaposition. What is this secondary proposition?

What is "a rational approach to a question which would prevent you from impartially suspending the précis necessary to properly address the issue."

This is an issue of practical politics as you would rapidly discover if everybody saw the light and converted to agnosticism. It is not a sophistical weaving of the winds of circular abstract word formulations. They are circular because you are defining "rational", "necessary", " establish", "impartially suspending" and "properly". As such they are meaning-lite.

If you stick to practical politics there would be no "babbling".

The Church would have **** on Luther & Co had it been able to just as we **** on Gadaffi because we were able to and are not shitting on Assad because we are not able to.

Will someone help out here and translate Frank's expressions into simple concepts it is possible to address.

1 Reply

@spendius,

I think Frank's just playing you at your own game. He, and CI have accused some, not all, of your posts of being nonsensical. There is one of your sentences that you've both argued over, you've asserted it makes sense, they disagree. I think you should just treat this as merry larks.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

If I do that we all dissolve into giggling fits. Only a reader of certain kinds of literature could correctly identify when "merry larks" are in play. Who is taking the piss and who is being serious is the big question readers have to answer before they can claim to be literate in literature.

Is the chap who composed the fine print of your insurance certificates taking the piss? He is, after all, giving a demonstration of the deviousness of the human race and what his company needs to do to protect itself from it.

What you consider "merry larks" might be considered old hat and well worn out.

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

What you consider "merry larks" might be considered old hat and well worn out.

You can treat it whatever way you want, merry larks, old hat or wizard japes, it's all the same to me.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

It's not all the same to me. Are you taking the piss? Is Frank taking the piss? Is Barry Manilow taking the piss? I assume so in BM's case. The inexorable logical outcome of the general position he presents does not bear thinking about.

Taking the piss has an objective which might or might not be serious. It is intended to adjust attitudes by laughing at current ones. I have a feeling that attitudes do need some adjustments, but not for myself, because I am too old and too shagged out to have any personal interest in the matter.

Like Loadsamoney showing what materialism looks like when gone about seriously. And some enjoy it immensely with merely a small degree of subtlety employed to tone it down.

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

It's not all the same to me. Are you taking the piss?

Sometimes, but not always.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Have you any signposts or sat navs to help us in the grey area?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

I cannot, for the life of me, imagine the mentality of anyone thumbing up Frank's last post unless it is that of a piss-taker goading Frank on to get more laughs.

0 Replies

@spendius,

What do you thinnk?

2 Replies

Atheists... Your life is pointless

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know