Define God

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

..tell him "Number 1."

That's ridiculous. If they didn't love God what's the sense obeying all the others? Like an oath in court.

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
..tell him "Number 1."

That's ridiculous. If they didn't love God what's the sense obeying all the others? Like an oath in court.

You asked, "Which of the Ten Commandments do you favour abolishing?"

I suggest "Number 1." I could have suggested 1, 2, 3, and 4 (depending upon the Bible used)...and it all would have made lots and lots of sense.

Nothing ridiculous about it at all.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Nothing ridiculous about it at all.

Obviously!! There is no other possibility when you MYOEPs.

Did you discover you was a genius before or after you got into long trousers? Gunner Bill claims 8.

You have not a clue what is happening old boy. You're stuck in bygone times. You can afford to be at your age but do you know what you are incubating for the lads up the line?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

I suggest "Number 1." I could have suggested 1, 2, 3, and 4 (depending upon the Bible used)...and it all would have made lots and lots of sense.

Never mind suggesting. What would you abolish?

If you abolish No 1 the rest are automatically abolished. I explained that. I gave a modern example in the oath. And you have ignored both points and are left dropping notes in the suggestion box.

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
Nothing ridiculous about it at all.

Obviously!! There is no other possibility when you MYOEPs.

Did you discover you was a genius before or after you got into long trousers? Gunner Bill claims 8.

You have not a clue what is happening old boy. You're stuck in bygone times. You can afford to be at your age but do you know what you are incubating for the lads up the line?

Thank you for sharing all that, Spendius.

0 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
I suggest "Number 1." I could have suggested 1, 2, 3, and 4 (depending upon the Bible used)...and it all would have made lots and lots of sense.

Never mind suggesting. What would you abolish?

If you abolish No 1 the rest are automatically abolished. I explained that. I gave a modern example in the oath. And you have ignored both points and are left dropping notes in the suggestion box.

Already answered, Spendius. Try reading...rather than raging. Although you are probably much better at the latter than the former. Wink

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank, have you read the Ten Commandments ... carefully.
They are structured and arranged by priorities starting with the top priority - the primary interest having prior claim to consideration, starting with the best practices (... of the prior ILF in this case maybe).
If we assume that our top priority is the quality of life (fresh air, clean water, quality food, commodities that spare the environment of living (our), incl. energy resources, etc.) ... and immortality of the human species in the general case, the formal model of the Ten Commandments solves the problem by claiming that better organization and better co-operation between the individuals of the species and abstraction apart from the greed and stipudity and egocentrism ... and the habits of wandering lost in the huge universe without any purpose give better chances to achieve the top priority goal ... for those who have it.

2 Replies

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

Frank, have you read the Ten Commandments ... carefully.
They are structured and arranged by priorities starting with the top priority - the primary interest having prior claim to consideration, starting with the best practices (... of the prior ILF in this case maybe).
If we assume that our top priority is the quality of life (fresh air, clean water, quality food, commodities that spare the environment of living (our), incl. energy resources, etc.) ... and immortality of the human species in the general case, the formal model of the Ten Commandments solves the problem by claiming that better organization and better co-operation between the individuals of the species and abstraction apart from the greed and stipudity and egocentrism ... and the habits of wandering lost in the huge universe without any purpose give better chances to achieve the top priority goal ... for those who have it.

What does that have to do with anything?

Spendius asked which laws should be trashed.

I suggested the first...or the first through the fourth.

If you are suggesting that you cannot refrain from stealing or murdering unless you first keep one god before all others...you have serious problems.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

You have more serious problems if you refrain from such things due to fear of the law.

All you have done is replace God with the law and the law is designed to protect the fat cats who don't engender much respect.

I noticed you climbed into the safety harness with your weasel words about "depending on which Bible you read".

And why did you stop at No 4?

And Herald's post does have relevance. You could blurt "What does that have to do with anything?" in reply to any post you don't agree with and in doing so you grant permission to everybody to do the same unless you reserve such a stupid right to yourself. All communications then become expressions of impulses and instincts.

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

You have more serious problems if you refrain from such things due to fear of the law.

All you have done is replace God with the law and the law is designed to protect the fat cats who don't engender much respect.

I noticed you climbed into the safety harness with your weasel words about "depending on which Bible you read".

And why did you stop at No 4?

And Herald's post does have relevance. You could blurt "What does that have to do with anything?" in reply to any post you don't agree with and in doing so you grant permission to everybody to do the same unless you reserve such a stupid right to yourself. All communications then become expressions of impulses and instincts.

Thank you for sharing that, Spendius.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Writing in 1964 about the modern dissenting voice Prof Hofstadter wrote--

Quote:

The new dissenters argue, and with good reason, that at no time has the need for intelligent* dissent and free* criticism been greater than it is today, and on this count they find the older cult of alienation still meaningful. These writers do not like the present cultural situation or the political state of the world---and who can blame them?--- and on the strength of this dislike they have developed their own conception of the role of the thinker*, the artist*, the intellectual*. It is a conception* however, which I believe oversimplifies history and offers a delusive prescription for the conduct of intellectual* life.

* expressions self-evidently partaking of the luxury of marking your own homework.

2 Replies

@spendius,

Maybe Mailer's Ancient Evenings was an attempt to rebut such a drastic challenge. Deluding themselves I mean, but it did show how boring history is when not oversimplified as much as is usual and it was a valiant effort to demonstrate Mailer's understanding of history.

Nobody would undertake the amount of research and rewriting that Mailer did for that amazing book unless he was pretty well enraged and bent on showing that toffee-nosed, inchoate aristocrat, conservative dickhead what's what.

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Writing in 1964 about the modern dissenting voice Prof Hofstadter wrote--

Quote:
The new dissenters argue, and with good reason, that at no time has the need for intelligent* dissent and free* criticism been greater than it is today, and on this count they find the older cult of alienation still meaningful. These writers do not like the present cultural situation or the political state of the world---and who can blame them?--- and on the strength of this dislike they have developed their own conception of the role of the thinker*, the artist*, the intellectual*. It is a conception* however, which I believe oversimplifies history and offers a delusive prescription for the conduct of intellectual* life.

* expressions self-evidently partaking of the luxury of marking your own homework.

Thank you very much for sharing Prof. Hofstadter's thoughts, Spendius.

0 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Maybe Mailer's Ancient Evenings was an attempt to rebut such a drastic challenge. Deluding themselves I mean, but it did show how boring history is when not oversimplified as much as is usual and it was a valiant effort to demonstrate Mailer's understanding of history.

Nobody would undertake the amount of research and rewriting that Mailer did for that amazing book unless he was pretty well enraged and bent on showing that toffee-nosed, inchoate aristocrat, conservative dickhead what's what.

Thank you for that also, Spendius,..whatever it was.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

I don't expect anybody who can oversimplify history to the extent of turning it into a long drawn plea for leniency would know what it was.

1 Reply

@Herald,

Quote:

the Ten Commandments solves the problem by claiming that better organization and better co-operation between the individuals of the species and abstraction apart from the greed and stipudity and egocentrism ..

That's all bull! Human organizations are not based on the ten commandments; they are based on human structures based on religion and politics. Many religions are not based on the bible or the ten commandments.

The two most populous countries in the world, China and India, are not based on "christianity."

Your myopia only shows how ignorant your assumptions are. It's up to the country and its politics to ensure survival, but human endeavors are in opposition to those goals. Humans spend more on warfare and guns than any other human endeavor.

The use of limited raw materials goes unabated, because humans want everything today. The economic system of this world demands that raw materials be used for our pleasure and comfort. It's about greed and profit.

3 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

What does that have to do with anything?

So, your claim is that what I wrote has no semantics. Can you prove this claim with some math logic, if you can?
Becides, why don't you call the things with their real names ... and as they are. Life would be much more simple, incl. yours.
Example: I don't understand what you are talking about and/or I don't like what you are saying would be O.K.
"Thou shalt not bear false witness" ... concealing your cross-cultural misunderstanding of the world

Frank Apisa wrote:

... first keep one god before all others ...

You don't even have a definition of God, but comment with ease on any theme. Structuring the priorities in life ... and in morality is in no way 'first keep one god before all others'.
When one misunderstands 'the point' (the problem) all the interpretations and comments become irrelevant ... unfortunately.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Human organizations are not based on the ten commandments; they are based on human structures based on religion and politics.

Religions that date back to 5th c. B.C. (Judaism). Just for comparison the Christianity becomes official religion of the Roman Empire during 4 c. A.D. (Konstantine)
I didn't have in mind the development of the religions throughout the centuries, but rather the Event X (the Word of God, perceived as tangible communication). If this Event X has been objective (of some real source) rather than subjective (result of the slacked imagination of the prophets) we have understood almost nothing of it ... and the things that are thought as understood are more or less some cross-cultural misunderstanding, caused by the ignorance of the 'receivers'.

Quote:

It's up to the country and its politics to ensure survival

Blessed are the believers ... that they will inherit the kingdom of heaven.

Quote:

It's about greed and profit.

This is clear.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

The two most populous countries in the world, China and India, are not based on "christianity."

They seem to be getting closer, slowly, to adopting Christian manners and thus getting better organization and better co-operation between individuals. They rescue trapped miners now when they used to just seal off the workings.

I have seen both Chinese and Indian people playing Beethoven sonatas and they are pretty Christian.

You're trouble ci, is that you think Christianity is nothing but an obstacle to the indulgent exercise of the sexual appetites.

0 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

I don't expect anybody who can oversimplify history to the extent of turning it into a long drawn plea for leniency would know what it was.

I am sure there are lots of thing you do not expect. I hope you do not furnish us with a list, because it is boring.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know