They don't hate us, they love their God

I'll miss Jack. But I still like my tacos caliente

0 Replies

IFeelFree wrote:

Without internal spiritual experiences, we are left with belief systems, and reliance on external authority, whether the bible, Jesus, Mohamed, Krishna, a guru, etc. To suggest that personal spiritual experience is indicative of nothing in particular is, in effect, to deny the reality of the spiritual dimension. It is equivalent to reducing all spiritual teachings to belief systems and reliance on authority -- the logic of the ego. True spirituality is participatory. It is not an intellectual process. We must locate Happiness, the inherent well of Being and Bliss within.

From where did you get the authority to utter such crap?

(This is not an insult, is only adjectivating your discourse, which has no logic or back up).

Can't a man live his own life by the precepts he builds himself, if the latter don't interfere with the community laws?

Can't a man live by his intellectual processes without calling them "spirituality"?

Can't a man live by his own rules without referring to some "superior" authority?

Can't a man only be a man, without being a subject?

Well, at least this man does...

And he doesn't pat on the shoulder other fellows, just because they agree with him..

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

I'll miss Jack. But I still like my tacos caliente

now that I'm home in the midwest oncemore, I'm just going to miss good tacos. Specifically fish tacos. they don't have them here. I'm insane with anger about this.

T
K
O

0 Replies

I always liked getting to Rolla.

Joe(It meant that I had put a state and a half between me and Texas.)Nation

0 Replies

Rolla, MO?

0 Replies

IFeelFree wrote:

Joe Nation wrote:
Anybody want to discuss whether or not the followers of one god are exactly the same as any other and that's it's inevitable that at some point in time they will try to wipe us all out rather than face the reality that there is no god to follow.

Yeah, right, lets change the subject rather than deal with the unpleasant realization that some in our midst are being mean and rude. Furthermore, lets take any opportunity to lump all theists in with murderous fanatics so that we can propagate an angry, paranoid view of anyone who actually attempts to take seriously all that religious crap.

God, what a putz. Joe wasn't changing the subject, he was pointing out what the subject of the thread happens to be.

You seem to think that you are the subject of every thread in which you appear. It is little different than ET claiming i am out to get him. Fallacy of the enumeration of favorable circumstances--he ignores every thread he's in where i don't comment, every post he makes that i don't criticize. If he just came here to preach to a choir, he'd have been disappointed anyway.

Joe was pointing out what the topic of this thread happens to be--it is your whining rant about how mean i am to you, and now about how mean others are being to you, that is an instance of changing the subject. Typical religionist response.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Rolla, MO?

Well actually Springfield MO right now. I'm staying with my father until I go back to school this friday. But then yes, back to Rolla.

Little...Podunk...Rolla...

T
K
O

0 Replies

Rolla, eh?

Are you by chance in engineering?

0 Replies

I just thought I'd drop you guys a note. I've decided, like Jack, to retire from this forum. The atmosphere is a little too toxic for me. Too little open-minded discussion, and too much attacking of anyone who dares to express a theistic point of view. I've found other sites where people can actually discuss various points of view regarding spirituality without being insulted.

0 Replies

Bye

0 Replies

So, you are not feeling free for proselytizing here?

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

Rolla, eh?

Are you by chance in engineering?

Yes, Aerospace Engineering. 22credt hours left, then I'm done with over 170 hours. Some PHD students don't have this many hours. Shoot me, seriously. I look forward to celebrating the end of acadamia... for a while.

T
K
O

0 Replies

IFeelFree wrote:

I just thought I'd drop you guys a note. I've decided, like Jack, to retire from this forum. The atmosphere is a little too toxic for me. Too little open-minded discussion, and too much attacking of anyone who dares to express a theistic point of view. I've found other sites where people can actually discuss various points of view regarding spirituality without being insulted.

I hate to see you do that. What I and others were hoping for is that you would begin to sharpen your rhetoric.

You are obviously intelligent. But intelligence impedes understanding as often as it facilitates.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

I have no argument with those who would die for their religion. It's those who kill for their religion that scare me.

That was back on Page One when we were actually discussing the subject.
So, Neo, (and thanks for being faithful) you're in a kill or be killed situation, die for your god or kill for him?

Joe(if I remind correctly the sin is absolvable with the proper act of contrition.)Nation

0 Replies

Under the new covenant, there would be no situation requiring a Christian to kill in the name of God.

0 Replies

ET was on topic there for a while, although i couldn't say if that were intentional or not. His references to how "we" had legislated nearly all "Mosaic" law in the United States, once upon a time, could almost be seen as a perfect expression of Joe's titular contention. There is no reason to assume that ET hates any of us. There is good reason to believe that given his adherence to christianity and the reputed injunctions of the bible, his love of his god would lead him to consider it the better part of wisdom to adopt any "law" he saw as being inscribed in the scriptural canon.

I can't imagine Neo killing anyone or anything, even if someone were to somehow convince him that were the wish of his god. I could be wrong though . . . i was once . . . wrong that is . . . that was in 1967 . . .

0 Replies

Although eltejano says he has left the forum he left us plenty to chew on that fits the topic of this thread. I think it is important to note that when eltejano related his story about the curse of Ham, he blamed the problem on the false doctrine rather than faulting the text from which the doctrine was formed. That seems to be the way it always is with religionists, the problem is in the interpretation rather than the text itself. No matter how repugnant the passages of ancient religious texts are to our modern day sensibilities they find a way to gloss over them.

Take capital punishment for example. The old Testament is riddled with passages directing death for for the slightest moral infraction, yet from eltejano we get Capital punishment - I stated earlier that I don't think Jesus would support it, and there's no solid New Testament Scripture that does so either.

We get the same from muslims. On one hand they say that Islam is a peaceful religion and there is no compulsion to religion while on the other they justify the death penalty as a punishment for apostasy:.

Setanta wrote:

I could be wrong though . . . i was once . . . wrong that is . . . that was in 1967 . . .

That would be the time that you thought you were wrong but weren't?

0 Replies

Yeah, that was it. By the by, ET did not leave the site, although he may have abandoned the S&R forum.

0 Replies

Well, I liked the way he did "amende honorable" in the Spanish thread..

0 Replies

Joe Nation wrote:

I shudder to think who they have brought into the Department of Homeland Security. Let's hope it's not some of our fanatics who believe that the Apocalypse IS now and that a flaming chaotic Middle East is a good thing because Jesus will appear on that shining cloud any day now.

As this thread showed, the highest levels of the pentagon are populated by fundamentalists.

0 Replies

They don't hate us, they love their God

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know