Posts by AGuest

699

A truce between Atheists and Non-Atheists?

by palmtree67 in

jw
friends

ricky gervais tweeted this 11/14/12 and i totally agree with it:.

"there are good atheists and bad atheists.

there are good believers and bad believers.. no god has ever changed that.".

AGuest

AGuest - do you ever tire of dredging every possible itty bit of twist on everything?

Sometimes yes, sometimes no, Q. Do you?

If you so wish to extract a single idea from a very simple concept (and yes the 'Marketplace of ideas' is it in a nutshell - well spotted) and bugger with it seventy times seven such that by the time you've finished you've spun a whole fairytale about how measuring must be done with YOUR spiritual guide then I can't stop you

You obviously think you can, else why the post? And I actually like the "Marketplace of Ideas" concept, but I don't often find it present in posts from you.

but just have to sit there and accept that you don't want to converse , you want to perform. For all your words and all your rhetoric - you can't see past yourself sometimes.

That is your take, Q. I actually believe the same as to you and some others. But so what: it's a [relatively] "free" discussion forum. What I like... or dislike... as I discern through your posts... about you... or any other(s) is, IMHO... absolutely irrelevant. At least, it should be, maturely speaking.

The metaphor was not about how we measure, nor who our peers are or should be , or any such other tortured subtlety; it was simply about the ability to disassociate oneself from your ideas idea such that you can reject it when the time comes.

Well, yes, that's one way of looking at it. I chose to take it further, though, and "dissect" the "weigh"(ing) process... and tools. I mean, if there's a flaw in THOSE... then, by default, there's going to be a flaw in the resultant deduction made BY them. Right?

Too many people sink themselves into an idea and won't let go and get passionate over bad ideas.

I agree. And while I might concede that that has occurred here, I'm not sure I would agree as to who it is that has done that.

Ideas that have integrity will rise to the top if allowed to be discussed and critiqued.

Which is an important truth that you often seem to miss: if allowed to be discussed... which, in at least one area you don't... and critiqued... which is not what occurs. I don't care what you and some others call it, it is NOT discussing and critiquing: it is bullying and attempting to censor and silence. C'mon, let's keep it real... and real honest.

Ideas that need the cover and protection of respect, reverance and mystery are somewhat intellectually weaker in my experience.

Ideas that NEED reverence and mystery are not only suspect in my book, but almost always, if not always, false. Those that ask for respect are not necessarily and perhaps never (though I don't think never is accurate; almost never, then).

You also forget AG that I and most posters here used spiritual 'measuring sticks' for most of our lives.

No, you did not. Because you didn't know... and still don't... what spiritual IS. You are using a definition created and fomented by MAN... to explain something of GOD, of the SPIRIT and not of the FLESH. But you keep trying to apply it TO that which is fleshly.

Always try and keep in mind there are few atheists/non-believers/doubters here who have always been such.

Of course there are, Q, and certainly a few here. A lot of atheists (here and outside) were former "believers" and after experiencing some reason for disillusion... made a different life-choice. I get that and respect that. I... don't have a problem with atheists. Never have. Even as a JW. They weren't really on my radar and screen and when they were, I didn't feel that I had any grounds... or authority... to judge them. Or anyone, for that matter. The same can't be said for many of the "religious", particular those who profess to be "christian." Most atheist I know, personally (and I met quite few in university/law school/at work) were never raised in or around ANY religion to begin with (or their spouses, who I also met, weren't). Even so, they seem to be able to relate to ME just a tad better to those who still tout religion - THAT they just don't get. We shared many a discussion... about belief as well as many other topics... and got along just fine. They would ask me what I believed, I would share it, and they would say, "Okay", or even "Cool!". No concern... or fear... or judgment... from them, though. Ever.

The invitation is to benefit from our experiments with both sides -

I have no problem with experiments, so long as they're civil, decent, and sans malice (and lies). I have no problem with experiments designed as "discussions" (although I don't necessarily like the deceit they are founded on). But I don't have a problem with what you believe... or don't believe. That opposite, however, is not the case. "YOU" have the problem(s) - not me.

you might enjoy being an atheist :)

I might. I very seriously highly doubt that either of will ever find out, though. As EP would say... "not very likely." I would say it's impossible, but just don't have the energy for the responses that would ensure. And so I'll just say, hey... the fat lady hasn't actually sang yet, so...

All I would ask is that you respect MY right... and will... to choose if that ever occurs... or won't... and let me be me in the meantime.

A slave of Christ,

SA

61

C...

by AGuest in

peace to you (forgive me if that offends/insults, but i felt wrong not offering it in opening this new thread).

to continue where we left off on the "truce" thread:.

there is no such thing as relative truth - it is not open to subjective feelings.

AGuest

Just got back and had a browse. I realise this thread is called "C" - for reasons only known to Shelby

Ummmm... it's the first letter of your avatar name. I got lazy and didn't feel like typing out the other four letters.

- but I'm not feeling motivated to join in.

Of course, you aren't. No worries - I'm not offended... or surprised... at all.

please stop breaking up everybody's posts into a hundred pieces and rambling on at length about every syllable - its enough to bore anybody to tears.

I think I'll keep my style, thank you, even if you do mind, as it suits MY "needs". In the meantime, might I offer you a hankie?

I think the OP had something to do with a claim that you "know" stuff about god and therefore you don't need faith - whatever.

Well, reading it would give you a bit more knowledge about that it had to do with, but I didn't actually expect that and my suspicions have been confirmed each time you've posted. So long as we moved the issue from dear Palm's (peace!) thread, which was the purpose, though...

I have heard it all before.

No, actually, you haven't. You just think you have...

Its all just egocentric posturing designed to impresses your disciples.

I have no disciples... or followers... or groupies... or posse. As for posturing, egocentrically or otherwise... have you met that black kettle named "Cofty" over on the "Truce" thread? If not, I think you should as you two seem to have a LOT in common... including egocentric posturing...

A slave of Christ,

SA

452

Faith... and Trust: The Same Things?

by AGuest in

in a discussion with some other dear ones, the question was asked as to what such ones put their faith in.

in response to one comment that"one can't function without faith," another disagreed, stating ones can, that "many do so every day... the ones who have trust" (in things like the sun rising in the east versus the west).

that trust extended to "faith" based "on nature and the natural order of things.

AGuest

Actually, I think he actually may have, C. I wouldn't put it past him. But, then, that's what makes an imposter an imposter, right? The ability to imitate the genuine article... and pretty good? Doesn't mean all who imitate the genuine article (Christ) ARE imposters, though. Unfortunately, most will have to wait until they see Christ more plainly... and as he truly is... hence, when he returns... to know who was/is and who isn't/wasn't.

Some can "see" him now, though, and so don't have the same concerns as perhaps you do.

A slave of Christ,

SA

15

YOWWW!!

by AGuest in

jw
friends

i feel good!.

(dunna nunna nunna nuh).

i feel nice (dunna nunna nunna nuh).

AGuest

WOW! AGuest I don't know what you got up to last night but it seems to have done you good.

Ahh, dear Glad (the greatest of love and peace to you, dear one!)... it wasn't what I got up TO last night, but that I got UP... this morning! As you may know, I am a Type 1 diabetic and must take insulin. Sometimes, I get "off-schedule" and so either under- or over-do my dosage. As a result, there are occasions when I experience a significant glucose "crash" in the middle of the night. Which can be brutal (when you go into deep hyperglycemia, your vital organs begin shutting down in anticipation of coma... and possible death. It's a feat to "come back" from, sometimes taking days).

The night before last... I crashed twice. Although I have had a couple/few major crashes, including 2 that ended me up in the ER, I've never had two in one night. I caught the first... because my Lord woke me up (as he usually does to keep me from going into a full on crash). I heard him... and woke up and "corrected". I thought. About 3-4 hours later... I began to crash... again. Only, I almost didn't wake up because I was ignoring him. Because, I said, "No, Lord, I heard you... and I took care it already." And so I thought that perhaps I was dreaming. But... I wasn't. I was crashing... again... and he was calling to me about it.

I decided to do what I usually do... and listen anyway. And... I was crashing again. And I didn't know what to do because I didn't know whether to bring my glucose back up (with candy, juice, glucose tablets)... or wait. Because, I thought, maybe the first attempt just hasn't kicked in yet and then I'll be high and have to take insulin, and restarting the cycle. I was tired (it was the wee hours), groggy, uncertain... and very disoriented (because that is a symptom of very low blood-sugar).

But I pushed through and listened... and did what my Lord said and ate "two more pieces of candy" (I keep them by the bedside, too; they're faster than the glucose tabs and you don't have to eat so many). And I corrected just fine. I woke up with a gl109. But I've felt like crud the past day or so while my body "recovers" from the double crash.

And so that's the thing: I woke up yet one more day! For me, the possibility that I won't is always there... and high, under the circumstances. So... every day is a blessing, IMHO.

Oh, and the reason I crashed twice was that I had FORGOT I had taken some cold medicine earlier, and then took a Benadryl (because of sinus pressure)... just before bed! I corrected my dosage to compensate for the Benadryl, but not for the cold meds! Yikes!

They say the mind goes first. For an insulin diabetic... forgetfulness is not a good thing, at all. It can be fatal. All I can do is thank my Lord for calling out to me... when he does.

Again, peace to you, and... OHHH, HAPPY DAY (oh, happy day!)... OH HAPPY DA-AY (oh, happy daayyy!) - LOLOL!

A [very] happy slave of Christ,

SA

452

Faith... and Trust: The Same Things?

by AGuest in

in a discussion with some other dear ones, the question was asked as to what such ones put their faith in.

in response to one comment that"one can't function without faith," another disagreed, stating ones can, that "many do so every day... the ones who have trust" (in things like the sun rising in the east versus the west).

that trust extended to "faith" based "on nature and the natural order of things.

AGuest

(Shaking head)... Goodness gracious (and peace to you, all!). Okay, here's my last comment(s) on the matter (that the thread has turned to, but not faith/trust):

To any on this board who have adopted a style of posting similar to mine (i.e., (1) "quote and [corresponding] response" - because you can see the benefit of doing it that way as (a) it sets out the issues more plainly, (b) allows you to address what was actually stated, while (c) reducing the opportunity for others to misstate/twist what you stated... versus very generally responding to blocks of comments, which often does get misstated/misconstrued and leads to even further confusion)... and (2) including a greeting of peace, either as an opening or closing... or both... and whether you've done so as a believer or as a non-believer (because some of both have)... take heed: some folks here want you to cut it out. Because it causes them concern: they believe such to be indicative of my starting... and you joining... a cult... or engaging in cultish thinking/conduct. They believe that such a style and such greetings are better off as mine alone and take issue with you utilizing the same. It worries them because they believe that by your doing so you are in fact "following" me and I am "leading" you. And, unfortunately, that scares them.

Nevermind the benefits of responding in such a style... and in such greetings (i.e., that it IS a wish for peace among those engaging AND that Christ did tell those who followed HIM to engage others with a greeting of peace).

As to those of the Household of God, Israel... and those who go with... who may have adopted such a style (the greatest of love and peace to you!):

Nevermind that:

1. It's Christ that you are looking at and imitating... not me... and that it only appears like you're looking at and trying to imitate me because I'm looking at and trying to imitate That One, as well, and so, since he is the One we are ALL looking at... and trying to imitate... we all are moving toward looking like and imitating HIM...

2. We repeatedly state that we are following no one BUT Christ...

3. I/others ask and state that no one IS to follow ANY of US...

4. We repeatedly state that we have no leader but Christ... and that no one among us is greater than any other, but that we, all of us, are simply servants of one another... and all others...

5. We DO investigate the things shared with us by one another, and that there is WRITTEN documentation and record as to the things we speak of...

6. When we have DO doubts or concerns, we either ASK God/Christ... and/or in some other manner TEST the expression... stated to be inspired or otherwise...

7. We say we do... and DO... have and use critical thinking faculties...

These say differently... and that our "union" concerns them, worries them. We even can see where it anger such ones. So, they are saying to cut it out.

I would not even undertake to tell you what to do on this matter. I, though, must listen to the words of the One I follow and imitate... who says to ME that I have will, ability... and RIGHT... to choose... what I will do and who I will listen to... the Holy One of Israel, JAHESHUA, the Chosen One of JAH (MischaJah). As for me and MY household, then... we're just gonna follow that One, who has never lied to us or led us astray... but the contrary has always spoken the trust and actually led us OUT... and AWAY from those who were misguiding us... who does not MAKE us choose, but truly is the only one who gives us a real choice.

You, dear, dear ones... must also decide and choose as to things for yourselves. But do so for yourselves; do not let ANYONE else... including me, your servant, choose FOR you. And I know you don't. They, though, just can't seem to grasp that.

Again, the greatest of love and peace to you!

Your servant, as I am servant to the Household of God, Israel, and all those who go with... and your fellow slave of Christ,

SA

15

YOWWW!!

by AGuest in

jw
friends

i feel good!.

(dunna nunna nunna nuh).

i feel nice (dunna nunna nunna nuh).

AGuest

BWAAHHHHHAHAHAHA, dear tec (peace, luv!). Well, THAT oughta put to rest, once and for ALL... what happens when someone "tries" to follow me! LOLOLOLOLOL!

Peace, my dear one!

SA, on her own... trying not to fall all over her keyboard, gasping from laughing so hard...

61

C...

by AGuest in

peace to you (forgive me if that offends/insults, but i felt wrong not offering it in opening this new thread).

to continue where we left off on the "truce" thread:.

there is no such thing as relative truth - it is not open to subjective feelings.

AGuest

As far puctuation being herd mentality or group think, being a writer, I think this is kind of silly.

I'm not a writer, dear one... but even so, that's not what I meant... or stated... at all. I meant (and stated), in response to your statement was to what is customary to STATE (in lieu of how I use quotations), that I don't subscribe to the customary.

I've had this discussion with newer writers who feel unduly bound by the rules of grammar and puctuation, so I'll just share what I tell them. I think of it as a social contract. I am asking someone to take their time to read something I have to say. I feel a responsiblity to make that smooth for them.

You are writer. You should feel responsible. I'm not a writer. I'm just a lady on an Internet social forum, one that doesn't include "use proper grammar, punctuation, and sentence structure in your posts." Were that the case, more than half of the dear folks here would have to be banned. You're trying (and why, I have NO idea), to put me into your... mmmm... idea... of what I should be (a "writer"), as well as how I should be it (non-spiritual). Why? Why can't I just be me... like you are just being you?

If I really want them to understand what I am saying, I will respect the language they have become accustomed to.

I ABSOLUTELY agree! And so I write TO "them" EXACTLY the way they are "accustomed to" - how my Lord said it TO me... and so I repeat it to THEM. Now, you, though, because you are NOT so accustomed... rather than try and BECOME accustomed... what ME (your "writer") to change my style to suit YOU. (Again, no screaming - just fast typing...). What IS that?

I also have a selfish motive. I want them to understand.

And here is where you and I are most different: it is not up to ME as to whether others understand. I just put it out there. If they "hear" - good. If they don't... okay, too. Not my point... or purpose. Not my power.

If I force them to spend a great deal of time and energy deciphering my style, my mistakes, and reconstructing what I write into a language they better understand, then I will lose them and they won't read what I have written.

Maybe. Or... maybe the WILL spend that time. Like a person whose found a buried treasure, who knows it's there but knows they will have to dig to get it out of the ground. OR... maybe they "speak" the same language to begin with. Can you allow yourself to understand, dear one... that perhaps you don't get it because... you don't get it? I speak a little Spanish; Paolo speaks it fluently. Paolo is speaking to Julia... in Spanish. Can I really walk up to Paolo and say, "Hey, wait - you need to say what you said to Julia differently so that I understand it"?

You're not saying you want to understand me, NC. You imply that you are, but that isn't the truth here. The TRUTH is that YOU don't want to understand ME; you want ME to understand... so as to agree with... YOU. And I DO understand you. I don't necessarily AGREE with you, though.

So there is a choice I make. Do I want to communicate, or do I want my reader to struggle with my style and perhaps lose the message I was trying to convey? I choose to communicate and not burden them with the other.

As do I. And those I usually direct my... mmmmmm... messasge to DO understand. Without struggling with my style. They even state that, here, openly. Frequently. You are assuming, though, that I want YOU to understand me... but that isn't what this is about. I haven't asked you to understand me. Not once. If you do, wonderful. If you don't... then simply ask for clarification - if you WANT clarification. But, please... don't come at me under the guise of "we need to understand one another", when the truth is that you're really only concerned that I understand you... and that you think I and others don't know how to/aren't using critical thinking. I get that that's what you want me to understand... and I really do understand that.

Now, that you don't understand why I don't AGREE with you on that... I think that's on you. I think you're not ALLOWING yourself to understand why.

Of course, there are times when unique style may be completely appropriate. I think of poetry. Poetry is more like artwork with words. The appearance, sound and unique style are part of the process. Poetry is also a different kind of contract. A person reading poetry has already decided that they will spend a bit more time thinking and playing with the words. But poetry is usually not the most direct form of communication. It can be, but for the most part, it is more highly open to personal interpretation, and there really is no wrong way to understand it, as it appeals to emotions. People take what they want from poetry, and it's not always what the author originally intended.

I think posting on a social Internet forum is an appropriate time... and place... for unique style, as well. I do get, though, that you don't necessarily agree with that. But I can receive that. Doesn't mean I'm going to change my style to accommodate you, though...

I'm not telling you how to write.

C'mon... let's keep it honest: yes, you are. You are doing it under the guise of "only suggesting", yes... but the goal is still to tell me how to write.

Write as you wish.

Really? Are you SURE? Because if you are, then as you say, we don't have to visit THIS topic again... right?

I'm just telling you how I respond. I spend a great deal of time simply deciphering, and because I do, I don't always spend as much time understanding.

So, you know what you do... and don't do... but want me to change to accommodate you. Isn't it just as easy (and perhaps a bit more reasonable) for you to change what you know you don't do... so as to do it... than to have me change my style?

That will likely continue, but it is not my deficiency, as I have very good reading comprehension. If people regularly misunderstand me, I tend to look at how I'm expressing myself and try to fix that. I rarely consider the it the reader's fault.

People rarely misunderstand me, dear NC. Yes, some SAY they do... but that's because I'm not saying what they want me to, what they want to hear FROM me. And so, they SAY they don't understand... NOT because what I'm stating doesn't make sense (because it does), but because it's just too difficult for them to hear, receive, accept.

Sorry, but... that's on them.

Again, peace to you!

A slave of Christ,

SA

699

A truce between Atheists and Non-Atheists?

by palmtree67 in

jw
friends

ricky gervais tweeted this 11/14/12 and i totally agree with it:.

"there are good atheists and bad atheists.

there are good believers and bad believers.. no god has ever changed that.".

AGuest

Perhaps you would find it in your kind heart to restate those constructive ideas, dear Palm (peace to you!), just so's we're all on the same page? I mean, I think it would be helpful because I'm not sure just which ideas you're speaking of - there were many...

Again, peace to you!

YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

SA

15

YOWWW!!

by AGuest in

jw
friends

i feel good!.

(dunna nunna nunna nuh).

i feel nice (dunna nunna nunna nuh).

AGuest

Boogie down, bey-bey... booo-oooo-oooo-oooo-oooo-oooo-oooo-gie down!

Peace... in the valley of luh...uh... uh...uh.. uvvvvv!

A slave of Christ,

SA

15

YOWWW!!

by AGuest in

jw
friends

i feel good!.

(dunna nunna nunna nuh).

i feel nice (dunna nunna nunna nuh).

AGuest

You know, ya'll, a lot of folks didn't really "know" the Godfather of Soul (peace to you, all!)... and the huge role he played as a peacemaker during the civil rights conflicts in the 1960'-70's. Many viewed him as a flamboyant, militant-type dude, who got folks all riled up by screaming "jungle" songs. NUTHIN'... could'a been further from the truth.

If folks would... could... stop judgin' books by their covers... maybe then we COULD all "just get along." And by "cover" I don't mean skin...

Peace!

A slave of Christ,

SA, on her own...

Oh, and I don't mean some kind of facade, either... for those who think they know how to "read between [my] lines" and so always want to attribute untoward or even bad motives...