You statement certainly did make it sound like you have a problem with meditation. If you don't, then there is nothing to discuss.
As I said, I never said anything negative about meditation. Any idea that I did came from you alone, not me.
there is a huge difference between been religious and been spiritual.
been religious is about been superior to others in the sight of god.
however, been spiritual is about self awareness, inner peace and unity with the natural world.
You statement certainly did make it sound like you have a problem with meditation. If you don't, then there is nothing to discuss.
As I said, I never said anything negative about meditation. Any idea that I did came from you alone, not me.
there is a huge difference between been religious and been spiritual.
been religious is about been superior to others in the sight of god.
however, been spiritual is about self awareness, inner peace and unity with the natural world.
Since I assume you CAN read, then you should know that's not what I was talking about.
More personal attacks. Your argument is invalid.
I was talking about a common technique you use, which is to qualify what others say or think in such a way that you implicitly attack that person's intelligence, integrity and character - therefore, in essence, a sly form of ad hominem.You shouldn't expect others to read your mind nor dishonestly make claims about other people. It's quite simple, if people don't want to be accused of dishonesty, don't be dishonest. If you don't want to be accused of making false claims about other people, then don't make them. If you don't want your entire argument invalidated by opening with a pointless personal attack, then don't make personal attacks.
And then you complaint you become the recipient of ad hominem as well?
More false claims. I've never complained about it. Rather, I've come to expect it when irrational arguments are exhausted. Indeed, you opened this post with one. Rather than complain, I simply point out the reality of invalidating your own argument by going that route and move on.
In the future, please don't pretend I get offended at your attempts to insult me. Despite your attempts, you've neither managed to insult me or cause me to complain. My feelings are not so fragile that a person I don't know that misrepresents what I say on the internet has the ability to bother me. Quite the contrary, I find it pretty damn amusing that people resort to personal attacks.
Therefore, if you deceitfully claim you don't attack others personally, but merely their ideas, when if fact that's precisely what you do, how shall we call that? That's right - dishonesty.
Please show where, on this thread, I have insulted a person rather than discuss the content of the post. You imagining or pretending it happened doesn't make it reality.
there is a huge difference between been religious and been spiritual.
been religious is about been superior to others in the sight of god.
however, been spiritual is about self awareness, inner peace and unity with the natural world.
You accused deltawave of "promoting meditation and the teachings of BK." Why would you say that if you don't have a problem with meditation?
Because I've never I had a problem with it. If you can show otherwise, please do.
there is a huge difference between been religious and been spiritual.
been religious is about been superior to others in the sight of god.
however, been spiritual is about self awareness, inner peace and unity with the natural world.
"I'm shocked, SHOCKED, to find that gambling is going on in here."
Bingo.
there is a huge difference between been religious and been spiritual.
been religious is about been superior to others in the sight of god.
however, been spiritual is about self awareness, inner peace and unity with the natural world.
Well, although you have shown some unusual verbal restraint on this particular thread, here's an example:
An example has to represent the thing your claiming.
The above is a cunning way to say the same insult twice: The person may have said something that's not accurate, but you chose the term "dishonesty", knowing full well, that such qualifies the person saying it as "dishonest".
Calling dishonesty dishonest is an accurate representation and not a personal attack. It's in no way my problem if accuracy offends you. That's really your problem and yours alone. You don't get to put your monkey on my back.
It's like if I said: "Oh, do you believe in X? Only stupid people believe in X" - and then claim I didn't call that person stupid.
Or, it's not even remotely like that at all. DW was well aware that Jesus endorsed slavery and was attempting to claim the opposite. It's not at all like what you are claiming.
is this what jesus had in mind?
to be a spiritual person you must:.
underline your books.
Wouldn't that depend on whether it was written on tree pulp paper, instead of say parchment, papyrus or how much cotton rag content the paper had?
Hey, who turned out the lights?
there is a huge difference between been religious and been spiritual.
been religious is about been superior to others in the sight of god.
however, been spiritual is about self awareness, inner peace and unity with the natural world.
So what is wrong with the practice of meditation Viviane?
I'll be happy to answer that as soon as anyone can point out where I said anything was wrong with it.
there is a huge difference between been religious and been spiritual.
been religious is about been superior to others in the sight of god.
however, been spiritual is about self awareness, inner peace and unity with the natural world.
If one insists on the right to villify others, it should be no surprise that it comes back to bite you.
No one has vilified any one. Ideas and claims have been vilified. To say otherwise is to misrepresent reality. Well, except for you trying to attack me. You are a shining example of the very thing you are attempting to claim I did and complain about.
I forgive you.
Often, those who overcriticize others for attempting to share their beliefs, are themselves preaching their own set of creeds – be it rationalism, science, theism atheism or whatnot.
Please let me know if you see anyone doing that. However, unlike your incorrect opening claims about personal attacks, please endeavor to be correct next time.
there is a huge difference between been religious and been spiritual.
been religious is about been superior to others in the sight of god.
however, been spiritual is about self awareness, inner peace and unity with the natural world.
Flippin Norah, remind me never to cross viviane!
No one has crossed me. I just don't tolerate promoting woo as reality and misrepresenting facts.
You'll be fine so long as you never form an opinion on anything and be so bold as to post it.
It seems to me that what gets her going is when someone forms an opinion on something and then posts it as fact.
In learning to strip off my irrational old personality, I realize that there is a big difference between stating an opinion and stating an opinion as fact.
So, me posting that statement as fact is gonna get Viviane all riled up.
However, I don't think she'll say I can't have that opinion, even if she views it as wrong and incorrect and irrational (which, admittedly, it is irrational).
Winner winner, chicken dinner!
Deltawave has on a recent thread described accurately the Watchtower discussion at the meeting. He is not Brahma Kumaris, just a JW trying to leave and looking for help. Disgusted! He can't even spell! He is not a threat.
I can accurately describe a WT discussion and I've not been to a meeting in almost 6 years. Deltawave has a name that it directly associated with the meditative practive of the BKs, is promoting meditation and the teachings of the BKs.
there is a huge difference between been religious and been spiritual.
been religious is about been superior to others in the sight of god.
however, been spiritual is about self awareness, inner peace and unity with the natural world.
I think it's best, in the interest of peace that we all (exception made to Viviane) stop making general statements that common sense (except Viviane's common sense, if it can be proven to exist in lab controlled conditions, I'm just working on an assumption here) would understand it as not applying to 100% of mankind without qualifying first that we're not speaking in her name.
Aw, look at you trying make personal attacks. You're totes adorbs when you do that.