I am sorry you can not rejoice with others you are missing out on much.
How do you know I do not rejoice with you? You are on the defensive perhaps
you can not tell. Rather combative.
No one answered my question...
why come andridicule and criticize?what is the purpose
and truly there is nothing more condescending then just that!
As far as fear it is showing in those with their defensive attitudes ...
otherwise one would think they would be happy with others beliefs.
No need for put downs or insulting another's beliefs when one is not
on the defensive.
They are comfortable with their beliefs and allow others to share theirs
without being threatened.
This was a great question, not at all silly, only to some non believers,
There were some great answers ... answers from the heart.
For me ...this question was about feelings and some shared them beautifully.
I have NEVER ONCE ridiculed anyone's faith. do YOU rejoice in the faith of those you disagree with? you don't rejoice in mine. so then why would you think I'm missing out on rejoicing with christians or you?
But I feel these threads are started just to start an argument with those you call "non-believers" (like we believe in nothing if we don't believe in your god). I thought it was a weird question. Priests themselves don't even sit around and ponder this question.
So what you are saying is.....no one can come to a thread started by you or GF because then it's just ridicule and fear. But you are free to go about your business on any thread you like derailing all of them into your "god is great" theme.
You can sit there and lecture all you want about what this thread was about and what an appropriate response is or isn't, but again, I shall ask, why do all these threads come back to YOU? You always put yourself at the centre of the topic. You police every thread like you are the moderator.
I am also comfortable in MY beliefs. yours do not coincide with mine, so when I state my opinion, those are my beliefs. if you trash what I say, then you aren't being tolerant to MY beliefs now are you?
how long are you going to preach these double standards?
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
you start out with an insult and then tell me to accept your reply with all due respect. weird.
anyway, of COURSE everyone feels fear. I'm not denying that. Not sure where you got that from. But I don't fear god, because at this point I don't see his existence. I didn't fear death before I had my daughters. Now I fear death of myself for them, and my wife, if I am not around or able to provide. I have a fear of needles. And I will be the first to admit, I still sometimes fear the dark a bit. But I don't fear things that aren't there.
i dont really feel fear.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
cool story, my take on it "We will create Man in our Image" so maybe He looks like me and looks like you
"I am he as you are me and we are all together"
...
Maybe God looks like DNA.
...
And is anyone else creeped out about God (and Santa Claus) watching us all of the time? Isn't that what stalkers do? Don't they have better things to do than watch us all playing with our genetali?
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
cool story, my take on it "We will create Man in our Image" so maybe He looks like me and looks like you
"I am he as you are me and we are all together"
...
Maybe God looks like DNA.
...
And is anyone else creeped out about God (and Santa Claus) watching us all of the time? Isn't that what stalkers do? Don't they have better things to do than watch us all playing with our genetali?
nope. cant say that i am.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Problem was it was used in a derogatory way showing believers as being weak for the need.
This a good example of the need to put down others.
Hmmm I wonder if that is a crutch?
you have said yourself that religion/faith are a crutch for a weakness. i'll find the quote if I have to. fact is, pandora, there are many needs in life that are as a result of a void. music fills mine.maybe your faith fills yours. but you constantly tell people not to comment on a public thread about their views on any given subject. if we don't agree, we are somehow evil. no one is ridiculing religion/faith/pandora. merely stating our views. if you can't handle that, and I'm not trying to be mean or condescending, but maybe you should stay off the train.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
you start out with an insult and then tell me to accept your reply with all due respect. weird.
anyway, of COURSE everyone feels fear. I'm not denying that. Not sure where you got that from. But I don't fear god, because at this point I don't see his existence. I didn't fear death before I had my daughters. Now I fear death of myself for them, and my wife, if I am not around or able to provide. I have a fear of needles. And I will be the first to admit, I still sometimes fear the dark a bit. But I don't fear things that aren't there.
i dont really feel fear.
sorry, cate, but I have no choice but to call bullshit on that. to say as a human being that you don't feel fear is like saying you don't feel sadness. if you don't feel a biological human emotion, then something is dead.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
you start out with an insult and then tell me to accept your reply with all due respect. weird.
anyway, of COURSE everyone feels fear. I'm not denying that. Not sure where you got that from. But I don't fear god, because at this point I don't see his existence. I didn't fear death before I had my daughters. Now I fear death of myself for them, and my wife, if I am not around or able to provide. I have a fear of needles. And I will be the first to admit, I still sometimes fear the dark a bit. But I don't fear things that aren't there.
i dont really feel fear.
sorry, cate, but I have no choice but to call bullshit on that. to say as a human being that you don't feel fear is like saying you don't feel sadness. if you don't feel a biological human emotion, then something is dead.
im not saying i never have. im saying now, where i am within myself, i dont feel fearful of anything. if however i was standing in the middle of a road with a mack truck bearing down on me and i couldnt move for some reason i probably would feel a great deal of fear. it would be a fear of being hurt and the pain involved. but pump me full of morphine and the fear of that pain would disappear.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
2 - What is good? Everything that heightens the feeling of power in man, the will to power, power itself.
What is bad? Everything that is born of weakness.
What is happiness? The feeling that power is growing, that resistance is overcome.
Not contentedness but more power; not peace but war; not virtue but fitness (Renaissance virtue, virtu, virtue that is moraline-free).
What is more harmful than any vice? Active pity for all the failures and all the weak: Christianity.
15 - In Christianity neither morality nor religion has even a single point of contact with reality. Nothing but imaginary causes ("God," "soul," "ego," "spirit," "free will"—for that matter, "unfree will"), nothing but imaginary effects ("sin," "redemption," "grace," "punishment," "forgiveness of sins"). Intercourse between imaginary beings ("God," "spirits," "souls"); an imaginary natural science (anthropocentric; no trace of any concept of natural causes); an imaginary psychology (nothing but self-misunderstandings, interpretations of agreeable or disagreeable general feelings—for example, of the states of the nervus sympathicus—with the aid of the sign language of the religio-moral idiosyncrasy: "repentance," "pangs of conscience," "temptation by the devil," "the presence of God"); an imaginary teleology ("the kingdom of God," "the Last Judgment," "eternal life").
This world of pure fiction is vastly inferior to the world of dreams insofar as the latter mirrors reality, whereas the former falsifies, devalues, and negates reality. Once the concept of "nature" had been invented as the opposite of "God," "natural" had to become a synonym of "reprehensible": this whole world of fiction is rooted in hatred of the natural (of reality!); it is the expression of a profound vexation at the sight of reality.
But this explains everything. Who alone has good reason to lie his way out of reality? He who suffers from it. But to suffer from reality is to be a piece of reality that has come to grief. The preponderance of feelings of displeasure over feelings of pleasure is the cause of this fictitious morality and religion; but such a preponderance provides the very formula for decadence.
19 - That the strong races of northern Europe did not reject the Christian God certainly does no credit to their religious genius—not to speak of their taste. There is no excuse whatever for their failure to dispose of such a sickly and senile product of decadence. But a curse lies upon them for this failure: they have absorbed sickness, old age, and contradiction into all their instincts—and since then they have not created another god. Almost two thousand years—and not a single new god! But still, as if his existence were justified, as if he represented the ultimate and the maximum of the god-creating power, of the creator spiritus in man, this pitiful god of Christian monotono-theism! This hybrid product of decay, this mixture of zero, concept, and contradiction, in which all the instincts of decadence, all cowardices and wearinesses of the soul, find their sanction!
39 - I go back, I tell the genuine history of Christianity. The very word "Christianity" is a misunderstanding: in truth, there was only one Christian, and he died on the cross. The "evangel" died on the cross. What has been called "evangel" from that moment was actually the opposite of that which he had lived: "ill tidings," a dysangel. It is false to the point of nonsense to find the mark of the Christian in a "faith," for instance, in the faith in redemption through Christ: only Christian practice, a life such as he lived who died on the cross, is Christian.
Such a life is still possible today, for certain people even necessary: genuine, original Christianity will be possible at all times.
Not a faith, but a doing; above all, a not doing of many things, another state of being. States of consciousness, any faith, considering something true, for example—every psychologist knows this—are fifth-rank matters of complete indifference compared to the value of the instincts: speaking more strictly, the whole concept of spiritual causality is false. To reduce being a Christian, Christianism, to a matter of considering something true, to a mere phenomenon of consciousness, is to negate Christianism. In fact, there have been no Christians at all. The "Christian," that which for the last two thousand years has been called a Christian, is merely a psychological self-misunderstanding. If one looks more closely, it was, in spite of all "faith," only the instincts that ruled in him—and what instincts!
43 - When one places life's center of gravity not in life but in the "beyond"—in nothingness—one deprives life of its center of gravity altogether. The great lie of personal immortality destroys all reason, everything natural in the instincts—whatever in the instincts is beneficent and life-promoting or guarantees a future now arouses mistrust. To live so that there is no longer any sense in living, that now becomes the "sense" of life. Why communal sense, why any further gratitude for descent and ancestors, why cooperate or trust; why envisage and promote any common welfare? Just so many "temptations," just so many distractions from the "right path"—for only "one thing is needful."
54 - One should not be deceived: great spirits are skeptics. Zarathustra is a skeptic. Strength, freedom which is born of the strength and overstrength of the spirit, proves itself by skepticism. Men of conviction are not worthy of the least consideration in fundamental questions of value and disvalue. Convictions are prisons. Such men do not look far enough, they do not look beneath themselves: but to be permitted to join in the discussion of value and disvalue, one must see five hundred convictions beneath oneself—behind oneself.
A spirit who wants great things, who also wants the means to them, is necessarily a skeptic. Freedom from all kinds of convictions, to be able to see freely, is part of strength. Great passion, the ground and the power of his existence, even more enlightened, even more despotic than he is himself, employs his whole intellect; it makes him unhesitating; it gives him courage even for unholy means; under certain circumstances it does not begrudge him convictions. Conviction as a means: many things are attained only by means of a conviction. Great passion uses and uses up convictions, it does not succumb to them—it knows itself sovereign.
Conversely: the need for faith, for some kind of unconditional Yes and No, this Carlylism, if one will forgive me this word, is a need born of weakness. The man of faith, the "believer" of every kind, is necessarily a dependent man—one who cannot posit himself as an end, one who cannot posit any end at all by himself. The "believer" does not belong to himself, he can only be a means, he must be used up, he requires somebody to use him up. His instinct gives the highest honor to a morality of self-abnegation; everything persuades him in this direction: his prudence, his experience, his vanity. Every kind of faith is itself an expression of self-abnegation, of self-alienation.
If one considers how necessary most people find something regulatory, which will bind them from without and tie them down; how compulsion, slavery in a higher sense, is the sole and ultimate condition under which the more weak-willed human being can prosper—then one will also understand conviction, "faith."
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,974
You are have said you are basing your belief on your senses
is that then your 5 senses?
Don't discount the existence of God based on that.
We have a long long way to go
imo
I think Wolfy said 'Belief is a passive response to the information your senses and your reason and intelligenceprovide you with'
I really don't think he was talking about the 5 senses, ie hearing, sight, touch, smell, and taste. I think you know that too.
I felt 'wolves' was speaking of his 5 senses because he has expressed the
need for proof ... doorstep analogy
Pandora, I think it's patently obvious that I was talking about the absolute totality of my experience, and not just my five senses. I am talking about everything that I have to understand the world by, every bit of information, knowledge, thought and feeling that I have to base a belief on. And from that absolute totality of my experience and knowledge, I have found no convicing justification for believing that God exists. Is that clear enough for you? Or do you only listen to what you want to hear, and dismiss the rest?
intelligence and reasoning can hinder one from feeling
as do the five senses
...and far too often, focusing solely on feeling can, and does, hinder one from reason and intelligence.
The result of that is that wild, subjective speculations with no basis in fact get treated as if they were absolute objective truth. Which is a pretty dangerous way of operating...
You need to grasp the fact that it's not a simplistic either/or situation. The colours blend... Intellect and intuition...
A final point. You keep making grand pronouncements of how you respect everyone's opinion, how "to each, his own", but yet your behaviour suggests quite the opposite. You throw the little "IMO" qualifier into all your posts, which is good if it is to illustrate that you're being peaceable and reasonable. But I get the sense, the more you use it, that you are actually using it by contrast to suggest that we are not. That we who disagree with you are being mean-spirited and insulting. Anything you disagree with you call offensive, and anyone who says something that you deem to be offensive is tarred as a bully. I think you like to believe that you are this peaceful tolerant being, but in actual fact, you have freqently been domineering and condescending on this thread. You say "in my opinion" and expect people to respect your opinion (as they should), but then you often show flagrant disrespect for other people's opinions. It's a double-standard that does you no favours.
If you truly do believe each to his own, then you would drop all this "bullying" nonsense and allow people to express without judgements their thoughts and feelings on the topic, whether or not you agree with them. Can you do that?
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
cool story, my take on it "We will create Man in our Image" so maybe He looks like me and looks like you
"I am he as you are me and we are all together"
...
Maybe God looks like DNA.
...
And is anyone else creeped out about God (and Santa Claus) watching us all of the time? Isn't that what stalkers do? Don't they have better things to do than watch us all?[ playing with our genetali/quote]
playing with my genetalia....me ?? never !!!!.......welll maybe once or twice but thats all
I am sorry you can not rejoice with others you are missing out on much.
How do you know I do not rejoice with you? You are on the defensive perhaps
you can not tell. Rather combative.
No one answered my question...
why come andridicule and criticize?what is the purpose
and truly there is nothing more condescending then just that!
As far as fear it is showing in those with their defensive attitudes ...
otherwise one would think they would be happy with others beliefs.
No need for put downs or insulting another's beliefs when one is not
on the defensive.
They are comfortable with their beliefs and allow others to share theirs
without being threatened.
This was a great question, not at all silly, only to some non believers,
There were some great answers ... answers from the heart.
For me ...this question was about feelings and some shared them beautifully.
I have NEVER ONCE ridiculed anyone's faith. do YOU rejoice in the faith of those you disagree with? you don't rejoice in mine. so then why would you think I'm missing out on rejoicing with christians or you?
But I feel these threads are started just to start an argument with those you call "non-believers" (like we believe in nothing if we don't believe in your god). I thought it was a weird question. Priests themselves don't even sit around and ponder this question.
So what you are saying is.....no one can come to a thread started by you or GF because then it's just ridicule and fear. But you are free to go about your business on any thread you like derailing all of them into your "god is great" theme.
You can sit there and lecture all you want about what this thread was about and what an appropriate response is or isn't, but again, I shall ask, why do all these threads come back to YOU? You always put yourself at the centre of the topic. You police every thread like you are the moderator.
I am also comfortable in MY beliefs. yours do not coincide with mine, so when I state my opinion, those are my beliefs. if you trash what I say, then you aren't being tolerant to MY beliefs now are you?
how long are you going to preach these double standards?
perhaps you might want to ask yourself that one you seem to make threads about me though I have
said if you don't like what I say you could ignore. But you quote me.
as I said rather combative. Makes one wonder if you enjoy this.
I don't think I stated you ridiculed anyone :?
yes I rejoice in others faith and beliefs ... yes atheists
it troubles me those who need to put another's down though.
That is counterproductive to understanding their own.
Lets see, if no one showed up to mock or ridicule the poster's genuine question would there be a argument? I think not.
Really post positive....
if one doesn't believe in God how can one seriously answer the question?
All they can do is come say it is impossible because there s no God ...
dissing the question itself and those who believe
or call it silly and then make it sillier ... why come post that?
It was obvious to believers that it was taunting when they themslves wanted to speak
on the subject.
Then those taunting cry foul. :?
And where please did I trash your beliefs?
So the debate becomes the validity of the question itself.
To me that is wrong .. the question was a valid one for believers and
had awesome potential until non believers made it a joke.
Problem was it was used in a derogatory way showing believers as being weak for the need.
This a good example of the need to put down others.
Hmmm I wonder if that is a crutch?
you have said yourself that religion/faith are a crutch for a weakness. i'll find the quote if I have to. fact is, pandora, there are many needs in life that are as a result of a void. music fills mine.maybe your faith fills yours. but you constantly tell people not to comment on a public thread about their views on any given subject. if we don't agree, we are somehow evil. no one is ridiculing religion/faith/pandora. merely stating our views. if you can't handle that, and I'm not trying to be mean or condescending, but maybe you should stay off the train.
not gonna happen, you got me...
but you can ignore or you could try harder cause you can be
mean and condescending but maybe I just bring the best out in you
again this is what happened to what could have been a great thread
in my opinion of course
So the debate becomes the validity of the question itself.
To me that is wrong .. the question was a valid one for believers and
had awesome potential until non believers made it a joke.
Maybe all could respect each others beliefs in the future and not do that?
You are have said you are basing your belief on your senses
is that then your 5 senses?
Don't discount the existence of God based on that.
We have a long long way to go
imo
I think Wolfy said 'Belief is a passive response to the information your senses and your reason and intelligenceprovide you with'
I really don't think he was talking about the 5 senses, ie hearing, sight, touch, smell, and taste. I think you know that too.
I felt 'wolves' was speaking of his 5 senses because he has expressed the
need for proof ... doorstep analogy
Pandora, I think it's patently obvious that I was talking about the absolute totality of my experience, and not just my five senses. I am talking about everything that I have to understand the world by, every bit of information, knowledge, thought and feeling that I have to base a belief on. And from that absolute totality of my experience and knowledge, I have found no convicing justification for believing that God exists. Is that clear enough for you? Or do you only listen to what you want to hear, and dismiss the rest?
intelligence and reasoning can hinder one from feeling
as do the five senses
...and far too often, focusing solely on feeling can, and does, hinder one from reason and intelligence.
The result of that is that wild, subjective speculations with no basis in fact get treated as if they were absolute objective truth. Which is a pretty dangerous way of operating...
You need to grasp the fact that it's not a simplistic either/or situation. The colours blend... Intellect and intuition...
A final point. You keep making grand pronouncements of how you respect everyone's opinion, how "to each, his own", but yet your behaviour suggests quite the opposite. You throw the little "IMO" qualifier into all your posts, which is good if it is to illustrate that you're being peaceable and reasonable. But I get the sense, the more you use it, that you are actually using it by contrast to suggest that we are not. That we who disagree with you are being mean-spirited and insulting. Anything you disagree with you call offensive, and anyone who says something that you deem to be offensive is tarred as a bully. I think you like to believe that you are this peaceful tolerant being, but in actual fact, you have freqently been domineering and condescending on this thread. You say "in my opinion" and expect people to respect your opinion (as they should), but then you often show flagrant disrespect for other people's opinions. It's a double-standard that does you no favours.
If you truly do believe each to his own, then you would drop all this "bullying" nonsense and allow people to express without judgements their thoughts and feelings on the topic, whether or not you agree with them. Can you do that?
I do not consider bullying to be nonsense
Think about the person or persons behind the post.
IMO is in my posts because of a suggestion since earlier this week.
It is from Kat's debating post. Have you seen it? Everyone can be reminded
of good debating rules.
I too was not doing that lately so you are very wrong on my motive for using it.
And turned it into something ugly I might add... :?
even sinister... whats up with that?
Your post is really condescending and so is the ugliness you made.
When you're dreaming like a big blob of "energy clay." HA! Kidding. Only thing I can say is, when you accept 'God" as omnipresent within everything, then you will see and understand.
When you're dreaming like a big blob of "energy clay." HA! Kidding. Only thing I can say is, when you accept 'God" as omnipresent within everything, then you will see and understand.
Yes, you did. Every time you said people acted out of 'fear', as they stated their beliefs.
quite sure I said some people not all posters
were the posts their beliefs or mockery? Very few serious answers
but you saw that also Jonny ...the ridicule
and you refrained from posting to avoid being offensive as you have mentioned
It doesnt matter if they were mockery, ridicule, or serious.
A few said that they thought the question was ridiculous, which heeds a ridiculous response. No matter what side of this I am on, I can respect that.
If someone makes ANY kind of response, of course it is up to you how you preceive it, but that is why I initially withheld my response to the question... I was not afraid of being offensive, I was afraid others might perceive it as offensive. There's a difference.
But I stated my beliefs because I was making a point...that I see things like Bible quotes describing physical descriptions of God, and I question it because I find it hard to subscribe to, like much of the Bible.
Even if you said "some" posters act out of fear while stating their beliefs, you are still mocking their beliefs. I'm surprised you can't see this, but I just assume its because you are not accepting of people who dont share your belief, or maybe you just perceive their beliefs as bullying and feel the need to defend it.
Yes, you did. Every time you said people acted out of 'fear', as they stated their beliefs.
quite sure I said some people not all posters
were the posts their beliefs or mockery? Very few serious answers
but you saw that also Jonny ...the ridicule
and you refrained from posting to avoid being offensive as you have mentioned
It doesnt matter if they were mockery, ridicule, or serious.
A few said that they thought the question was ridiculous, which heeds a ridiculous response. No matter what side of this I am on, I can respect that.
If someone makes ANY kind of response, of course it is up to you how you preceive it, but that is why I initially withheld my response to the question... I was not afraid of being offensive, I was afraid others might perceive it as offensive. There's a difference.
But I stated my beliefs because I was making a point...that I see things like Bible quotes describing physical descriptions of God, and I question it because I find it hard to subscribe to, like much of the Bible.
Even if you said "some" posters act out of fear while stating their beliefs, you are still mocking their beliefs. I'm surprised you can't see this, but I just assume its because you are not accepting of people who dont share your belief, or maybe you just perceive their beliefs as bullying and feel the need to defend it.
as I mentioned you guys so funny if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck
its a duck
some posts no question about perception
no.... I said some come to insult out of being defensive not while they are statingtheir beliefs
Big difference
Your fence Jonny is showing
As I have said
So the debate becomes the validity of the question itself.
To me that is wrong .. the question was a valid one for believers and
had awesome potential until non believers made it a joke.
But its not too late perhaps we can get more beautiful conjuring imagery
as some have posted ... their posts in all seriousness with reflection...
not satirical.
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,974
cool story, my take on it "We will create Man in our Image" so maybe He looks like me and looks like you
"I am he as you are me and we are all together"
...
Maybe God looks like DNA.
...
And is anyone else creeped out about God (and Santa Claus) watching us all of the time? Isn't that what stalkers do? Don't they have better things to do than watch us all?[ playing with our genetali/quote]
playing with my genetalia....me ?? never !!!!.......welll maybe once or twice but thats all
Godfather.
Feeling your oats this morning, Godfather! Good post!
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Comments
or like the 'Aqualung' character from the Jethro Tull album:
...
except in a dirty Mac instead of a white robe.
Hail, Hail!!!
I have NEVER ONCE ridiculed anyone's faith. do YOU rejoice in the faith of those you disagree with? you don't rejoice in mine. so then why would you think I'm missing out on rejoicing with christians or you?
But I feel these threads are started just to start an argument with those you call "non-believers" (like we believe in nothing if we don't believe in your god). I thought it was a weird question. Priests themselves don't even sit around and ponder this question.
So what you are saying is.....no one can come to a thread started by you or GF because then it's just ridicule and fear. But you are free to go about your business on any thread you like derailing all of them into your "god is great" theme.
You can sit there and lecture all you want about what this thread was about and what an appropriate response is or isn't, but again, I shall ask, why do all these threads come back to YOU? You always put yourself at the centre of the topic. You police every thread like you are the moderator.
I am also comfortable in MY beliefs. yours do not coincide with mine, so when I state my opinion, those are my beliefs. if you trash what I say, then you aren't being tolerant to MY beliefs now are you?
how long are you going to preach these double standards?
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
you can't feel the wind? :?
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
i dont really feel fear.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Maybe God looks like DNA.
...
And is anyone else creeped out about God (and Santa Claus) watching us all of the time? Isn't that what stalkers do? Don't they have better things to do than watch us all playing with our genetali?
Hail, Hail!!!
nope. cant say that i am.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
sorry, cate, but I have no choice but to call bullshit on that. to say as a human being that you don't feel fear is like saying you don't feel sadness. if you don't feel a biological human emotion, then something is dead.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
im not saying i never have. im saying now, where i am within myself, i dont feel fearful of anything. if however i was standing in the middle of a road with a mack truck bearing down on me and i couldnt move for some reason i probably would feel a great deal of fear. it would be a fear of being hurt and the pain involved. but pump me full of morphine and the fear of that pain would disappear.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Would you say that to a neo-Nazi?
Abrn Hlls '98 - Clarkston 2 '03 - Grd Rpds '06 - Abrn Hlls '06 - Clvd '10 - PJ20 - Berlin 1+2 '12 - Wrigley '13 - Pitt '13- buff '13- Philly 1+2 '13 - Seattle '13
Which is exactly what I believe.
I'll let Nietzsche explain:
http://davesource.com/Fringe/Fringe/Rel ... ti-Christ/
The Anti-Christ
2 - What is good? Everything that heightens the feeling of power in man, the will to power, power itself.
What is bad? Everything that is born of weakness.
What is happiness? The feeling that power is growing, that resistance is overcome.
Not contentedness but more power; not peace but war; not virtue but fitness (Renaissance virtue, virtu, virtue that is moraline-free).
What is more harmful than any vice? Active pity for all the failures and all the weak: Christianity.
15 - In Christianity neither morality nor religion has even a single point of contact with reality. Nothing but imaginary causes ("God," "soul," "ego," "spirit," "free will"—for that matter, "unfree will"), nothing but imaginary effects ("sin," "redemption," "grace," "punishment," "forgiveness of sins"). Intercourse between imaginary beings ("God," "spirits," "souls"); an imaginary natural science (anthropocentric; no trace of any concept of natural causes); an imaginary psychology (nothing but self-misunderstandings, interpretations of agreeable or disagreeable general feelings—for example, of the states of the nervus sympathicus—with the aid of the sign language of the religio-moral idiosyncrasy: "repentance," "pangs of conscience," "temptation by the devil," "the presence of God"); an imaginary teleology ("the kingdom of God," "the Last Judgment," "eternal life").
This world of pure fiction is vastly inferior to the world of dreams insofar as the latter mirrors reality, whereas the former falsifies, devalues, and negates reality. Once the concept of "nature" had been invented as the opposite of "God," "natural" had to become a synonym of "reprehensible": this whole world of fiction is rooted in hatred of the natural (of reality!); it is the expression of a profound vexation at the sight of reality.
But this explains everything. Who alone has good reason to lie his way out of reality? He who suffers from it. But to suffer from reality is to be a piece of reality that has come to grief. The preponderance of feelings of displeasure over feelings of pleasure is the cause of this fictitious morality and religion; but such a preponderance provides the very formula for decadence.
19 - That the strong races of northern Europe did not reject the Christian God certainly does no credit to their religious genius—not to speak of their taste. There is no excuse whatever for their failure to dispose of such a sickly and senile product of decadence. But a curse lies upon them for this failure: they have absorbed sickness, old age, and contradiction into all their instincts—and since then they have not created another god. Almost two thousand years—and not a single new god! But still, as if his existence were justified, as if he represented the ultimate and the maximum of the god-creating power, of the creator spiritus in man, this pitiful god of Christian monotono-theism! This hybrid product of decay, this mixture of zero, concept, and contradiction, in which all the instincts of decadence, all cowardices and wearinesses of the soul, find their sanction!
39 - I go back, I tell the genuine history of Christianity. The very word "Christianity" is a misunderstanding: in truth, there was only one Christian, and he died on the cross. The "evangel" died on the cross. What has been called "evangel" from that moment was actually the opposite of that which he had lived: "ill tidings," a dysangel. It is false to the point of nonsense to find the mark of the Christian in a "faith," for instance, in the faith in redemption through Christ: only Christian practice, a life such as he lived who died on the cross, is Christian.
Such a life is still possible today, for certain people even necessary: genuine, original Christianity will be possible at all times.
Not a faith, but a doing; above all, a not doing of many things, another state of being. States of consciousness, any faith, considering something true, for example—every psychologist knows this—are fifth-rank matters of complete indifference compared to the value of the instincts: speaking more strictly, the whole concept of spiritual causality is false. To reduce being a Christian, Christianism, to a matter of considering something true, to a mere phenomenon of consciousness, is to negate Christianism. In fact, there have been no Christians at all. The "Christian," that which for the last two thousand years has been called a Christian, is merely a psychological self-misunderstanding. If one looks more closely, it was, in spite of all "faith," only the instincts that ruled in him—and what instincts!
43 - When one places life's center of gravity not in life but in the "beyond"—in nothingness—one deprives life of its center of gravity altogether. The great lie of personal immortality destroys all reason, everything natural in the instincts—whatever in the instincts is beneficent and life-promoting or guarantees a future now arouses mistrust. To live so that there is no longer any sense in living, that now becomes the "sense" of life. Why communal sense, why any further gratitude for descent and ancestors, why cooperate or trust; why envisage and promote any common welfare? Just so many "temptations," just so many distractions from the "right path"—for only "one thing is needful."
54 - One should not be deceived: great spirits are skeptics. Zarathustra is a skeptic. Strength, freedom which is born of the strength and overstrength of the spirit, proves itself by skepticism. Men of conviction are not worthy of the least consideration in fundamental questions of value and disvalue. Convictions are prisons. Such men do not look far enough, they do not look beneath themselves: but to be permitted to join in the discussion of value and disvalue, one must see five hundred convictions beneath oneself—behind oneself.
A spirit who wants great things, who also wants the means to them, is necessarily a skeptic. Freedom from all kinds of convictions, to be able to see freely, is part of strength. Great passion, the ground and the power of his existence, even more enlightened, even more despotic than he is himself, employs his whole intellect; it makes him unhesitating; it gives him courage even for unholy means; under certain circumstances it does not begrudge him convictions. Conviction as a means: many things are attained only by means of a conviction. Great passion uses and uses up convictions, it does not succumb to them—it knows itself sovereign.
Conversely: the need for faith, for some kind of unconditional Yes and No, this Carlylism, if one will forgive me this word, is a need born of weakness. The man of faith, the "believer" of every kind, is necessarily a dependent man—one who cannot posit himself as an end, one who cannot posit any end at all by himself. The "believer" does not belong to himself, he can only be a means, he must be used up, he requires somebody to use him up. His instinct gives the highest honor to a morality of self-abnegation; everything persuades him in this direction: his prudence, his experience, his vanity. Every kind of faith is itself an expression of self-abnegation, of self-alienation.
If one considers how necessary most people find something regulatory, which will bind them from without and tie them down; how compulsion, slavery in a higher sense, is the sole and ultimate condition under which the more weak-willed human being can prosper—then one will also understand conviction, "faith."
Pandora, I think it's patently obvious that I was talking about the absolute totality of my experience, and not just my five senses. I am talking about everything that I have to understand the world by, every bit of information, knowledge, thought and feeling that I have to base a belief on. And from that absolute totality of my experience and knowledge, I have found no convicing justification for believing that God exists. Is that clear enough for you? Or do you only listen to what you want to hear, and dismiss the rest?
...and far too often, focusing solely on feeling can, and does, hinder one from reason and intelligence.
The result of that is that wild, subjective speculations with no basis in fact get treated as if they were absolute objective truth. Which is a pretty dangerous way of operating...
You need to grasp the fact that it's not a simplistic either/or situation. The colours blend... Intellect and intuition...
A final point. You keep making grand pronouncements of how you respect everyone's opinion, how "to each, his own", but yet your behaviour suggests quite the opposite. You throw the little "IMO" qualifier into all your posts, which is good if it is to illustrate that you're being peaceable and reasonable. But I get the sense, the more you use it, that you are actually using it by contrast to suggest that we are not. That we who disagree with you are being mean-spirited and insulting. Anything you disagree with you call offensive, and anyone who says something that you deem to be offensive is tarred as a bully. I think you like to believe that you are this peaceful tolerant being, but in actual fact, you have freqently been domineering and condescending on this thread. You say "in my opinion" and expect people to respect your opinion (as they should), but then you often show flagrant disrespect for other people's opinions. It's a double-standard that does you no favours.
If you truly do believe each to his own, then you would drop all this "bullying" nonsense and allow people to express without judgements their thoughts and feelings on the topic, whether or not you agree with them. Can you do that?
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
that album ... oh my God!
but you are a Mom ... right? losing a child, a great fear ...
A parents greatest fear.
Maybe God looks like DNA.
...
And is anyone else creeped out about God (and Santa Claus) watching us all of the time? Isn't that what stalkers do? Don't they have better things to do than watch us all?[ playing with our genetali/quote]
playing with my genetalia....me ?? never !!!!.......welll maybe once or twice but thats all
Godfather.
you seem to make threads about me though I have
said if you don't like what I say you could ignore. But you quote me.
as I said rather combative. Makes one wonder if you enjoy this.
I don't think I stated you ridiculed anyone :?
yes I rejoice in others faith and beliefs ... yes atheists
it troubles me those who need to put another's down though.
That is counterproductive to understanding their own.
Lets see, if no one showed up to mock or ridicule the poster's genuine question would there be a argument? I think not.
Really post positive....
if one doesn't believe in God how can one seriously answer the question?
All they can do is come say it is impossible because there s no God ...
dissing the question itself and those who believe
or call it silly and then make it sillier ... why come post that?
It was obvious to believers that it was taunting when they themslves wanted to speak
on the subject.
Then those taunting cry foul. :?
And where please did I trash your beliefs?
So the debate becomes the validity of the question itself.
To me that is wrong .. the question was a valid one for believers and
had awesome potential until non believers made it a joke.
try it as a feeling not black and white
but you can ignore or you could try harder cause you can be
mean and condescending but maybe I just bring the best out in you
again this is what happened to what could have been a great thread
in my opinion of course
So the debate becomes the validity of the question itself.
To me that is wrong .. the question was a valid one for believers and
had awesome potential until non believers made it a joke.
Maybe all could respect each others beliefs in the future and not do that?
Lay the argument to rest.
I got a picture!
she's cute!!
Think about the person or persons behind the post.
IMO is in my posts because of a suggestion since earlier this week.
It is from Kat's debating post. Have you seen it? Everyone can be reminded
of good debating rules.
I too was not doing that lately so you are very wrong on my motive for using it.
And turned it into something ugly I might add... :?
even sinister... whats up with that?
Your post is really condescending and so is the ugliness you made.
:thumbup:
Godfather.
Yes, you did. Every time you said people acted out of 'fear', as they stated their beliefs.
were the posts their beliefs or mockery? Very few serious answers
but you saw that also Jonny ...the ridicule
and you refrained from posting to avoid being offensive as you have mentioned
It doesnt matter if they were mockery, ridicule, or serious.
A few said that they thought the question was ridiculous, which heeds a ridiculous response. No matter what side of this I am on, I can respect that.
If someone makes ANY kind of response, of course it is up to you how you preceive it, but that is why I initially withheld my response to the question... I was not afraid of being offensive, I was afraid others might perceive it as offensive. There's a difference.
But I stated my beliefs because I was making a point...that I see things like Bible quotes describing physical descriptions of God, and I question it because I find it hard to subscribe to, like much of the Bible.
Even if you said "some" posters act out of fear while stating their beliefs, you are still mocking their beliefs. I'm surprised you can't see this, but I just assume its because you are not accepting of people who dont share your belief, or maybe you just perceive their beliefs as bullying and feel the need to defend it.
its a duck
some posts no question about perception
no.... I said some come to insult out of being defensive not while they are stating their beliefs
Big difference
Your fence Jonny is showing
As I have said
So the debate becomes the validity of the question itself.
To me that is wrong .. the question was a valid one for believers and
had awesome potential until non believers made it a joke.
But its not too late perhaps we can get more beautiful conjuring imagery
as some have posted ... their posts in all seriousness with reflection...
not satirical.
Feeling your oats this morning, Godfather!