S
Spinster
Guest
Why can't more Christians be like you?
Why can't more Christians be like you?
C
Consumer Monkey
Guest
Re: Threatening will get you nowhere. Jesus never threatened me.
> P.S. The church just wants your money. Just read the bible on
> your own. Churches mislead you.
Just a small point, but why limit yourself ( oneself ) to one book - religion is a process of self-transformation, not self-labelling; Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu, Atheist etc are all words that place limitiations on our possibilities for change and action.
> P.S. The church just wants your money. Just read the bible on
> your own. Churches mislead you.
Just a small point, but why limit yourself ( oneself ) to one book - religion is a process of self-transformation, not self-labelling; Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu, Atheist etc are all words that place limitiations on our possibilities for change and action.
M
Mani
Guest
Re:
> Why can't more Christians be like you?
coz it's hard enough for me to be this way. The first thing to realise is that money is not an object.
....hard already, isn't it? hehe
Thanks, babe.
> Why can't more Christians be like you?
coz it's hard enough for me to be this way. The first thing to realise is that money is not an object.
....hard already, isn't it? hehe
Thanks, babe.
M
Mani
Guest
Re: Threatening will get you nowhere. Jesus never threatened me.
> Just a small point, but why limit yourself ( oneself ) to one
> book - religion is a process of self-transformation, not
> self-labelling
True. You see, the religions you name below--atheism and agnosticism included--have two goals. 1)The triumph of good over evil 2)love and respect for the creator of existance. Sadly, some of them approach it with misinterpretations and fallacies.
I just decided on Christianity only because it fit well with me. But, Buddhism has some of the more aesthetic beliefs that I adore. And, most all religious beliefs do parallel in some form or other. In this changing world, you cannot be absolute--it is not possible for one thought to be a law. And, I do accept other's beliefs if they are enlightening.
Most importantly, I am greatful for this life. For the ability things I've done in this life, there is only one person responsible--the one that made it all. Christ is @#!!!ing awesome!! (or whomever you worship.)
>; Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu, Atheist etc
> are all words that place limitiations on our possibilities for
> change and action.
Not really. Ignorant people make these limitations. For example, some "christian" told me that homosexuality is evil, and showed my some scripture [that could easily be misintereperted by ignorant people]. But, there is nothing in the Ten Commandments that says "All gays go to hell". It's sad, but alot of people use God as a shield from life. They pray their problems away: Say, one decides to steal a car, and then becomes a fugitive. The solution is to pray? No, RETURN THE @#!!!ING CAR!!! God gave us the knowledge and wisdom to know right from wrong, and to learn our cultures. But, people choose which culture to accept. That is where the ignorance comes in, and with such a shield, some 'religious people' make shortsighted beliefs.
> Just a small point, but why limit yourself ( oneself ) to one
> book - religion is a process of self-transformation, not
> self-labelling
True. You see, the religions you name below--atheism and agnosticism included--have two goals. 1)The triumph of good over evil 2)love and respect for the creator of existance. Sadly, some of them approach it with misinterpretations and fallacies.
I just decided on Christianity only because it fit well with me. But, Buddhism has some of the more aesthetic beliefs that I adore. And, most all religious beliefs do parallel in some form or other. In this changing world, you cannot be absolute--it is not possible for one thought to be a law. And, I do accept other's beliefs if they are enlightening.
Most importantly, I am greatful for this life. For the ability things I've done in this life, there is only one person responsible--the one that made it all. Christ is @#!!!ing awesome!! (or whomever you worship.)
>; Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu, Atheist etc
> are all words that place limitiations on our possibilities for
> change and action.
Not really. Ignorant people make these limitations. For example, some "christian" told me that homosexuality is evil, and showed my some scripture [that could easily be misintereperted by ignorant people]. But, there is nothing in the Ten Commandments that says "All gays go to hell". It's sad, but alot of people use God as a shield from life. They pray their problems away: Say, one decides to steal a car, and then becomes a fugitive. The solution is to pray? No, RETURN THE @#!!!ING CAR!!! God gave us the knowledge and wisdom to know right from wrong, and to learn our cultures. But, people choose which culture to accept. That is where the ignorance comes in, and with such a shield, some 'religious people' make shortsighted beliefs.
C
Consumer Monkey
Guest
Re: Threatening will get you nowhere. Jesus never threatened me.
We all approach reality through misinterpretion and fallacy - its an inevitable consequence of our own limitations - especially the limitations of our mind. Today it is virtually impossible for intelligent people to accept the teaching of one doctrine because there are simply too many other alternatives - religion only really works when one is willing to accept all the paradigms of that religion ( which is basically a pre-humanist position, dependent on lack of contact with alternatives; which is easy for primitive people and children - and only really works in that context )
To live a true religious life today it is necessary to give up 'belief' ( which is just a mental process ). For instance 'good' and 'evil' are really just western ideas that are due to a modern tendency to polarize. In the past such ideas did not exist ( even today, some representations of God are quite shocking from a Western point of view - eg Shiva and Kali/Durga in Hinduism or Saturn/Chronos from Greek/Roman times - who was to become Satan in Christian thinking ). In Taoism Yin/Yang are not seen as good/evil, but merely opposing forces.
The invention of the concept of 'sin' is the most debilitating of all human self-constraints - there is no such thing and it leads to all sorts of problems ( such as killing someone on a cross ). In the East, Karma is the consequence of ones actions, but it is amoral ( ie all good or bad action carries consequence ). Only if we transcend sin/non-sin can we begin to approach the truth.
> True. You see, the religions you name below--atheism and
> agnosticism included--have two goals. 1)The triumph of good over
> evil 2)love and respect for the creator of existance. Sadly,
> some of them approach it with misinterpretations and fallacies.
> I just decided on Christianity only because it fit well with me.
> But, Buddhism has some of the more aesthetic beliefs that I
> adore. And, most all religious beliefs do parallel in some form
> or other. In this changing world, you cannot be absolute--it is
> not possible for one thought to be a law. And, I do accept
> other's beliefs if they are enlightening.
> Most importantly, I am greatful for this life. For the ability
> things I've done in this life, there is only one person
> responsible--the one that made it all. Christ is @#!!! ing
> awesome!! (or whomever you worship.)
> Not really. Ignorant people make these limitations. For example,
> some "christian" told me that homosexuality is evil,
> and showed my some scripture [that could easily be
> misintereperted by ignorant people]. But, there is nothing in
> the Ten Commandments that says "All gays go to hell".
> It's sad, but alot of people use God as a shield from life. They
> pray their problems away: Say, one decides to steal a car, and
> then becomes a fugitive. The solution is to pray? No, RETURN THE
> @#!!! ING CAR!!! God gave us the knowledge and wisdom to know
> right from wrong, and to learn our cultures. But, people choose
> which culture to accept. That is where the ignorance comes in,
> and with such a shield, some 'religious people' make
> shortsighted beliefs.
We all approach reality through misinterpretion and fallacy - its an inevitable consequence of our own limitations - especially the limitations of our mind. Today it is virtually impossible for intelligent people to accept the teaching of one doctrine because there are simply too many other alternatives - religion only really works when one is willing to accept all the paradigms of that religion ( which is basically a pre-humanist position, dependent on lack of contact with alternatives; which is easy for primitive people and children - and only really works in that context )
To live a true religious life today it is necessary to give up 'belief' ( which is just a mental process ). For instance 'good' and 'evil' are really just western ideas that are due to a modern tendency to polarize. In the past such ideas did not exist ( even today, some representations of God are quite shocking from a Western point of view - eg Shiva and Kali/Durga in Hinduism or Saturn/Chronos from Greek/Roman times - who was to become Satan in Christian thinking ). In Taoism Yin/Yang are not seen as good/evil, but merely opposing forces.
The invention of the concept of 'sin' is the most debilitating of all human self-constraints - there is no such thing and it leads to all sorts of problems ( such as killing someone on a cross ). In the East, Karma is the consequence of ones actions, but it is amoral ( ie all good or bad action carries consequence ). Only if we transcend sin/non-sin can we begin to approach the truth.
> True. You see, the religions you name below--atheism and
> agnosticism included--have two goals. 1)The triumph of good over
> evil 2)love and respect for the creator of existance. Sadly,
> some of them approach it with misinterpretations and fallacies.
> I just decided on Christianity only because it fit well with me.
> But, Buddhism has some of the more aesthetic beliefs that I
> adore. And, most all religious beliefs do parallel in some form
> or other. In this changing world, you cannot be absolute--it is
> not possible for one thought to be a law. And, I do accept
> other's beliefs if they are enlightening.
> Most importantly, I am greatful for this life. For the ability
> things I've done in this life, there is only one person
> responsible--the one that made it all. Christ is @#!!! ing
> awesome!! (or whomever you worship.)
> Not really. Ignorant people make these limitations. For example,
> some "christian" told me that homosexuality is evil,
> and showed my some scripture [that could easily be
> misintereperted by ignorant people]. But, there is nothing in
> the Ten Commandments that says "All gays go to hell".
> It's sad, but alot of people use God as a shield from life. They
> pray their problems away: Say, one decides to steal a car, and
> then becomes a fugitive. The solution is to pray? No, RETURN THE
> @#!!! ING CAR!!! God gave us the knowledge and wisdom to know
> right from wrong, and to learn our cultures. But, people choose
> which culture to accept. That is where the ignorance comes in,
> and with such a shield, some 'religious people' make
> shortsighted beliefs.
N
nhon
Guest
The Thinker
Only if we transcend sin/non-sin can we begin to approach the
> truth.
I think the truth to anything is an on going and almost never ending search. But it's a good start if you just place your hand on your chin on a good boring weekend and ask "WHY?" to the everyday things in life. : )
Only if we transcend sin/non-sin can we begin to approach the
> truth.
I think the truth to anything is an on going and almost never ending search. But it's a good start if you just place your hand on your chin on a good boring weekend and ask "WHY?" to the everyday things in life. : )
M
Mani
Guest
Re: Threatening will get you nowhere. Jesus never threatened me.
> We all approach reality through misinterpretion and fallacy -
> its an inevitable consequence of our own limitations -
> especially the limitations of our mind.
Or, because our culture has somewhat of a guilty pleasure for and since we can't act on it, we blur the line between fantasy and fantasy. We don't want to admit it, but westerners fantisize alot, reality. That, being our only limitation.
> Today it is virtually
> impossible for intelligent people to accept the teaching of one
> doctrine because there are simply too many other alternatives
Hence, relative thought. Being absolute is just stupid; the only thing mankind has ever been close to proving is science. And, Oscar Wilde said himself, science is a record of dead religions.
> religion only really works when one is willing to accept all the
> paradigms of that religion ( which is basically a pre-humanist
> position, dependent on lack of contact with alternatives; which
> is easy for primitive people and children - and only really
> works in that context )
True, yet one can't be wholly absolute as well. I mean, I am celibate, but I hang out with perverts and have not intention of abandoning them because Father Flannigan said so. But, I would rather have a lobotomy than hang out with Charles Manson just because his life differs from mine. Or, I wouldn't be so forgiving to a child molester. If one is an obvious infidel, then I rule them out. But, if one has an opposing lifestyle, they should be given a chance.
> To live a true religious life today it is necessary to give up
> 'belief' ( which is just a mental process ). For instance 'good'
> and 'evil' are really just western ideas that are due to a
> modern tendency to polarize.
But, that is only today. Modern religion is crap, because everyone knows each human is born with a heart and mind--two instruments that can be decieved and manipulated, just as easily as to feel or learn. Religion pretty much is based upon one agenda--convert everyone.
Maybe I'm more spiritual than religious. For one, I haven't gone to church today.
And, the reason why the easter hemisphere has no concept of good vs. evil is because the western hemisphere has created the ultimate symbol of evil: $
Plus, I believe good and evil should be considered a universal concept. For example, this is a very intelligent post--well written, and very insightful--and, I'm sure you took your time on it. Why? You wanted to do your best to make your point. (If you didn't take your time on it, there'd be alot of "Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure"-type responses like "Yeah" and "Naah-uh".) Humans have this natural sense of improvement. Who wakes up and says "Hey, I want this day to suck more than yesterday"? We have this natural ethic of moving upward/ahead (F.Y.I. off the subject, that's why I believe in Jesus.)
> In the past such ideas did not
> exist ( even today, some representations of God are quite
> shocking from a Western point of view - eg Shiva and Kali/Durga
> in Hinduism or Saturn/Chronos from Greek/Roman times - who was
> to become Satan in Christian thinking ). In Taoism Yin/Yang are
> not seen as good/evil, but merely opposing forces.
The in/yo seems to be something I appreciate, even though I am not Taoist. One has to appreciate 'evil', because there'd be no concept of 'good'. In a sense, they are opposing forces, but some lame American decided one of the forces was 'bad'.
> The invention of the concept of 'sin' is the most debilitating
> of all human self-constraints - there is no such thing and it
> leads to all sorts of problems ( such as killing someone on a
> cross ). In the East, Karma is the consequence of ones actions,
> but it is amoral ( ie all good or bad action carries consequence
> ). Only if we transcend sin/non-sin can we begin to approach the
> truth.
Well, some people take the 'sin' thing too far. For one, accidents and mistakes are not sins. Sins are DELIBERATE ethical defiance and imposition upon an existing life's well being. Humans tend to think they can be judge and jury of what is sinful.
Like, gays are not allowed in Disneyland because it 'doesn't promote family values'. I don't remember a gay ever harming childern or families in Disneyland, so to me it's more sinful to turn someone away just because they indulge in activities that one doesn't. I watch WWF. It is sexist, racy, and violent. Is Disneyland gonna turn me away? NO!
When certain religions describe sin, they usually stray away from the Ten Commandments. That is shortsightedness. While there are rapists in the world--unconvicted, and still at large--churces are busy protesting about bare breasts on T.V. Better yet, they take a situation like Columbine, and impose their agendas on 'a sinful school', by harrasing them with bible class petitions. They go around and blame the music and the clothing. But, never take responsibility for the fact that THEY KNOW THEIR SON HAS A GUN IN HIS ROOM.
Sin is pretty much common sense. If you step on an ant without seeing it, it is not a sin. If you fight someone you don't like, and you stomp a mudhole in his head, that is a sin.
P.S. By chance are you a philosopher? This is quite an educated conversation.
> We all approach reality through misinterpretion and fallacy -
> its an inevitable consequence of our own limitations -
> especially the limitations of our mind.
Or, because our culture has somewhat of a guilty pleasure for and since we can't act on it, we blur the line between fantasy and fantasy. We don't want to admit it, but westerners fantisize alot, reality. That, being our only limitation.
> Today it is virtually
> impossible for intelligent people to accept the teaching of one
> doctrine because there are simply too many other alternatives
Hence, relative thought. Being absolute is just stupid; the only thing mankind has ever been close to proving is science. And, Oscar Wilde said himself, science is a record of dead religions.
> religion only really works when one is willing to accept all the
> paradigms of that religion ( which is basically a pre-humanist
> position, dependent on lack of contact with alternatives; which
> is easy for primitive people and children - and only really
> works in that context )
True, yet one can't be wholly absolute as well. I mean, I am celibate, but I hang out with perverts and have not intention of abandoning them because Father Flannigan said so. But, I would rather have a lobotomy than hang out with Charles Manson just because his life differs from mine. Or, I wouldn't be so forgiving to a child molester. If one is an obvious infidel, then I rule them out. But, if one has an opposing lifestyle, they should be given a chance.
> To live a true religious life today it is necessary to give up
> 'belief' ( which is just a mental process ). For instance 'good'
> and 'evil' are really just western ideas that are due to a
> modern tendency to polarize.
But, that is only today. Modern religion is crap, because everyone knows each human is born with a heart and mind--two instruments that can be decieved and manipulated, just as easily as to feel or learn. Religion pretty much is based upon one agenda--convert everyone.
Maybe I'm more spiritual than religious. For one, I haven't gone to church today.
And, the reason why the easter hemisphere has no concept of good vs. evil is because the western hemisphere has created the ultimate symbol of evil: $
Plus, I believe good and evil should be considered a universal concept. For example, this is a very intelligent post--well written, and very insightful--and, I'm sure you took your time on it. Why? You wanted to do your best to make your point. (If you didn't take your time on it, there'd be alot of "Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure"-type responses like "Yeah" and "Naah-uh".) Humans have this natural sense of improvement. Who wakes up and says "Hey, I want this day to suck more than yesterday"? We have this natural ethic of moving upward/ahead (F.Y.I. off the subject, that's why I believe in Jesus.)
> In the past such ideas did not
> exist ( even today, some representations of God are quite
> shocking from a Western point of view - eg Shiva and Kali/Durga
> in Hinduism or Saturn/Chronos from Greek/Roman times - who was
> to become Satan in Christian thinking ). In Taoism Yin/Yang are
> not seen as good/evil, but merely opposing forces.
The in/yo seems to be something I appreciate, even though I am not Taoist. One has to appreciate 'evil', because there'd be no concept of 'good'. In a sense, they are opposing forces, but some lame American decided one of the forces was 'bad'.
> The invention of the concept of 'sin' is the most debilitating
> of all human self-constraints - there is no such thing and it
> leads to all sorts of problems ( such as killing someone on a
> cross ). In the East, Karma is the consequence of ones actions,
> but it is amoral ( ie all good or bad action carries consequence
> ). Only if we transcend sin/non-sin can we begin to approach the
> truth.
Well, some people take the 'sin' thing too far. For one, accidents and mistakes are not sins. Sins are DELIBERATE ethical defiance and imposition upon an existing life's well being. Humans tend to think they can be judge and jury of what is sinful.
Like, gays are not allowed in Disneyland because it 'doesn't promote family values'. I don't remember a gay ever harming childern or families in Disneyland, so to me it's more sinful to turn someone away just because they indulge in activities that one doesn't. I watch WWF. It is sexist, racy, and violent. Is Disneyland gonna turn me away? NO!
When certain religions describe sin, they usually stray away from the Ten Commandments. That is shortsightedness. While there are rapists in the world--unconvicted, and still at large--churces are busy protesting about bare breasts on T.V. Better yet, they take a situation like Columbine, and impose their agendas on 'a sinful school', by harrasing them with bible class petitions. They go around and blame the music and the clothing. But, never take responsibility for the fact that THEY KNOW THEIR SON HAS A GUN IN HIS ROOM.
Sin is pretty much common sense. If you step on an ant without seeing it, it is not a sin. If you fight someone you don't like, and you stomp a mudhole in his head, that is a sin.
P.S. By chance are you a philosopher? This is quite an educated conversation.
M
Mani
Guest
Re: The Thinker
> I think the truth to anything is an on going and almost never
> ending search. But it's a good start if you just place your hand
> on your chin on a good boring weekend and ask "WHY?"
> to the everyday things in life. : )
The truth is love. But, we'll never achieve it because it's not cool.
> I think the truth to anything is an on going and almost never
> ending search. But it's a good start if you just place your hand
> on your chin on a good boring weekend and ask "WHY?"
> to the everyday things in life. : )
The truth is love. But, we'll never achieve it because it's not cool.
V
Violent Beeatch
Guest
The truth about Mani
> Today it is virtually
> impossible for intelligent people to accept the teaching of one
> doctrine because there are simply too many other alternatives -
> religion only really works when one is willing to accept all the
> paradigms of that religion ( which is basically a pre-humanist
> position, dependent on lack of contact with alternatives; which
> is easy for primitive people and children - and only really
> works in that context )
I think what he's trying to say here is that Mani, you are one unintelligent primitive motherf*cker!
> Today it is virtually
> impossible for intelligent people to accept the teaching of one
> doctrine because there are simply too many other alternatives -
> religion only really works when one is willing to accept all the
> paradigms of that religion ( which is basically a pre-humanist
> position, dependent on lack of contact with alternatives; which
> is easy for primitive people and children - and only really
> works in that context )
I think what he's trying to say here is that Mani, you are one unintelligent primitive motherf*cker!
V
Violent Beeatch
Guest
Jesus made me? (so jesus save me!)
> Most importantly, I am greatful for this life. For the ability
> things I've done in this life, there is only one person
> responsible--the one that made it all. Christ is @#!!! ing
> awesome!! (or whomever you worship.)
How is this possible? I hear this all the time that we are his children. What did they do, milk his sperm the whole time he was here and impregnant all women in the past 2000 years with it? I'm sure he did a ton of it naturally though. Jesus must have been a real @#!!!_ hound.
> Most importantly, I am greatful for this life. For the ability
> things I've done in this life, there is only one person
> responsible--the one that made it all. Christ is @#!!! ing
> awesome!! (or whomever you worship.)
How is this possible? I hear this all the time that we are his children. What did they do, milk his sperm the whole time he was here and impregnant all women in the past 2000 years with it? I'm sure he did a ton of it naturally though. Jesus must have been a real @#!!!_ hound.
V
Violent Beeatch
Guest
Re: The Thinker
> The truth is love. But, we'll never achieve it because it's not
> cool.
It's cool with me.
> The truth is love. But, we'll never achieve it because it's not
> cool.
It's cool with me.
M
Mani
Guest
The truth about Ignorant Beeatch
> It's cool with me.
How exactly is love cool with YOU? You run around this site, antagonizing me with degenerate profanity, trying to push my buttons. And, you are hypocritical enough to call me primitive, when you bring in your South Park attitude into intelligent discussions.
That is not convincing me that you are a loving person.
As far as the previous posts go, let Consumer Monkey speak for himself--if he has beef on me, he's man enough to say so. Don't try to manipulate his post just because you don't have the brass to disagree by yourself. You don't like Jesus. Fine. Makes no difference to me.
But, if you want to start a fight, get away from the computer and go outside. Hundreds of people you can choose from.
You can't intimidate people on a computer, you use your damn head and fight someone you can find.
> It's cool with me.
How exactly is love cool with YOU? You run around this site, antagonizing me with degenerate profanity, trying to push my buttons. And, you are hypocritical enough to call me primitive, when you bring in your South Park attitude into intelligent discussions.
That is not convincing me that you are a loving person.
As far as the previous posts go, let Consumer Monkey speak for himself--if he has beef on me, he's man enough to say so. Don't try to manipulate his post just because you don't have the brass to disagree by yourself. You don't like Jesus. Fine. Makes no difference to me.
But, if you want to start a fight, get away from the computer and go outside. Hundreds of people you can choose from.
You can't intimidate people on a computer, you use your damn head and fight someone you can find.
C
Consumer Monkey
Guest
Re: The truth about Ignorant Beeatch
I certainly didn't mean my post to be taken personally as Violet presents it. When I talk about intelligence, my point is about the way that traditional religions work as evolved structures within cultures - when those cultures disintigrate, many people try to hold onto those old religious principles. Today intelligient people ( such as youself ) are aware of other cultures and ideas, which inevitably colour their spirtual or religious quests. Due to the rapid transformation of society, it becomes increasingly difficult to find religions that work, because they evolved to fill the need of people at different times - times in which those priciples were never questioned. If we wish to live religious lives today, its much harder than before because our sophistication undermines our ability to accept the availiable dogmas. In a sense, the best we can do is to invent our own religion, but this will always be weak because we don't have the advantage of time to allow the processes to evolve - also we depend too much on intellect, which works agains spirituality. An alternative way is to plunder the ideas of old religions, and try to find some core ideas that we can hold as universals. Neither is very useful in practice; and because of this the world is full of depressed hopeless people wandering about looking for something to do that is somehow fundamental to their exitance - which is the crisis of modernity, and really has no answer.
> How exactly is love cool with YOU? You run around this site,
> antagonizing me with degenerate profanity, trying to push my
> buttons. And, you are hypocritical enough to call me primitive,
> when you bring in your South Park attitude into intelligent
> discussions.
> That is not convincing me that you are a loving person.
> As far as the previous posts go, let Consumer Monkey speak for
> himself--if he has beef on me, he's man enough to say so. Don't
> try to manipulate his post just because you don't have the brass
> to disagree by yourself. You don't like Jesus. Fine. Makes no
> difference to me.
> But, if you want to start a fight, get away from the computer
> and go outside. Hundreds of people you can choose from.
> You can't intimidate people on a computer, you use your damn
> head and fight someone you can find.
I certainly didn't mean my post to be taken personally as Violet presents it. When I talk about intelligence, my point is about the way that traditional religions work as evolved structures within cultures - when those cultures disintigrate, many people try to hold onto those old religious principles. Today intelligient people ( such as youself ) are aware of other cultures and ideas, which inevitably colour their spirtual or religious quests. Due to the rapid transformation of society, it becomes increasingly difficult to find religions that work, because they evolved to fill the need of people at different times - times in which those priciples were never questioned. If we wish to live religious lives today, its much harder than before because our sophistication undermines our ability to accept the availiable dogmas. In a sense, the best we can do is to invent our own religion, but this will always be weak because we don't have the advantage of time to allow the processes to evolve - also we depend too much on intellect, which works agains spirituality. An alternative way is to plunder the ideas of old religions, and try to find some core ideas that we can hold as universals. Neither is very useful in practice; and because of this the world is full of depressed hopeless people wandering about looking for something to do that is somehow fundamental to their exitance - which is the crisis of modernity, and really has no answer.
> How exactly is love cool with YOU? You run around this site,
> antagonizing me with degenerate profanity, trying to push my
> buttons. And, you are hypocritical enough to call me primitive,
> when you bring in your South Park attitude into intelligent
> discussions.
> That is not convincing me that you are a loving person.
> As far as the previous posts go, let Consumer Monkey speak for
> himself--if he has beef on me, he's man enough to say so. Don't
> try to manipulate his post just because you don't have the brass
> to disagree by yourself. You don't like Jesus. Fine. Makes no
> difference to me.
> But, if you want to start a fight, get away from the computer
> and go outside. Hundreds of people you can choose from.
> You can't intimidate people on a computer, you use your damn
> head and fight someone you can find.
V
Violent Beeatch
Guest
Re: The truth about Ignorant Beeatch
Temper temper. Jesus would not handle it this way Mani. Now I think that you should put in your favorite DC Talk album and get on your knees.
I don't mean to intimidate. Also, I like Jesus. And really, love is cool with me.
If I thought that you were gonna take my words so seriously I wouldn't have posted. Sorry.
Temper temper. Jesus would not handle it this way Mani. Now I think that you should put in your favorite DC Talk album and get on your knees.
I don't mean to intimidate. Also, I like Jesus. And really, love is cool with me.
If I thought that you were gonna take my words so seriously I wouldn't have posted. Sorry.
D
debbie
Guest
Re: Moz fans and religion poll
I BELIEVE IN GOD AND ACCEPT JESUS IN MY LIFE!
I BELIEVE IN GOD AND ACCEPT JESUS IN MY LIFE!
M
Mani
Guest
hmm....
> Temper temper. Jesus would not handle it this way Mani. Now I
> think that you should put in your favorite DC Talk album and get
> on your knees.
I am not Jesus. I am entitled to negativity. And, I don't get down on my knees unless I need to tie my shoes. DC Talk sucks, and I'd rather listen to Moby.
> I don't mean to intimidate. Also, I like Jesus. And really, love
> is cool with me.
Wonderful.
> If I thought that you were gonna take my words so seriously I
> wouldn't have posted. Sorry.
If you weren't serious, why post three times over?
> Temper temper. Jesus would not handle it this way Mani. Now I
> think that you should put in your favorite DC Talk album and get
> on your knees.
I am not Jesus. I am entitled to negativity. And, I don't get down on my knees unless I need to tie my shoes. DC Talk sucks, and I'd rather listen to Moby.
> I don't mean to intimidate. Also, I like Jesus. And really, love
> is cool with me.
Wonderful.
> If I thought that you were gonna take my words so seriously I
> wouldn't have posted. Sorry.
If you weren't serious, why post three times over?
Similar threads
- john in new jersey
- General Discussion archive 1999 (read-only)
- Johnny Marvelous aka black james
- General Discussion archive 1999 (read-only)
- ARNO (a italian fan who wants to know)
- General Discussion archive 1999 (read-only)
- Shayna take a bow
- General Discussion archive 1999 (read-only)
