|
Post by transfuged on Apr 27, 2024 23:32:28 GMT
BTW I have a colleague who behaves just like you. Three weeks ago, he busted my chops, it’s still tender. I hope you won’t go that far, Film flaneur. All my altercations are purely of the written variety and I am anti-violence. But thank you for the insinuation. Stay safe. I will try, but that depends on the willingness of a walking meat tower who never cares about anything around him, pursuits his only one goal, blind and deaf to the rest of the universe... He did it again yesterday. I went almost on the ground making a noise like ”wrooff”, and the only thing he asked was ”oh, you do not mind, do you ?”. That time he busted my forearm. One more bump and I’m as dead as Ceasar.
|
|
|
Post by transfuged on Apr 27, 2024 23:37:54 GMT
I was indeed quoting (and replying to clusium, but that is a public forum). I do not mind the attempt at modification. That is very kind of you. But looking at your posting, imdb2.freeforums.net/post/6073293 which indeed is a reply to Clusium when he said "When a person denies the Supreme Being, they deny His Rule, and thereby allow their guard down spiritually, & their morale with it." It was you who said "I beg to differ. Traditionally when a person allow their guard down spiritually, & their morale with it, they do wrong, behave wrong as they do no[t] behave in a good Christian way anymore .. " which I then paraphrased as saying 'only good Christians keep their spiritual guard and morale up' Clusium, as one can see, offers no subjective judgement. You do. So looks like the fallacy is all your own work. Come to think of it, I’ll miss it, when you’ll stop twisting things into what suits you. No hard feelings, love. Xxx
|
|
|
Post by transfuged on Apr 27, 2024 23:48:19 GMT
I was indeed quoting (and replying to clusium, but that is a public forum). I do not mind the attempt at modification. That is very kind of you. But looking at your posting, imdb2.freeforums.net/post/6073293 which indeed is a reply to Clusium when he said "When a person denies the Supreme Being, they deny His Rule, and thereby allow their guard down spiritually, & their morale with it." It was you who said "I beg to differ. Traditionally when a person allow their guard down spiritually, & their morale with it, they do wrong, behave wrong as they do no[t] behave in a good Christian way anymore .. " which I then paraphrased as saying 'only good Christians keep their spiritual guard and morale up' Clusium, as one can see, offers no subjective judgement. You do. So looks like the fallacy is all your own work. As you acknowlege what you did, there no need to rub your nose into it further. Love, bro.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Apr 28, 2024 9:38:49 GMT
That is very kind of you. But looking at your posting, imdb2.freeforums.net/post/6073293 which indeed is a reply to Clusium when he said "When a person denies the Supreme Being, they deny His Rule, and thereby allow their guard down spiritually, & their morale with it." It was you who said "I beg to differ. Traditionally when a person allow their guard down spiritually, & their morale with it, they do wrong, behave wrong as they do no[t] behave in a good Christian way anymore .. " which I then paraphrased as saying 'only good Christians keep their spiritual guard and morale up' Clusium, as one can see, offers no subjective judgement. You do. So looks like the fallacy is all your own work. Come to think of it, I’ll miss it, when you’ll stop twisting things into what suits you. No hard feelings, love.... As you acknowledge what you did, there no need to rub your nose into it further. Love, bro. Xxx Please quote where it is I 'twist things' when all I have done is to quote verbatim and paraphrased your verbose prose. And I fully acknowledge calling out a Scotsman when I see one. Don't think though that it hasn't been noticed that you haven't addressed it. From what you say it appears you know others who do things a little more brutish than translate doggerel. But perhaps some things are best left untranslated... Yes I have, It is where you make an exception for the charge of mass killing for those who think they act in the name of God, remember? But thank you for asking.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Apr 28, 2024 9:39:50 GMT
All my altercations are purely of the written variety and I am anti-violence. But thank you for the insinuation. Stay safe. I will try, but that depends on the willingness of a walking meat tower who never cares about anything around him, pursuits his only one goal, blind and deaf to the rest of the universe... He did it again yesterday. I went almost on the ground making a noise like ”wrooff”, and the only thing he asked was ”oh, you do not mind, do you ?”. That time he busted my forearm. One more bump and I’m as dead as Ceasar. I am sorry to hear that.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Apr 28, 2024 13:22:34 GMT
I will try, but that depends on the willingness of a walking meat tower who never cares about anything around him, pursuits his only one goal, blind and deaf to the rest of the universe... He did it again yesterday. I went almost on the ground making a noise like ”wrooff”, and the only thing he asked was ”oh, you do not mind, do you ?”. That time he busted my forearm. One more bump and I’m as dead as Ceasar. I am sorry to hear that. I'm not sure as to what's going on with this person (they--not even sure if we're talking he or she, to use old-fashioned binary genderspeak--hinted in an early post to me that they had possibly undergone some type of corporeal abuse at the hands of a sect of Buddhist monks); it's virtually impossible to parse out what they're saying exactly, as they're so diffuse in their wording. Whatever the case, and whether the indicated abuse is real or imaginary, something is not right here. I really have no idea how one goes about communicating with a person under such circumstances, especially with the additional burden of apparently poor English language skills (and I have no fluency in any Asian language, as I assume this individual is of Asian background). I'd hate to think that they're engaged in some sort of manipulative pity ploy involving claims of violence against them...but, honestly, I have no idea of what to make of any of it; the chief reason, along with the impenetrable posts, as to why I just ceased bothering with responses to them.
|
|
|
Post by transfuged on Apr 28, 2024 13:24:38 GMT
Come to think of it, I’ll miss it, when you’ll stop twisting things into what suits you. No hard feelings, love.... As you acknowledge what you did, there no need to rub your nose into it further. Love, bro. Xxx Please quote where it is I 'twist things' when all I have done is to quote verbatim and paraphrased your verbose prose. And I fully acknowledge calling out a Scotsman when I see one. Don't think though that it hasn't been noticed that you haven't addressed it. From what you say it appears you know others who do things a little more brutish than translate doggerel. But perhaps some things are best left untranslated... Yes I have, It is where you make an exception for the charge of mass killing for those who think they act in the name of God, remember? But thank you for asking. Sorry, could you please develop ”expounded”? ... what’s that ?
|
|
|
Post by transfuged on Apr 28, 2024 13:26:53 GMT
Please quote where it is I 'twist things' when all I have done is to quote verbatim and paraphrased your verbose prose. And I fully acknowledge calling out a Scotsman when I see one. Don't think though that it hasn't been noticed that you haven't addressed it. From what you say it appears you know others who do things a little more brutish than translate doggerel. But perhaps some things are best left untranslated... Yes I have, It is where you make an exception for the charge of mass killing for those who think they act in the name of God, remember? But thank you for asking. Sorry, could you please develop ”expounded”? ... what’s that ? Your prose, verbatim ? Really ? Love.
|
|
|
Post by transfuged on Apr 28, 2024 13:44:24 GMT
Please quote where it is I 'twist things' when all I have done is to quote verbatim and paraphrased your verbose prose. And I fully acknowledge calling out a Scotsman when I see one. Don't think though that it hasn't been noticed that you haven't addressed it. From what you say it appears you know others who do things a little more brutish than translate doggerel. But perhaps some things are best left untranslated... Yes I have, It is where you make an exception for the charge of mass killing for those who think they act in the name of God, remember? But thank you for asking. Sorry, could you please develop ”expounded”? ... what’s that ? Er... I asked for the official / traditional excuses offered to pardon mass murderers, eg Moses, and if I recall right you provided a list. I integrated that list. Imho mass murder do not go to heaven, even if they ”believe” in God, but the authorities think differently on that point, and the likes as Moses are supposed to go, in his case straight up, if I recall Sunday school right. These authorities overlooked the command of not killing one’s contemporaries as they saw fit. The likes as Moses knew it was forbidden, but it seems that the command was overriden by a higher command. In the case of ”Moses” the Bible story suggest a direct order from ”god”, and almost surely the ”general good” of the ”chosen people”. This is where the discussion about Pascal wager’s ends. Further discussion is quite possible, though not on a thread about the Wager in the text. Now, when you want to discuss topics like general good and Bentham, for example, You’re welcome to do it, but you know the difference between Bentham and Pascal. If the op is interested, he’ll tell you about it, imho. Live, bro.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Apr 28, 2024 13:50:58 GMT
He may not have been an atheist, but, he did not believe in the Christian God either. As previously noted, he preferred Eastern spirituality, which was why he chose the swastika for the Nazi emblem. Hitler was on record for saying that he wished Islam -and not Christianity - was the predominant religion of Europe, because Christianity preached meekness but, Islam was spread by the sword. Bernardo was a narcissist & scored high as a psychopath. Hitler didn't favor organized religion of any kind. National Socialism preached total subservience to the State. Every citizen was expected to dedicate their existence to Germany. Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer. No place for God. He never persecuted Christianity but never aided it much either. I think he expected religion to whither and die in his Thousand Year Reich. And he sure as Hell wanted nothing to do with Islam. Not when the First Pillar of Islam reads "There is no deity but God and Muhammad is his messenger".
The swastika was becoming an anti-Semitic symbol in Wilhelmine Germany before the Great War. When the term "Aryan" was used for non-Jewish whites. It was Hitler who designed the Nazi flag, black swastika, tilted, on a white circle with a red banner.
However, the Nazi regime was not at all averse to using religion, in the form of the church, to instill notions of subservience and 'proper place' within the regime. The (in)famous slogan "Kinder, Küche, Kirche" (children, kitchen, church) employed to designate the woman's proper place in Aryan society, reflects this nicely. The phrase did not originate with Hitler or the Nazi Party--it's generally thought it originated from Wilhelm II or his wife Augusta; but its reductive simplification of women's proper sphere exactly suited it to Nazi social rhetoric (and to be fair, Hitler didn't stress the 'Kirche' part, but he didn't strike it from the formulation either).
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Apr 28, 2024 16:27:16 GMT
Sorry, could you please develop ”expounded”? ... what’s that ? Expounded : to give a detailed explanation of something. I hope that helps. If you are unfamiliar with an English word, best not to use it as it can be embarrassing. Nearly right, I just mentioned a common one, which you echoed back to me: when it is suggested by whose faith clouds their sense of morality that an exception can be made for those who think they act to commit genocide etc in the name of God - in effect a form of special pleading otherwise known as Command Theory. 'Overlooked' is much too mild a term where mass killing ends up justified, where the charge of moral hypocrisy comes in. But such is this 'official bypass'. The Wager has nothing to directly to do with whether not genocide can ever be justified. I quite agree. Except it is understandably more difficult to make oneself believe in any deity which claims to be 'all good' and 'all loving', while commanding or instigating mass murder etc Thank you but I will leave such irrelevances to you. I directly quoted Clusium, yourself, and then me. Are you going to play feign ignorance any longer, Love? FF:Please quote where it is I 'twist things'. Evasion noted.
|
|
|
Post by transfuged on Apr 28, 2024 19:45:20 GMT
Sorry, could you please develop ”expounded”? ... what’s that ? Expounded : to give a detailed explanation of something. I hope that helps. If you are unfamiliar with an English word, best not to use it as it can be embarrassing. Nearly right, I just mentioned a common one, which you echoed back to me: when it is suggested by whose faith clouds their sense of morality that an exception can be made for those who think they act to commit genocide etc in the name of God - in effect a form of special pleading otherwise known as Command Theory. 'Overlooked' is much too mild a term where mass killing ends up justified, where the charge of moral hypocrisy comes in. But such is this 'official bypass'. The Wager has nothing to directly to do with whether not genocide can ever be justified. I quite agree. Except it is understandably more difficult to make oneself believe in any deity which claims to be 'all good' and 'all loving', while commanding or instigating mass murder etc Thank you but I will leave such irrelevances to you. I directly quoted Clusium, yourself, and then me. Are you going to play feign ignorance any longer, Love? FF:Please quote where it is I 'twist things'. Evasion noted. I indeed am not familiar with the vocable expounded and thank you for the definition. .. It’s difficult to tell you in a polite and nice way that the vocable expounded belongs to you in this occurence. Well, what is you aim in that expounded business, that’s unclear. If you care to bring some light on it, you are welcome. Xxx
|
|
|
Post by transfuged on Apr 28, 2024 19:47:57 GMT
Sorry, could you please develop ”expounded”? ... what’s that ? Expounded : to give a detailed explanation of something. I hope that helps. If you are unfamiliar with an English word, best not to use it as it can be embarrassing. Nearly right, I just mentioned a common one, which you echoed back to me: when it is suggested by whose faith clouds their sense of morality that an exception can be made for those who think they act to commit genocide etc in the name of God - in effect a form of special pleading otherwise known as Command Theory. 'Overlooked' is much too mild a term where mass killing ends up justified, where the charge of moral hypocrisy comes in. But such is this 'official bypass'. The Wager has nothing to directly to do with whether not genocide can ever be justified. I quite agree. Except it is understandably more difficult to make oneself believe in any deity which claims to be 'all good' and 'all loving', while commanding or instigating mass murder etc Thank you but I will leave such irrelevances to you. I directly quoted Clusium, yourself, and then me. Are you going to play feign ignorance any longer, Love? FF:Please quote where it is I 'twist things'. Evasion noted. Every butchery of a post by you is a distorsion of its sense. You almost always do this, honey bun. Xxx
|
|
|
Post by transfuged on Apr 28, 2024 19:52:11 GMT
Sorry, could you please develop ”expounded”? ... what’s that ? Expounded : to give a detailed explanation of something. I hope that helps. If you are unfamiliar with an English word, best not to use it as it can be embarrassing. Nearly right, I just mentioned a common one, which you echoed back to me: when it is suggested by whose faith clouds their sense of morality that an exception can be made for those who think they act to commit genocide etc in the name of God - in effect a form of special pleading otherwise known as Command Theory. 'Overlooked' is much too mild a term where mass killing ends up justified, where the charge of moral hypocrisy comes in. But such is this 'official bypass'. The Wager has nothing to directly to do with whether not genocide can ever be justified. I quite agree. Except it is understandably more difficult to make oneself believe in any deity which claims to be 'all good' and 'all loving', while commanding or instigating mass murder etc Thank you but I will leave such irrelevances to you. I directly quoted Clusium, yourself, and then me. Are you going to play feign ignorance any longer, Love? FF:Please quote where it is I 'twist things'. Evasion noted. Indeed the Wager in the text is not directly connected but the op does ask. The kisses are genuine. 😁💕
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Apr 28, 2024 21:52:45 GMT
I indeed am not familiar with the vocable expounded and thank you for the definition. .. No problem. I see now I was the first to use the word, so any criticism here is withdrawn. Indeed. Some people need things expounded to them than others. I am in a polite and nice way, trying to explain and example things to you. Thank you for appreciating my efforts. Indeed the Wager in the text is not directly connected but the op does ask. Actually you did. imdb2.freeforums.net/post/6070349 But never mind. FF:Please quote where it is I 'twist things' or offer 'butchery' of what you say, when as exampled the only mangler of your words is ... you. Evasion(s) still noted.
|
|
|
Post by transfuged on Apr 29, 2024 20:08:50 GMT
I indeed am not familiar with the vocable expounded and thank you for the definition. .. No problem. I see now I was the first to use the word, so any criticism here is withdrawn. Indeed. Some people need things expounded to them than others. I am in a polite and nice way, trying to explain and example things to you. Thank you for appreciating my efforts. Indeed the Wager in the text is not directly connected but the op does ask. Actually you did. imdb2.freeforums.net/post/6070349 But never mind. FF:Please quote where it is I 'twist things' or offer 'butchery' of what you say, when as exampled the only mangler of your words is ... you. Evasion(s) still noted. See, honey bun, you did it again.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Apr 30, 2024 9:58:36 GMT
No problem. I see now I was the first to use the word, so any criticism here is withdrawn. Indeed. Some people need things expounded to them than others. I am in a polite and nice way, trying to explain and example things to you. Thank you for appreciating my efforts. Actually you did. imdb2.freeforums.net/post/6070349 But never mind. FF:Please quote where it is I 'twist things' or offer 'butchery' of what you say, when as exampled the only mangler of your words is ... you. Evasion(s) still noted. See, honey bun, you did it again. Yes I did; I asked for you to substantiate what you say. But..evasion still noted.
|
|
|
Post by transfuged on Apr 30, 2024 16:51:25 GMT
See, honey bun, you did it again. Yes I did; I asked for you to substantiate what you say. But..evasion still noted. You erased, honey bun. Do you have a chocolate bun, honey bun ?😚
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Apr 30, 2024 17:33:22 GMT
Would a Christian accept the same type of argument, if it was about a God from another religion?
My guess is no
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Apr 30, 2024 18:25:40 GMT
Yes I did; I asked for you to substantiate what you say. But..evasion still noted. You erased, honey bun. Do you have a chocolate bun, honey bun ?😚 You will have to be more specific and show where meanings have been changed by me. It is quite common to only carry over that which is relevant in a reply. Your procrastination in doing this indicates that you have no argument. Hence after this message if no change, that will be the end of it.
|
|