finding god

[ItalianStereotype]

I, on the other hand, think it is utter shit. COMPLETE and utter shit. congratulations on your acceptance to the retard parade.

[Jeanette X]

Originally Posted by ItalianStereotype

I, on the other hand, think it is utter shit. COMPLETE and utter shit. congratulations on your acceptance to the retard parade.

What makes you think anyone gives a flying fuck about your opinions? Do me a favor and keep from further ruining an interesting discussion on religion.

[The_voice_of_reason]

Originally Posted by ItalianStereotype

I, on the other hand, think it is utter shit. COMPLETE and utter shit. congratulations on your acceptance to the retard parade.

I know, I mean why think for yourself when you can just believe all the shit other people have made up?

[ItalianStereotype]

Originally Posted by Jeanette X

What makes you think anyone gives a flying fuck about your opinions? Do me a favor and keep from further ruining an interesting discussion on religion.

just about anyone who doesn't like the whiny, unfunny, self-absorbed, animal-nature fuck angle. your brand of tripe has no place in a religious discussion, the philosophy board, I-Mockery, or the internet in general. get back to explaining the intricacies of the African albino pygmy platypus dick and stop meddling in adult affairs.

[The_voice_of_reason]

I also think that our concept of the passage of time is just one of the parameters that this god-mind operates on (after all don't all computers need operational parameters?).

If we could experience all of time at once, it would make the infinite set that is our free will last only a moment* making Gods mind infinitely powerful but infinitely small. However if he can make the infinite spread out over time his mind will be infinitely powerful and as long as life with free will exists. It seems that if he could experience all time at once it would be some how greater than the continious thought that is produced by making humans aware of only one instant at a time, but either way the sum is infinity.


* smallest possible interval

[The_voice_of_reason]

Originally Posted by ItalianStereotype

just about anyone who doesn't like the whiny, unfunny, self-absorbed, animal-nature fuck angle. your brand of tripe has no place in a religious discussion, the philosophy board, I-Mockery, or the internet in general. get back to explaining the intricacies of the African albino pygmy platypus dick and stop meddling in adult affairs.

yet you continue to think that what you have to say carries any weight at all.

[ItalianStereotype]

much more than that whiny guess-work that you consider logical thought.

[kellychaos]

Originally Posted by Jeanette X

Whoa. Thats some heavy stuff there VoR. I'd love to hear more.

*sits cross-legged at your feet as a new disciple*

Koresh disciple potentiality. Beware the fork tongue!

[sspadowsky]

Originally Posted by ItalianStereotype

much more than that whiny guess-work that you consider logical thought.

Right and the Catholic Chruch is all about logical thought. Like opposing gay marriage (with a completely straight face) while covering up and protecting the child-fuckers in their ranks. It doesn't get any more logical than that.

Edit: I know I pick on the Catholic Church a lot, but it's just so ridiculous that it makes fun of itself, so it's irresistably easy.

[O71394658]

Spadowsky, every church member didn't and doesn't support the notion of hiding child molestors within the Church ranks. We want them exposed and punished just as much (if not more so) than anyone else.

[Jeanette X]

Originally Posted by ItalianStereotype

just about anyone who doesn't like the whiny, unfunny, self-absorbed, animal-nature fuck angle. your brand of tripe has no place in a religious discussion, the philosophy board, I-Mockery, or the internet in general. get back to explaining the intricacies of the African albino pygmy platypus dick and stop meddling in adult affairs.

Look asshole, if you want to have a flame war with me, start a Mock Wars thread instead of fucking up this one.

[Protoclown]

George, I'm glad you found some answers that satisfied you, and I personally feel that discovering shit like this on your own is the best way. I'm a Christian, more or less, but I don't particularly like the Christian church. Follow your own path, George.

[Vibecrewangel]

VoR -
Very similar to what I've talked about in other threads. The singularity being that infinte set of possibilites you call the God-mind.

I still maintain that it is the language that is the sticking point here. The concept remains constant.

Stereotype -
You seem cranky. I give you a big hug. That is assuming you'll let my philosophical cooties near ya. (these are my cooties watch them dance)

[Spectre X]

Bruce Campbell is God.

[The_Rorschach]

"A bolt of lightning didn't strike and the Bible magically appear. It was written by people interpreting what they believe to be the word of God. It is self-contradictory and fallible."

So why did Christ cite the scriptures both to those whom knew them, the Torah scholars, and the devil (assuming you believe there is a lucifer, or a Christ) himself? Or is this another fallible interpretation of the Apostles?

In any case George, because I do like you, I'll be honest. God is who He is, and has made Himself available to everyone, all He seems to ask in return is that you acknowledge Him and abide by Him. Salvation is free, but not cheap, you would do well to remember that.

If you truly seek Him, you will find Him.

"What makes you think anyone gives a flying fuck about your
opinions? Do me a favor and keep from further ruining an
interesting discussion on religion."

He has a Constitutional right now only to possess an opinion, but to share it. Would you infringe upon his personal rights simply because you find them undesirable? If so, I would much appreciate you creating a seperate thread so we can discuss the tendancy of liberal philosophy to veer towards totalitarianism.

[Jeanette X]

"What makes you think anyone gives a flying fuck about your
opinions? Do me a favor and keep from further ruining an
interesting discussion on religion."

He has a Constitutional right now only to possess an opinion, but to share it. Would you infringe upon his personal rights simply because you find them undesirable? If so, I would much appreciate you creating a seperate thread so we can discuss the tendancy of liberal philosophy to veer towards totalitarianism.

Oh for...
No, I would not infringe upon his personal rights Ror. I cannot infringe upon his personal rights, as this is a messageboard and not real life. But he was being an asshole and ruining the thread, and I don't think anyone here wants to listen to his shit. when we were having a very interesting discussion. I was merely expressing my distaste at his obnoxious behavior, and informing him that I wanted him to shut up. Whether he does or not is his choice.

[AChimp]

Why are you apologizing? This is I-Mockery!

[Sethomas]

Vox Rationes, the problem with your idea is that it goes against the notion of determinism. What you're suggesting is that the soul enacts free will by fixing the outcome of probabalistic quantum functions. This again invokes the conflict between God's will and human Free will. Besides, determinism wins out aesthetically.

[Jeanette X]

Originally Posted by AChimp

Why are you apologizing? This is I-Mockery!

That wasn't an apology. That was an explaination.

[The_voice_of_reason]

Originally Posted by Sethomas

Vox Rationes.

I like that. When i was signing up i was originally was going to call myself Deus vox, but i thought that was a bit presumptious (sp?).




And Italian, there is no need to be an asshole when explaining your position. You can just say what you believe without getting all self rightious.




You fucking worthless stupid christ loving cock monger.

[The_Rorschach]

No more presumptuous tha Seth's use of broken Latin :/

And Jeanette, I don't differentiate between a message board, and real life. No more than I would differentiate between what is done publically and privately. One's actions, regardless of the stage they are played out upon, are a testament to their character. Silencing discension, regardless of whether the subject matter is itself convoluted or crude, is still a form of censorship, in spirit if not in deed.

On a seperate note, how do you feel about hate literature? Should it be protected under the auspice of 'Free Speach' or limited as a purely instigational provision as covered in tyhe 'Fighting Words' clause?

[Vibecrewangel]

Hey.....if it weren't for hate literature I would never have found this site.

Thank you crack-o-minty-poprocks

[Jeanette X]

And Jeanette, I don't differentiate between a message board, and real life. No more than I would differentiate between what is done publically and privately. One's actions, regardless of the stage they are played out upon, are a testament to their character. Silencing discension, regardless of whether the subject matter is itself convoluted or crude, is still a form of censorship, in spirit if not in deed.

On a seperate note, how do you feel about hate literature? Should it be protected under the auspice of 'Free Speach' or limited as a purely instigational provision as covered in tyhe 'Fighting Words' clause?

Haven't you ever told someone to shut up when they were being obnoxious or rude? Furthermore I seem to recall you telling me I shouldn't be on the Philosophy board when I first joined the forums.
And yes, I do believe that hate literature should be protected.

[The_Rorschach]

I'm guilty of many things, worse than that. The best I can manage is to correct myself, and illuminate a better way for others whom might be interested.

Surely you are not suggesting I cannot grow as a person?

Compassion doesn't come easily to everyone, but I'm working on it.

[Jeanette X]

What does this have to do with compassion?
Furthermore, since you do not differentiate between boards and real life, would you think it was unconstitutional for a board admin to eject a spammer or other obnoxious person?