(December 10, 2013 at 12:00 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(December 9, 2013 at 9:38 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Why do people come here and insist that we give credence to their delusions?

The great theistic ego! "Here's my position: since I can't possibly be wrong, your choices are to either agree with me, or reveal your own ignorance. Because I am right: look how many big words I can use, often in complete, grammatically correct sentences!"

Show me a reflection first. This is how discourse works. It is usually followed up with a secondary question showing a differing perspective, or inquiring from another point of view. Ad Hominem is empty speech going one way.

I would enjoy discussing the topic, but empty comments are no discussion. This keeps the upper ground straight up there in the OP.

If you actually want a discourse then drop the bullshit, flat-pack metaphors, quote scripture only when required and actually post something meaningful and coherent. Until then, all you will get is mockery.

(December 10, 2013 at 1:42 pm)StrongWaters Wrote: Show me a reflection first. This is how discourse works. It is usually followed up with a secondary question showing a differing perspective, or inquiring from another point of view. Ad Hominem is empty speech going one way.

When all you do is post complete, incoherent nonsense, backed up by constant condescension, insults are all you deserve, and can expect. However, those aren't ad hominems: you would need to hold a position for me to ignore in favor of attacking your character, for them to be ad hominems.

Quote:I would enjoy discussing the topic, but empty comments are no discussion. This keeps the upper ground straight up there in the OP.

You're right: empty comments are no discussion. You'd better stop posting them then.

(December 10, 2013 at 2:11 pm)Optimistic Mysanthrope Wrote: If you actually want a discourse then drop the bullshit, flat-pack metaphors, quote scripture only when required and actually post something meaningful and coherent. Until then, all you will get is mockery.

I gave it to you straight in the OP:

Quote:Through a gracious visitation all who walk in this spirit will know healing, bountiful peace, long life and multiple progeny, followed by eternal blessings and perpetual joy through life everlasting. They will receive a crown of glory with a robe of honor, resplendent forever and ever.

The operations of the spirit of falsehood result in greed, neglect of righteous deeds, wickedness, lying, pride, and haughtiness, cruel deceit and fraud, massive hypocrisy, a want of self-control and abundant foolishness, a zeal for manifestation, a reviling tongue, blind eyes, deaf ears, stiff neck, and hard heart—to the end of walking in all the ways of darkness and evil cunning.

The judgment of all who walk in such ways will be multiple afflictions of God’s furious vengeance, never-ending terror and reproach for all eternity, with a shameful extinction in the fire of Hell’s outer darkness. For all evil, and dark happenstance, until their utter destruction with neither remnant nor rescue.

(December 10, 2013 at 2:45 pm)StrongWaters Wrote:

(December 10, 2013 at 2:11 pm)Optimistic Mysanthrope Wrote: If you actually want a discourse then drop the bullshit, flat-pack metaphors, quote scripture only when required and actually post something meaningful and coherent. Until then, all you will get is mockery.

I gave it to you straight in the OP:

You call that straight? You asked us to discuss the accuracy of those two statements. Well, in what context? In the context of the text or how those statements apply to reality? Or something else?

The text is heretical, it directly contradicts the teachings of the bible (well, so does the bible, but nevermind), so I doubt there are many christians, jews or muslims who would consider either statement to be accurate.

Presumably the accuracy of the first statement is to be placed into the context of the hypothetical existence of these "spirits of light and darkness". Assuming that this is what you meant, I would say the statement isn't accurate, no. I can conceive of situations in which a certain course of action would be the most beneficial to both Light and Dark.

The second statement is prophetic and so its accuracy cannot be determined in the context of the text

(December 10, 2013 at 2:45 pm)StrongWaters Wrote:

(December 10, 2013 at 2:11 pm)Optimistic Mysanthrope Wrote: If you actually want a discourse then drop the bullshit, flat-pack metaphors, quote scripture only when required and actually post something meaningful and coherent. Until then, all you will get is mockery.

I gave it to you straight in the OP:

Quote:Through a gracious visitation all who walk in this spirit will know healing, bountiful peace, long life and multiple progeny, followed by eternal blessings and perpetual joy through life everlasting. They will receive a crown of glory with a robe of honor, resplendent forever and ever.

The operations of the spirit of falsehood result in greed, neglect of righteous deeds, wickedness, lying, pride, and haughtiness, cruel deceit and fraud, massive hypocrisy, a want of self-control and abundant foolishness, a zeal for manifestation, a reviling tongue, blind eyes, deaf ears, stiff neck, and hard heart—to the end of walking in all the ways of darkness and evil cunning.

The judgment of all who walk in such ways will be multiple afflictions of God’s furious vengeance, never-ending terror and reproach for all eternity, with a shameful extinction in the fire of Hell’s outer darkness. For all evil, and dark happenstance, until their utter destruction with neither remnant nor rescue.

So long as we're quoting,

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough"
Albert Einstein.

You know, the cleverest people I know speak plain English. Its generally the insecure ones who feel the need to obfuscate their meaning through excessive verbosity.

(December 10, 2013 at 4:59 pm)Jacob(smooth) Wrote:

(December 10, 2013 at 2:45 pm)StrongWaters Wrote: I gave it to you straight in the OP:

So long as we're quoting,

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough"
Albert Einstein.

You know, the cleverest people I know speak plain English. Its generally the insecure ones who feel the need to obfuscate their meaning through excessive verbosity.

A to the fucking men.

Discourse 101. Say it simply and say it well, or shut the fuck up.

Of course, that assumes that the person involved in the discourse actually has a motivation beyond making himself feel smart... which I don't think is the case with strongwater.

(December 10, 2013 at 11:21 pm)Esquilax Wrote: Of course, that assumes that the person involved in the discourse actually has a motivation beyond making himself feel smart... which I don't think is the case with strongwater.

Proof is with the one demonstrating it: "False deeds are thus an abomination to the truth, whereas all the ways of truth are for perversity equally a disgrace. Fierce dispute attends every point of decision, for they can never agree."

As I have been saying, what's in the well comes up in the bucket. Every post in this forum between a Christian and Atheist demonstrates the quote beyond a shred of doubt.

You say there is no proof of pretty much anything a person can demonstrate. If you would like to disprove the quote, find some common ground. If not, I have demonstrated the veracity of the text I presented.

---

(December 10, 2013 at 7:11 pm)Fidel_Castronaut Wrote:

(December 10, 2013 at 4:59 pm)Jacob(smooth) Wrote: So long as we're quoting,

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough"
Albert Einstein.

You know, the cleverest people I know speak plain English. Its generally the insecure ones who feel the need to obfuscate their meaning through excessive verbosity.

A to the fucking men.

Discourse 101. Say it simply and say it well, or shut the fuck up.

Your words demonstrate the text.

"False deeds are thus an abomination to the truth, whereas all the ways of truth are for perversity equally a disgrace. Fierce dispute attends every point of decision, for they can never agree."

If you wish the text to be false, your actions in this thread should have shown it. As it stands, the premise of the thread seems to have been demonstrated by thoughts, words and deeds expressed.

To disprove the text, each of you will need to amend your behavior and engage with truth. It's a simple concept I presented in the OP. Proof seems to be abundant so far.

Strongwater: your assertions are not evidence, they are the claim. Your bible quotes are not evidence, they are the claim. Your weird pictograms are not evidence, they are the claim. I, nor anyone else, am required to disprove your claim. Your argument has no teeth, and merely demanding that it's true, does not make it so.

Do you not realize, yet, your critical failure to actually reach anyone here?