RE: A question about original sin.
August 3, 2011 at 10:33 am
(This post was last modified: August 3, 2011 at 11:15 am by The Grand Nudger.)
What's convoluted about wishful thinking Frodo? I know that there is a line between what I wish were real, and what is real. I toe that line. Why is it convoluted for me to toe the line, and rational for you to overstep it? I'm also wondering why you feel that the material world is dross?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dross
Is there a slang usage for this word in Wales that I'm missing the nuance of? Something less derogatory? Whatever predisposition you have regarding the nuts and the bolts of the universe (the dross to you I'm assuming), is only subjective. This is true for me as well, the difference is that I admit it. You instead chose to invent an elaborate mythology so that the world around you agrees with your dispositions. That christianity provided you with the framework was only a formality or coincidence of your birth. Whether or not I can imagine that I am above the "dross" has absolutely no effect on whether or not I am. You show me that I am, that's your claim, not mine. Don't ask me to imagine it, show it to me.
Nevertheless, when you arent busy propping up your subjective judgements and values, you demonstrate the clear ability to discern the wheat from the chaff. I haven't heard you defending Amen Ra, or Tiamat, and you definitely didn't defend the Meso American pantheon I provided you with. Why is it that you have erected a wall between those obvious flights of imagination and your own. Do you honestly believe that you have an insight to the cosmos that these people did not, that you have been granted special knowledge? Or are you willing to concede that those gods, those myths, are as valid an expression of subjective truth as your own?
You see, the kind of god you argue for is a subjective one, in that you have effectively eliminated any objectivity by placing it beyond the reach of the material. With no evidence that god is anything in specific, there can be no evidence that he is not anything in specific. You argue for an objective truth with subjective reasoning, these two concepts are not equivalent. To say that god is true for you, or true for me, is saying nothing as to whether or not god is actually true.
Add arguments to your insults. It makes them more effective. You know, come to think of it, the very moment you provide any evidence for your assumptions, you will have completely blown me out of the water. You should probably just skip directly there.
After all, that's the ultimate fuck you, don't you agree?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dross
Is there a slang usage for this word in Wales that I'm missing the nuance of? Something less derogatory? Whatever predisposition you have regarding the nuts and the bolts of the universe (the dross to you I'm assuming), is only subjective. This is true for me as well, the difference is that I admit it. You instead chose to invent an elaborate mythology so that the world around you agrees with your dispositions. That christianity provided you with the framework was only a formality or coincidence of your birth. Whether or not I can imagine that I am above the "dross" has absolutely no effect on whether or not I am. You show me that I am, that's your claim, not mine. Don't ask me to imagine it, show it to me.
Nevertheless, when you arent busy propping up your subjective judgements and values, you demonstrate the clear ability to discern the wheat from the chaff. I haven't heard you defending Amen Ra, or Tiamat, and you definitely didn't defend the Meso American pantheon I provided you with. Why is it that you have erected a wall between those obvious flights of imagination and your own. Do you honestly believe that you have an insight to the cosmos that these people did not, that you have been granted special knowledge? Or are you willing to concede that those gods, those myths, are as valid an expression of subjective truth as your own?
You see, the kind of god you argue for is a subjective one, in that you have effectively eliminated any objectivity by placing it beyond the reach of the material. With no evidence that god is anything in specific, there can be no evidence that he is not anything in specific. You argue for an objective truth with subjective reasoning, these two concepts are not equivalent. To say that god is true for you, or true for me, is saying nothing as to whether or not god is actually true.
Add arguments to your insults. It makes them more effective. You know, come to think of it, the very moment you provide any evidence for your assumptions, you will have completely blown me out of the water. You should probably just skip directly there.
After all, that's the ultimate fuck you, don't you agree?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
