Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Relapse wrote:

blood reaper wrote:

Melissia wrote:When directed towards a goal, pride can be useful as a motivating tool. Thus the old phrase, "have some pride in your work".

But it shouldn't allowed to take control of yourself.

Indeed.

However emotion should not be surpressed.

That depends on the expression of the emotion. It's not a good thing to let a child run wild with his emotions and less so with an adult.

Indeed, but when ones emotions are repressed, then they become an adult and find themselves with freedom, it can cause serious problems for the person.

@Messilia Strawman? Honestly? but even basic pride seems to be looked down upon, why? It's human nature! There however is a difference when you tare someone's throat out with a pencil.

Melissia wrote:I admit that I rather like Jesus' philosophy. Humility, love, acceptance, charity, forgiveness, and honesty are the virtues he spoke for, and they're all noble virtues which help make our society a better place for everyone.

But I see so many prideful, arrogant schmucks within the religious community that it makes me wonder... how do THEY know who will be saved? Someone who is prideful is just as sinful as someone who is lustful... yet the former is embraced while the latter is demonized. That said, as a personal thing I can't help but hate. It's one of my personal demons, as it were. But I struggle to control it the best I can-- no one likes a psychopathically violent person, after all, and I don't want to become one-- but these people... I wonder if they struggle iwth their own pride? Do they notice their prideful nature?.

And thus pride sneaks up on myself, as well. It's a rather insidious thing. Still, I do worry that people get so caught up in spreading the message that they lose track of its meaning. Trying to spread the word of Christ through spouting hate is like... trying to show hospitality by throwing someone out the door naked in to the snow.

I am mindful of the parable of the Good Samaritan that Jesus gave.
The important people in the religious and secular community passed the man laying on the road.
A Samaritan, considered from a people without merit or worth, stopped and did all he could to help the man.
It's not a big surprise to see who Jesus held up
as the example of what people should be like. With everything else Jesus said and did,
who do you think will be exaulted when the time for judgement comes?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

blood reaper wrote:

Relapse wrote:

blood reaper wrote:

Melissia wrote:When directed towards a goal, pride can be useful as a motivating tool. Thus the old phrase, "have some pride in your work".

But it shouldn't allowed to take control of yourself.

Indeed.

However emotion should not be surpressed.

That depends on the expression of the emotion. It's not a good thing to let a child run wild with his emotions and less so with an adult.

Indeed, but when ones emotions are repressed, then they become an adult and find themselves with freedom, it can cause serious problems for the person.

@Messilia Strawman? Honestly? but even basic pride seems to be looked down upon, why? It's human nature! There however is a difference when you tare someone's throat out with a pencil.

On the whole, unbridled emotions allowed as a child leads to an adult with issues, at least from my observations.

I ddin't say it didn't.

However, surprised Emotions can cause the same effect.

Also, I'm still awaiting evidence, I mean, the entire Bible, or for that matter all of the thousands, if not millions of Religous texts and their mass similarities seems to lack proof to believe in them. I could say the Lord of the Rings is real, or worship the Gods of Chaos, because they also have been written about, and they haven't been proved, nor has God number 312 or God 789 but they haven't been disproved.

Bringer: It took a bit of reading, But here is what I was thinking of, specifically, aside from the various quotes in Matthew (which I admit is my favorite book):

1 John 4:16 wrote:God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

Love, again, is the main directive of any Christian. Not to worship god through fear, but through love. God is the Father and the Mother, being of both genders and of neither. She loves us, and wants our love in return.

Perhaps I have too many fond memories of Mr. Rogers: "God loves you just the way you are."

And all that God asks is that we love back.

Mannahnin wrote:

Cheesecat wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:We are best able to expand our own minds and those of others if we keep the idea exchange friendly and don't dismiss or look down on one another.

So we can't look down on someone who uses there personal beliefs as an excuse for there discrimination towards others?

A) That's not what I said.
B) Dakka rules don't permit you to be nasty to someone on here, even if they engage in behavior or speech you find immoral and objectionable.

If you want to participate in discussions on here, you need to do it with courtesy and without abuse unless you are being discourteous or abusive to a bible believer.

Fixed that for ya Manny.

GG

p.s. at least it sure seems that way at times

If you want to participate in discussions on here, you need to do it with courtesy and without abuse unless you are being discourteous or abusive to someone with religous conviction

Fixed it for you GG

By using the word "bible" your still aiming at a specific. Need to keep it open

Dunno, I mean, I certainly have tried to be respectful to Bringer, who seems to have religious conviction. Just because we disagree on matters of theology is no reason to call "heresy!" and start a pogrom.

This isn't 40k after all.

Jihadin wrote:

If you want to participate in discussions on here, you need to do it with courtesy and without abuse unless you are being discourteous or abusive to someone with religous conviction

Fixed it for you GG

By using the word "bible" your still aiming at a specific. Need to keep it open

Ok..I'm fine with your fix.

GG

GG, you have to admit that your beleif system flies in the face of all currently held scientific facts, and isn't just a discourse to unite the known scientific facts.

If I can say that the crazy hobo that thinks that crows are government spies sent after him is crazy, I think I can say that beleiving that we've all descended from 2 human beings is pretty crazy. It's, to anyone with any degree of learning in modern biology, the same level of wrongness.

Claiming that, at any point in history or prehistory, humans have lived naturally up until 700 or 900, is a pretty sure way to attract ridicule. We've been steadily increasing our life expectation for, what now, 5 or 6 centuries? And still we can't beat senescence after 125.

Also, beleiving that agelessness is a sign of God's favour, or that senescence is a sign of His disfavour, would mean that flatworms and water hydras are actually the chosen people.

I didn't know that my belief system (Christianity) requires me to adhere to young earth creationism. I am sorry that I didn't get the memo.

Or, you know, you could stop generalizing.

Or water bears.

Throne on Earth those things are nigh-unkillable.

Melissia wrote:Or water bears.

Throne on Earth those things are nigh-unkillable.

who's the cute little tardigrade, you are, yes you are

Jihadin wrote:

If you want to participate in discussions on here, you need to do it with courtesy and without abuse unless you are being discourteous or abusive to someone with religous conviction

Fixed it for you GG

By using the word "bible" your still aiming at a specific. Need to keep it open

Jihadin, if you find an example of someone being abusive to a poster on here, please hit the yellow triangle. GG has come in for some attacks, and we have repeatedly censured and suspended posters for attacking him. On the other hand, GG has also repeatedly abused others, and engaged in deliberate trolling behavior, provoking others into attacking him. Two wrongs don't make a right. Depending on the severity of the situation, when two posters are both clearly in the wrong, we will sometimes choose not to suspend either, but instead put a general warning to the thread. On others we might just miss something.

youbedead wrote:

Melissia wrote:Or water bears.

Throne on Earth those things are nigh-unkillable.

who's the cute little tardigrade, you are, yes you are

They are pretty insanely cute! Well now we know what will be the new apex beings once God decides to throw a fit and have another flood.

Wait what, those buggers can live at about absolute zero? How the hell is that even possible? And void?

Melissia wrote:Bringer: It took a bit of reading, But here is what I was thinking of, specifically, aside from the various quotes in Matthew (which I admit is my favorite book):

1 John 4:16 wrote:God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

Love, again, is the main directive of any Christian. Not to worship god through fear, but through love. God is the Father and the Mother, being of both genders and of neither. She loves us, and wants our love in return.

Perhaps I have too many fond memories of Mr. Rogers: "God loves you just the way you are."

And all that God asks is that we love back.

Fair enough. Personally I've always been bad at summarizing the Bible with few words.

But God doesn't love us just the way we are. He loves us just the way we are minus sin

Melissia wrote:You are thinking of the wrong kind of fear, however. It is not a fear that God will raise Her mighty hand and smite us, but a fear that She will forsake us, because we have abandoned Her love.

Are you trying to bait me by saying her?

Melissia wrote:Love IS the core theme of Christianity.

For now I will say you are correct, though I don't like it when people say the core theme of the Bible is this or that because it leaves so much out of the picture that is absolutely vital. I'd say mercy and justice are two other themes that are both incredibly prominent. Though really, mercy could be considered as one facet of love.


What happened to the homosexuality debate?

I was always fond of Butters words ;

''If I'm a bit bisexual, and I'm an image of God, then maybe God's a bit bisexual himself too!''

Ah, Butters.

What happened to the homosexuality debate?

The topic pretty much beaten to death

Kovnik Obama wrote:
Also ; I hate Kant. The guy couldn't write a short book if his life depended on it.

Glad you agree. My Kant teacher pretty much opened his course saying '' Well, Kant was an incredibly boring man who could've said everything he ended up saying in about one tenth of the volume of books he wrote''.

Mind you, my master's on Husserl, so I pretty much went from Scylla straight to Charybdis.

Kovnik Obama wrote:Glad you agree. My Kant teacher pretty much opened his course saying '' Well, Kant was an incredibly boring man who could've said everything he ended up saying in about one tenth of the volume of books he wrote''.

Mind you, my master's on Husserl, so I pretty much went from Scylla straight to Charybdis.

To be fair that could be said about any philosopher or writer really, though I agree Kant is like the Melville of philosophers

I'm struggling to bring to mind a philosopher which could honestly be described as concise, so I think I'll have to grant you this one... Lyotard, maybe? Hume wasn't so bad either, if I remember correctly.


On topic part of the posts : Philosophers everywhere strongly disagrees with the wasteful burning of Cheerios.

Melissia wrote:

blood reaper wrote:

Melissia wrote:When directed towards a goal, pride can be useful as a motivating tool. Thus the old phrase, "have some pride in your work".

But it shouldn't allowed to take control of yourself.

Indeed.

However emotion should not be surpressed.

So you're saying that I shouldn't suppress the emotional desire to rip someone's throat out with a pencil whenever I feel it next?

Do whatever you like with your emotions; in this case it is the action that you ought to suppress.

Melissia wrote:And all that God asks is that we love back.

Yeah, this only really works if you ignore the other few hundred arbitrary rules He asks of us. There's a reason the Bible is a big ol' book, and not a Post-It note. "Attn: Mankind- love!" would otherwise get the job done.



@GeneralGrog, I'm still waiting for an answer from you on how someone can call themselves a Christian in following Leviticus when it comes to opposing gay marriage, yet not following Leviticus when it also forbids cutting your beard (19:27) or wearing poly-cotton blends (19:19).

Manchu wrote:Well it sounds like you are talking about something that is much more personal than a national news item there, DIDM. I'd venture to guess that you don't know many practicing Catholics anymore or have much to do with them. I'd venture that you don't go to mass, for example. And I'd venture that a lot of your opinions are filtered through a lens of hateful prejudice that your idiosyncratic personal experience frankly cannot excuse.

Because if you did know many Catholics, you'd discover a huge group of people who don't have anything in common with this cereal burner. And if you did go to mass, you wouldn't hear much -- or probably anything at all (I know I never have) -- about anyone going to hell over this or that, including being gay or transgendered. And if you didn't believe that your own individual experience was conclusive for all the other billion Catholics on this earth, you just might find that it is in fact not even slightly representative.

not only do I know them, I'm related to them

gay and a bundle of sticks are verbs in my family, and in the most ignorant way possible

azazel the cat wrote:

Melissia wrote:And all that God asks is that we love back.

Yeah, this only really works if you ignore the other few hundred arbitrary rules He asks of us. There's a reason the Bible is a big ol' book, and not a Post-It note. "Attn: Mankind- love!" would otherwise get the job done.

What few hundred arbitrary rules does he asks of us Christians?

Kovnik Obama wrote:Glad you agree. My Kant teacher pretty much opened his course saying '' Well, Kant was an incredibly boring man who could've said everything he ended up saying in about one tenth of the volume of books he wrote''.

I would have liked him, that's basically my opinion of all social science; and much of hard science.

When you see people citing Waltz in literature reviews regarding the nature of realism, you know a problem exists.

Mannahnin wrote:

Jihadin wrote:

If you want to participate in discussions on here, you need to do it with courtesy and without abuse unless you are being discourteous or abusive to someone with religous conviction

Fixed it for you GG

By using the word "bible" your still aiming at a specific. Need to keep it open

Jihadin, if you find an example of someone being abusive to a poster on here, please hit the yellow triangle. GG has come in for some attacks, and we have repeatedly censured and suspended posters for attacking him. On the other hand, GG has also repeatedly abused others, and engaged in deliberate trolling behavior, provoking others into attacking him. Two wrongs don't make a right. Depending on the severity of the situation, when two posters are both clearly in the wrong, we will sometimes choose not to suspend either, but instead put a general warning to the thread. On others we might just miss something.

Manny this is wrong of you to post what you did. I have never had a warning from any mod on this forum, and it is quite slanderous of you, a moderator, to sling my good name through the mud.

"the provoking others into attacking him" line is a typical blame the victim line.

You(mannahnin) have a personal axe to grind against me for my stance on homosexuality and that has colored your viewpoint of me. At times, I feel like you take out all of your frustrations that you can't normally express in "the real world" out on me, on this forum, just because you can.

GG


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kovnik Obama wrote:GG, you have to admit that your beleif system flies in the face of all currently held scientific facts, and isn't just a discourse to unite the known scientific facts.

If I can say that the crazy hobo that thinks that crows are government spies sent after him is crazy, I think I can say that beleiving that we've all descended from 2 human beings is pretty crazy. It's, to anyone with any degree of learning in modern biology, the same level of wrongness.

Claiming that, at any point in history or prehistory, humans have lived naturally up until 700 or 900, is a pretty sure way to attract ridicule. We've been steadily increasing our life expectation for, what now, 5 or 6 centuries? And still we can't beat senescence after 125.

Also, beleiving that agelessness is a sign of God's favour, or that senescence is a sign of His disfavour, would mean that flatworms and water hydras are actually the chosen people.

KO..this type of discussion that you are engaging in is fine, because you are stating your disagreement with out resulting to insult. Unfortunately your level headedness is far too rare on the internet.

I have also stated on this very very forum that my stance has softened a bit on the evolution issue. (And I had never said that a person wasn't a Christian if they believed in Macroevolution) I have softened in the sense that what I once viewed as very "cut and dried" to "I now understand why people believe in macro evolution, and have disdain for some creationist argument".

Now having said that, I still haven't seen enough evidence to buy into macroevolution, and I am not willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to ID or "creation science".

GG

generalgrog wrote:
Manny this is wrong of you to post what you did. I have never had a warning from any mod on this forum, and it is quite slanderous of you, a moderator, to sling my good name through the mud.

"the provoking others into attacking him" line is a typical blame the victim line.

You(mannahnin) have a personal axe to grind against me for my stance on homosexuality and that has colored your viewpoint of me. At times, I feel like you take out all of your frustrations that you can't normally express in "the real world" out on me, on this forum, just because you can.

GG

Some of the things you have said about people in the past have made me want to vomit. You say things like "It isn't his fault he is a disgusting pervert" and then cringe behind your Religious claptrap to avoid bans and warnings. Its truly hypocritical and absolutely disgusting, and the only possible reason you get away with it is because you play the perennial victim with consummate expertise and cower behind your faith.

Ergo, you are out of line for all of the above.

And I think this thread may be done.

mattyrm wrote:
Some of the things you have said about people in the past have made me want to vomit. You say things like "It isn't his fault he is a disgusting pervert" and then cringe behind your Religious claptrap to avoid bans and warnings. Its truly hypocritical and absolutely disgusting, and the only possible reason you get away with it is because you play the perennial victim with consummate expertise and cower behind your faith.

Ergo, you are out of line for all of the above.

Case in point.

But I guess I provoked him right?

GG

tack tack tack tack tack tack tack tack tack tack tack tack tack tack

(final nail in thread coffin)