Allegro.cc - Online Community

Allegro.cc Forums » Off-Topic Ordeals » A question to all the married men

This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. rss feed Print
A question to all the married men
Neil Roy
Member #2,229
April 2002
avatar

I just want to say I apologize if I offended anyone. I stand by my beliefs 100%. I may not be able to articulate them in a forum very well, and many of them I would have to write a novel of text to explain properly, and I am not willing to do that. Short explanations without other details that would take too long to explain usually leaves me wide open for attack. Actually people that don't believe will never accept what you say, which is why it is pointless to argue.

I have seen several comments here I want to respond to SO BADLY it hurts, but, I'll force myself to shut up this time as I hate discussing my beliefs and this has helped remind me why.

Again, sorry for any misunderstandings, insults etc... one thing I do wish to respond to, I NEVER mock anyone... ever... nor do I troll, that isn't who I am. I'm no good at discussing these things though, I have a difficult time putting how I feel into words so that you can firmly understand where I am coming from, and often times it's an impossible task when you're dealing with someone who just doesn't want to believe or they have other doctrines they firmly believe in that differ from your own.

My best advice if you are serious about learning, read it yourself, then if someone mocks your beliefs, change the subject. ;)

I'll probably stick around here, but for the programming, I'll leave the religious debates to you guys.

---
“I love you too.” - last words of Wanda Roy

Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
avatar

I still don't get why that's difficult for you to understand

I still stand by my old argument that topics regarding divinity and spirituality do not convey well by text on a forum alone. It's extremely easy to lose mental clarity on a subject that you don't already agree with on this medium. Articulation helps, but it only goes so far when you're trying to explain an entire ideology in a few paragraphs. People have written entire books on these subjects for centuries and still fail to get the point across in a way that is accessible to all audiences.

[edit: I wrote this before reading Neil's post, but I agree with the same line of reasoning as to why people misunderstand each other in this way]

"He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe"

23yrold3yrold
Member #1,134
March 2001
avatar

Derezo said:

I still stand by my old argument that topics regarding divinity and spirituality do not convey well by text on a forum alone.

This is why my first act was to remove the spirituality and divinity from my post by making it about a video game instruction manual and then later about Frodo, and asking the question again. :) I'm not sure how much more I could sterilize it ...

--
Software Development == Church Development
Step 1. Build it.
Step 2. Pray.

Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
avatar

I think the trouble is the lack of a willingness to understand these topics. Our own beliefs and perspectives distort the comprehension process. A strongly held belief is so well protected from outside influence that when it's presented with a new one, the response is to defend yourself. That's what we see in these threads. Rather than saying "Oh, you mean ...?" and attempting to display our mutual understanding, we present our own opposition so that we can reaffirm our own beliefs on the matter. This is also why you'll often find two people arguing with each other when they actually mean to say the same thing. They're just so unwilling to modify those deeply rooted beliefs that they don't even understand that the other person shares them.

Metaphor and allegory often wont bend around that stuff. Best try a case of beer.

"He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe"

Neil Black
Member #7,867
October 2006
avatar

I agree with Derezo.

The only reliable solution to such a situation is to have the debate be moderated by someone. In my opinion, anyway.

Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
avatar

I'll moderate.

Your opinion is wrong. >:(

Neil Black
Member #7,867
October 2006
avatar

Yay! Now everything's good forever!

Neil Roy
Member #2,229
April 2002
avatar

I do plan on looking into some of the things I discussed with Matthew. Just so you know I'm not closed minded, he did make me think. My opinions on those subjects still stand due to other scriptures, but he did make me realize I need to look up some scriptures and make some notes for future reference. :P

Anyohw....

*** GROUP HUG *** ;D

---
“I love you too.” - last words of Wanda Roy

Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
avatar

Seriously?
A conservative party logo?

>:(

You're begging to be flamed. Their leader is a disgrace to the human race and is what has caused the destruction of our country's sovereignty. >:(

{"name":"stephen-harper-and-the-kitten.jpg","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/6\/1\/613b0b0ef94893b61a70e7f8bd9334a3.jpg","w":527,"h":720,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/6\/1\/613b0b0ef94893b61a70e7f8bd9334a3"}stephen-harper-and-the-kitten.jpg

When he's found guilty of treason, assuming he lives that long, the world will be a happier place.

>:( and a thousand more >:('s to you.

"He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe"

23yrold3yrold
Member #1,134
March 2001
avatar

Ah, propaganda. :) I don't give a rats ass about politics but is Harper even that hated anymore? Is that still trendy?

--
Software Development == Church Development
Step 1. Build it.
Step 2. Pray.

Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
avatar

No, he fixed that up pretty good by playing the piano or some crap.

It's not like the Liberals before him were a positive influence, but this government gets away with so much right out in the open... not that we see that on our government controlled news or anything.

"He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe"

Neil Roy
Member #2,229
April 2002
avatar

Everyone's welcome to their opinion. I would address some of the issues that picture brings up but that would open up a whole new can o worms.

But no, he's not hated, plenty of people love him and think he's the best PM we've ever had, I happen to be one of 'em. Given how our country done during the recent economic meltdown, I would say he done very well. Canada done very well. I plan on voting for him again, and hopefully we can get a Majority with him at the helm this time rather than one of the three stooges. ;)

I thought the Liberals calling this based on ethics was the ultimate irony. ;)

---
“I love you too.” - last words of Wanda Roy

Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
avatar

Quote:

plenty of mindless tele-vision watching drones love him

I fixed this for you.

Neil Roy said:

Given how our country done during the recent economic meltdown, I would say he done very well.

Is that some sort of sick joke? He deserves a life in prison for what he's done with our economy, sovereignty, monetary system, and .. well, everything else he's poisoned.

Quote:

I plan on voting for him again

That is so painful it almost makes me want to puke. After all of the horrible things his party has done to us. :'(

That's just sick. You clearly don't even know what he's responsible for. The Liberals can go to prison with him for all I care, but we don't actually have a two party system like our neighbour, despite the multitude of Canadians who think so. The youth of our nation will rise up against this injustice. Turn off your fucking TV and stop thinking in red and blue.

"He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe"

23yrold3yrold
Member #1,134
March 2001
avatar

Derezo said:

You clearly don't even know what he's responsible for

Neither do you if all you can post is a propaganda poster. :) Again, I don't follow politics, I don't even know what party Harper and Ignatieff and all these idiots are, but here's a random post from a Facebook friend ...

Quote:

Look at things objectively. Our economy is among the strongest in developed nations. Our debt to GDP ratio is a fraction of the U.S. Our unemployment is low. And Harper did this with small tax cuts that have benefited everyone. Oh, and he did this with a minority government. Political scientists will be talking about this government for decades.

Now, convince me. Is he right or are you, and why?

--
Software Development == Church Development
Step 1. Build it.
Step 2. Pray.

Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
avatar

Neither do you if all you can post is a propaganda poster.

That's just from some random blog. You cannot talk about government without propaganda coming up, but these things are real problems. I google imaged for the kitten shot mostly.

If you REALLY want to know, you can watch this video or check out what some other party's are saying and see what the problems are in our country. I rather liked these guys when I read about them, and their website has a public forum with some pretty intense videos about what we're facing. Then of course you'll see who caused all of these problems. Liberals and Conservatives are backed entirely by corporate interests and their policy changes reflect that clear as day.

Quote:

Harper did this with small tax cuts that have benefited everyone.

The tax cuts benefit the rich, not the poor.

Remember when Harper did this? You've probably never heard of it. That site is propaganda, the actual agreement is somewhat creepy and makes you wonder.... "Why?", and I'm sure it's available on that site and nobody reading this will read it. :P

"He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe"

Evert
Member #794
November 2000
avatar

I cannot speak for either Chris or Neil, but I'm pretty sure both of them would say that God is "all mighty" (that phrase is used in the Bible many times) and "omnipotent": he has the ability to do whatever he wants to do. That's all the average Christian means by that. Few people would say God is "omnipotent" if the definition attached to it comes with some bogus self-contradicting concept.

And here's the rub:

The Bible says God isn't omnipotent.

Which particular meaning of the word "omnipotent" is being used here?
If two people use the same word to mean two different things, you get confusion.

Maybe you felt that Neil was using omnipotence as a way to justify some logically contradictory thing?

No.
Quite literally what I said: there are two people, both supposedly believing more or less the same things, and one of them says "God is omnipotent", the other "God is not omnipotent". Now supposedly they mean something different by the word "omnipotent" in each of those instances, and quoting one to say something about what the other meant to say is maybe not fair (although religious interest groups do this in debates on evolution all the time) but you can't actually tell by just looking at the statements themselves.

Neil Roy
Member #2,229
April 2002
avatar

That's a good point 23yrold3yrold... with a minority government he would have to have the support of the other parties to pass anything. So if you want to lay blame, you have to add in the other parties with him. That's the beauty of a minority government, you can't blame them solely.

There's a variety of reasons why I vote conservative. I'm against socialism, I feel it destroys a country. Supporting businesses and corporations helps create jobs, which gets people off the social system, gives them a little self respect and lowers taxes. The less people on the social system, the lower the taxes, the better everyone does. Higher social spending leads to higher taxes which leads to a greater need for social spending, it's a vicious loop.

;D, I just got thinking, what's a a religious thread without a little political debate?! ;D

Harper has done a nice job, even though I was against him spending those huge sums he spent to help economic recovery, the other parties threatened an election if he didn't, now ironically they will accuse him of spending... ah well.

---
“I love you too.” - last words of Wanda Roy

Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
avatar

Evert said:

Which particular meaning of the word "omnipotent" is being used here?

Context is relevant. When Chris is speaking in your language, God is not omnipotent. Knowing what kind of debates have been taken place here is relevant to understanding a statement like that. It's completely clear to me what's meant. I cannot make it clear for anybody else.

23yrold3yrold
Member #1,134
March 2001
avatar

Context is relevant. When Chris is speaking in your language, God is not omnipotent.

Essentially. Ever specifically Evert said the premise is absurd. It's only absurd if you take it literally, which, yes, is absurd. That was the supplied context. Perhaps Evert meant something else?

Quote:

It's completely clear to me what's meant.

But Evert specifically said he was the one being understood! The implication being that I'm the one not being clear! Stop confusing me!

--
Software Development == Church Development
Step 1. Build it.
Step 2. Pray.

Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
avatar

Neil Roy said:

Harper has done a nice job, even though ...

The trouble with politics is the same as with the religion. Once you cement your beliefs like that, you're no longer thinking for yourself and no longer examining alternatives. They become your God all over again. What you are saying is not the truth, and I have absolutely no reason to believe that Harper has done a "nice job" when there is no evidence of that.

However, it is again subjective. I'm sure if you own a bank you're very happy with Harper's performance.

"He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe"

Evert
Member #794
November 2000
avatar

But whether the English translation says "hell" or "hades" or "the underworld" is really irrelevant, isn't it? Aren't we talking about a concept, and not a four letter word?

The problem is that words carry associations with them, the affect at least their perceived meaning.
Originally (way back), "Hades" referred to the "underworld", the place underneat the Earth where the god Hades rules over the souls of the dead. In Hades there were different regions, for instance the Elyssean Fields where those who were noble and virtuous in life went, and the Tartaros, where giants and other monsters were chained up and where those who had been exceptionally cruel in their lifes (or stepped on the toes of the wrong god) underwent fitting punishment (Tantalos is a famous example). This is certainly not synonymous with the conventional Christian concept of hell. This is also something to be extremely careful of when reading early Christian texts written in Greek, or Greek translations of the Old Testament.
The correct translation depends on context, and people did (and do, and will) get this wrong.
So yes, it depends very much on what word you use what other people will think you say.

To give the thread a spin, I'm always annoyed at the scene in the otherwise excellent I, Claudius where Livia tells Claudius that she's afraid she'll be "punished in hell for all eternity" for the bad things she's done. Romans had no concept of hell in this sense, it's a Judeo-Christian thing[1] and to a large extent a concept from later times. Its use there jars quite badly.

EDIT

It's completely clear to me what's meant.

I know what he means, that's not the point I'm trying to make. Now how do I know what someone who uses the same word and makes a contradictory statement means?
Are they disagreeing?
Are they agreeing but using a different meaning of the word "omnipotent"?

References

  1. And as far as I know also far more Christian than Jewish, although the concept clearly exists in Islam as well.
Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
avatar

Evert said:

The problem is that words carry associations with them, the affect at least their perceived meaning.

I agree, and there is some importance related to the topic of hell. But again, I think a lot of it is just talking in the language that is understood by the people without getting caught up in details that aren't relevant.

For instance, when I was a "support technician" I quickly discovered that a disturbingly large number of people cannot tell their left from their right. So the first time I'd tell someone to left click vs right click and they indicated they clicked on the wrong button, I'd just switch my language to match theirs.

Every time I meant "right click" I'd say "left click". Somebody taking notes out of context would think I was crazy.

I don't think Jesus meant for everybody to hang on to every word he uttered. If he wasn't actually teaching specifically on what hell is, then him using a word of the day in a parable is hardly important at all.

Quote:

Now how do I know what someone who uses the same word and makes a contradictory statement means?

Ask him? And if you cannot, then assume he's not crazy.

Most people don't assign bogus definitions to things like omnipotence and then continue to use them to apply to things they don't think are bogus. So I'd base my understanding on something like that.

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

It's irrelevant which Canadian party is elected. They're all blowing the monopoly guy... Until the people come up with a way to prevent government from getting in bed with business it will always be nothing more than a puppet show.

Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
avatar

There are party's who promote that idea. It's just that they also promote other equally outrageous ideas which the public are completely unaware of and think are "crazy". The only party's the public pays attention to are the ones that they see on commercials and the news, because they're given a stimulus and have to make a decision about that stimulus. Then they've made up their mind.

The way it works is that they control two party's, fund them with a ton of money, and pit them against each other. One says the other is bad, the other says the other is bad, and so the public winds up making a decision based on that information.

... but that information doesn't include other party's!!!

"He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe"

Neil Roy
Member #2,229
April 2002
avatar

Derenzo, you assume a lot about me and why I vote for Harper. I actually used to vote Liberal, back in the Cretian days because I thought he was a decent person for the job and I didn't like the conservative person at the time. But with a lot of thought on the subject my mind changed based on my own thoughts on economics and other issues. I have NEVER been convinced to vote one way or another by advertisements or other nonsense I see on TV. IN fact, I spend more time on my computer than I ever will on TV, I can't stand most TV, mostly due to the commercials and other issues.

Don't assume that I have somehow been deceived into voting one way or the other, I have a mind of my own and I use it. Have you ever considered the idea that perhaps you are the one who is being deceived by some of these websites and videos you watch? It is possible you know. I'm not trying to be insulting towards you, but you should consider it and carefully view all the facts, and verify what you have been told, don't just accept it without question.

---
“I love you too.” - last words of Wanda Roy



Go to: