Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Most people don't like being called a liar. Especially when you offer nothing to back it up.
Most people don't insist that their lies are truth. Re-read your own posts for enlightenment.
Besides, your response has nothing to do with post that you quoted. Do you get offended when asked a simple question or not? Be careful how you answer, your posts are still out there.
Nope.
The most common scenario on this board is threads bashing Religion in general, Christianity mainly, and a handful of Bible Literalists personally and specifically.
Typically a crew of Fundie Atheists piling on the 2 or 3 main Fundie Christians that post for believing the hocus-pocus stuff written in the Bible...or their biased personal positions that are based upon Bible doctrine.
Anybody claiming that to not be so isn't familiar with the board, or otherwise ignorant of the main content.
You are incorrect, in that thread he only insisted that when the full definition supported him then one must use the full definition but when it did not support him that it was wrong to use the full one and should only use the one that you had to Google with a specific word order and use the single definition from that search. That is when dishonesty = onto the ignore list kicked in.
That's right. He is a typical fundamentalist, yet claims not to be. He takes a definition and applies it to atheism to say it is a religion, and then when you use that to say he is religious, all of a sudden the definition doesn't apply. You have to look at it in some alternate way. Dishonesty is a trait the Gldn most certainly has. His ability to do nothing but bash non believers is rather impressive as well. It is quite funny that he is "not religious", yet he always bashes non believers and takes the believers side...
Either way, I have decided not to feed the trolls anymore.
You are incorrect, in that thread he only insisted that when the full definition supported him then one must use the full definition but when it did not support him that it was wrong to use the full one and should only use the one that you had to Google with a specific word order and use the single definition from that search. That is when dishonesty = onto the ignore list kicked in.
Well, you know, I do sometimes get confused by the points of doctrine of Fundamentalist Theists occasionally. I must have missed this particular commandment, "Thou shalt not contradict GldnRule, particularly by quote his own posts at him", but I would not be surprised if it formed an integral part of his religious faith.
Do you remember arguing that one should use the "expert definers" to determine what words mean? And asserting that if you want to argue a negative that it cannot be true for any of the definitions given, not just one?
Surely you remember this, but just say the word and we can rehash that discussion...
religion noun re·li·gion \ri-ˈli-jən\
: the belief in a god or in a group of gods
: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods
: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group
I have added the bold for emphasis. This means that using the "full and complete definition" of the word, you are religious, as you follow a religion, which you term as your "Theist posture".
Now if you only want to use the second definition, then you would be correct that you are not religious. However since you insist that others must use the "full and complete definition" of God, surely you would not be such a rank hypocrite as to pick and choose your definition of "religion"?
Right?
So, religious you indeed are. And A fundie too, since you spend so much energy on message boards trying to enlighten the lost, i mean "Hip" people to the "reality of God". Thats what fundies do, right?
-NoCapo
Yes...I'm hip to that, and do see the logic in it.
Just as Atheism is a Religion, if one is perfervid enough about it...Pantheism could be thus considered as well.
It is not quite as much a Religion to me as shepherding the lot of you people around for my amusement...but, to your point, sufficient enough to qualify in my case. Just as Atheism is a Religion for most of you.
So...there ya go. Now, let's see how "honest" y'all are about your own deal.
Oh, and yes...I'm a Fundamental Pantheist. That works for me just fine. I have no issue with that.
That's right. He is a typical fundamentalist, yet claims not to be. He takes a definition and applies it to atheism to say it is a religion, and then when you use that to say he is religious, all of a sudden the definition doesn't apply. You have to look at it in some alternate way. Dishonesty is a trait the Gldn most certainly has. His ability to do nothing but bash non believers is rather impressive as well. It is quite funny that he is "not religious", yet he always bashes non believers and takes the believers side...
Either way, I have decided not to feed the trolls anymore.
I think he does a good job of maintaining a non-biased neutral position. But I guess the definition of a fundamentalist is anyone who doesn't agree with you.
Stereotyping is historically the first main step towards persecution of a group.
Do you remember arguing that one should use the "expert definers" to determine what words mean? And asserting that if you want to argue a negative that it cannot be true for any of the definitions given, not just one?
Surely you remember this, but just say the word and we can rehash that discussion...
religion noun re·li·gion \ri-ˈli-jən\
: the belief in a god or in a group of gods
: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods
: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group
I have added the bold for emphasis. This means that using the "full and complete definition" of the word, you are religious, as you follow a religion, which you term as your "Theist posture".
Now if you only want to use the second definition, then you would be correct that you are not religious. However since you insist that others must use the "full and complete definition" of God, surely you would not be such a rank hypocrite as to pick and choose your definition of "religion"?
Right?
So, religious you indeed are. And A fundie too, since you spend so much energy on message boards trying to enlighten the lost, i mean "Hip" people to the "reality of God". Thats what fundies do, right?
-NoCapo
Gee...Thanx NoCapo!. I feel like I fit in a lot better here now.
See that? You never knew how.much like me you really were...until today.
I think he does a good job of maintaining a non-biased neutral position. But I guess the definition of a fundamentalist is anyone who doesn't agree with you.
Stereotyping is historically the first main step towards persecution of a group.
True.
Like all witches are bad and should be burned at the stake. All gays are wimpy girly-men and should be stoned - or at least beaten. All non-believers are soulless heathens who deserve eternal hellfire.
Yes...I'm hip to that, and do see the logic in it.
Just as Atheism is a Religion, if one is perfervid enough about it...Pantheism could be thus considered as well.
It is not quite as much a Religion to me as shepherding the lot of you people around for my amusement...but, to your point, sufficient enough to qualify in my case. Just as Atheism is a Religion for most of you.
So...there ya go. Now, let's see how "honest" y'all are about your own deal.
If we use your tortured logic, I can freely admit, everything is a religion. Because anything that is, ever has been, or ever will be important to someone, or any person that is especially talented or skilled counts as a god, and to acknowledge the existence of a god means that you are religious... Kind of makes the idea a bit, useless for conveying information though, doesn't it?
Of course, I think your logic is deeply flawed, and a foolish attempt to use semantic trickery in order to feel like you are "winning", which incidently is what your entire religious position appears to be... But hey, you can believe what you want, I was just pointing out that you might want to be consistant...
So we can sum up, GldnRule has now admitted that, by his own standards, he is a religious fundamentalist.
Which brings me back to my original points from several years ago. If one uses "Gldn-logic" one quickly find that all words are ultimately meaningless, and therefore the truth value of any statement conveys no information, and is also ultimately meaningless blather.
This is why I fundamentally reject your underlying logic, and still maintain that word mean things, and map to ideas. It is the ideas that are the important thing, and language should be used to clarify not obfuscate. There are such things at metaphor and hyperbole, and to communicate meaningfully one must be aware of the distinction.
So based on my method of using and understanding language, I would argue that neither you, ol' Goldbritches, or myself are religious, but I can see how you has been backed into the corner of thinking of yourself as a fundie. But of course you can't agree with me without your entire worldview falling to pieces, so I am pretty sure you will try to find a way to embrace being a religious fundamentalist pantheist.
Most people don't insist that their lies are truth.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
