Why an Atheist in the R&S Forum?

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by cb2008

If it is conditional that is not love. It is something else, a barter.

Sorry, but you’re wrong. I would fall out of love with my wife if she turned out to be unfaithful, or became abusive, or did any number of other bad things that are inconsistent with my vision of who a good friend, partner, and parent to our child should be. If I did those same bad things to her, she would be well within our rights to do the same.

I wouldn’t fall out of love instantaneously. I would probably experience a period of disbelief and try to restore our relationship to its prior healthy and mutually respectful equilibrium. I would also be heartbroken and mourn the loss of the relationship. But sooner or later I would fall out of love and move on, however awful and surreal the feeling would be at the time. This is something I never expect to happen and greatly hope will never happen. But it could happen, and it would hardly defy the laws of physics if it ever did happen.

It’s called having self-respect, and setting boundaries, and knowing what you can and can’t take and do and don’t deserve in a loving relationship. You might hold yourself to different standards, which is fine for you and 100% your prerogative. But you are completely and undeniably wrong if you assert that other peoples’ vision of love is a mere transaction, or “barter,” to use your parlance.

[LearnMe]

Originally Posted by chief scum

When you put your response to me (that is according to you) on the balance, which uses gravity. You use the downward weight of declaring what I wrote as wrong (putting me down) and lift yourself up in that to declare yourself right and declaring yourself as rising in the light of enlightenment.

Science overlooks the spirit, and words are spirit going forth. Words can lift up and words can put down. Words can set free and words can imprison.

It is said of Samuel that his words did not fall to the ground.

Or...

Maybe learning a little something about botany is a good thing. Not so much an ego thing.

[LearnMe]

Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel

so if someone dies you stop loving?
without something or someone out there in the external in the physical, you are unable to love?

that sounds like saying someone can not feel love unless they have physical objects in their life.

Not sure I follow...

If my wife had not come along externally, I'm not sure I'd be loving her today.

What you write sounds like someone attempting to spin more pretzel logic around what it is to love another. Are we not able to appreciate both the internal and external aspects of what makes for loving other than ourselves?

[LearnMe]

Originally Posted by ElijahAstin

Sorry, but you’re wrong. I would fall out of love with my wife if she turned out to be unfaithful, or became abusive, or did any number of other bad things that are inconsistent with my vision of who a good friend, partner, and parent to our child should be. If I did those same bad things to her, she would be well within our rights to do the same.

I wouldn’t fall out of love instantaneously. I would probably experience a period of disbelief and try to restore our relationship to its prior healthy and mutually respectful equilibrium. I would also be heartbroken and mourn the loss of the relationship. But sooner or later I would fall out of love and move on, however awful and surreal the feeling would be at the time. This is something I never expect to happen and greatly hope will never happen. But it could happen, and it would hardly defy the laws of physics if it ever did happen.

It’s called having self-respect, and setting boundaries, and knowing what you can and can’t take and do and don’t deserve in a loving relationship. You might hold yourself to different standards, which is fine for you and 100% your prerogative. But you are completely and undeniably wrong if you assert that other peoples’ vision of love is a mere transaction, or “barter,” to use your parlance.

Why an Atheist in the R&S Forum?

Discussions like these!

[chief scum]

Originally Posted by LearnMe

Or...

Maybe learning a little something about botany is a good thing. Not so much an ego thing.

Originally Posted by chief scum

When you put your response to me (that is according to you) on the balance, which uses gravity. You use the downward weight of declaring what I wrote as wrong (putting me down) and lift yourself up in that to declare yourself right and declaring yourself as rising in the light of enlightenment.

Science overlooks the spirit, and words are spirit going forth. Words can lift up and words can put down. Words can set free and words can imprison.

It is said of Samuel that his words did not fall to the ground.

And I demonstrated on the balance of spirit law, how light causes things to rise. And yet, not all light is righteous light. You can't have it both ways.

You did the same thing in putting me down while declaring yourself to be enlightened. While simultaneously claiming light has no drawing effect on the rising growth of living things. And you used the gravity of the balance that you use to do it.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by LearnMe

Why an Atheist in the R&S Forum?

Discussions like these!

I will take that as a compliment!

[Sonof]

Originally Posted by myuen2

Is it not enough just to know that I can fall if I were to jump off the balcony and damn the reason why? Mountain goats know as much about falling off mountain sides without getting burdened with Newton's law about gravity.

The need to know was the cause of the fall of mankind, condemned to an absurd existence of Sisyphus rolling a boulder uphill by the sweat of our brow only to have it roll back down. Over and over again you roll that boulder uphill till you die. Does knowing that it is gravity that you are pushing against make you feel better?

So pursuit of knowledge and understanding is useless and unnecessary?

That's what you are saying now?

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by Sonof

So pursuit of knowledge and understanding is useless and unnecessary?

That's what you are saying now?

That is an unfortunate worldview in certain Christian schools of thought, although they don’t typically cite Greek mythology in support of their talking points.

[phetaroi]

Originally Posted by ElijahAstin

That is an unfortunate worldview in certain Christian schools of thought, although they don’t typically cite Greek mythology in support of their talking points.

I wouldn't call them "schools of thought"!

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by phetaroi

I wouldn't call them "schools of thought"!

Fair point!