T1B

BSmack wrote:

ppanther wrote:

BSmack wrote:Exactly all of it.

Delusions of grandeur much? Ridiculous.

No, it's self evident. Nobody can discover an idea for you. There are facilitators for sure, but the actual "ah ha" moment is a personal experience.

Teachers are more than just facilitators. When someone took the time to teach you that 2 + 2 = 4, the point at which you accepted this as fact was not you discovering that 2 + 2 = 4. But this is all about your outsized ego. You can’t even give a little bit of credit to those who have taught you, it was all about Brian’s numerous “discoveries”.

And this also dovetails nicely with your inability to consider the existence of a supreme being, as that would theoretically represent the ultimate teacher.

BSmack wrote:OUT!

PS: Was that Smack Chatty enough?

For some reason, I remember you ending your posts with "L8!" Maybe that was someone from Kansas City.

BSmack wrote:EVERYTHING YOU HAVE EVER BELIEVED YOU HAVE DISCOVERED ON YOUR OWN.

Is it starting to sink in yet?

It's not sinking in, mostly because it's absurdly incorrect, unless your view of the world is smaller than a pinhead. Even then it's probably incorrect.

ppanther wrote:For some reason, I remember you ending your posts with "L8!" Maybe that was someone from Kansas City.

Oklahoma... in the form of Filthy McNasty.

Back on topic here, I'll tell you your future - for free and without a lot of arm wavy mumbo jumbo. Are you ready? Here it is:








You're all going to die. The End.

Goober McTuber wrote:Teachers are more than just facilitators. When someone took the time to teach you that 2 + 2 = 4, the point at which you accepted this as fact was not you discovering that 2 + 2 = 4. But this is all about your outsized ego. You can’t even give a little bit of credit to those who have taught you, it was all about Brian’s numerous “discoveries”.

Obviously the nuance is going over your head. But when you do finally figure out what I am saying, it will be YOU that will have put the pieces together in YOUR mind. My role is that of a lens in exposing your mind to the idea and creating the optimum conditions around your so that your mind can make the discovery it needs to.

Consider this. If it were all about teaching, every student would get the same test score.

And this also dovetails nicely with your inability to consider the existence of a supreme being, as that would theoretically represent the ultimate teacher.

I have considered the existence of a supreme being. And although I concede that it is possible for such a being to exist, I have come to the conclusion that the fairy tales passed off as fact in the bible are not even remotely adequate in terms of proving said existence. You obviously have me confused with an atheist.

ppanther wrote:

BSmack wrote:OUT!

PS: Was that Smack Chatty enough?

For some reason, I remember you ending your posts with "L8!" Maybe that was someone from Kansas City.

My Smack Chat signoff was "Layte."

How soon they forget. Sniff sniff. :P

ppanther wrote:It's not sinking in, mostly because it's absurdly incorrect, unless your view of the world is smaller than a pinhead. Even then it's probably incorrect.

See my reply to Goober.

BSmack wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:Teachers are more than just facilitators. When someone took the time to teach you that 2 + 2 = 4, the point at which you accepted this as fact was not you discovering that 2 + 2 = 4. But this is all about your outsized ego. You can’t even give a little bit of credit to those who have taught you, it was all about Brian’s numerous “discoveries”.

Obviously the nuance is going over your head. But when you do finally figure out what I am saying, it will be YOU that will have put the pieces together in YOUR mind. My role is that of a lens in exposing your mind to the idea and creating the optimum conditions around your so that your mind can make the discovery it needs to.

Consider this. If it were all about teaching, every student would get the same test score.

You've obviously confused discovering with learning. And your role is that of a pedantic, nitpicking contrarian who can't see beyond his own upper sigmoid.

BSmack wrote:Obviously the nuance is going over your head. But when you do finally figure out what I am saying, it will be YOU that will have put the pieces together in YOUR mind. My role is that of a lens in exposing your mind to the idea and creating the optimum conditions around your so that your mind can make the discovery it needs to.

Oh, good grief!

For instance: No one sat you down and created some super-cozy condition for your mind and then said, "Go forth and discover the Pythagorean theorem." They gave you the theorem that someone else discovered and then expected you to use it. You did not discover the Pythagorean theorem, Brian.

There is no "nuance" here. You are simply being ridiculous.

BSmack wrote:Consider this. If it were all about teaching, every student would get the same test score.

Are you kidding me with this? Where are you getting this magic classroom full of children with identical abilities and attention spans?

mvscal wrote:You're all going to die. The End.

John 5:24
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.


The believer will not die.

The non-believer is already dead.

Genesis 2:17
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Romans 5:12
Wherefore, as by one man (Adam) sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned


Man is a spiritual being.
The Bible is a spiritual book centered on the spiritual world.

poptart wrote: Man is a spiritual being.

Actually we're bags of walking, talking bags of meat. That's all. You die. You rot.

I would just suggest for you to try to consider that there might be a spiritual world, mvscal.


Some background at this point:

I am a pragmatic person.
One to not jump into things, and instead one to look at things and confirm before moving ahead.
That's my nature.

I am definitely not a "religious person" at all.
My folks dragged me to church about every-other-Sunday - and I HATED it.
Worst day of the week for me, by far.
Total bore, total waste of time.

However a day came when I could not deny the spiritual world and I could not deny Christ - because it had been confirmed to me that it is real.

That is why I testify to the truth of God's Word in here.
Because I MUST testify to it.
It is the truth.

That's what this pragmatic, former church-hatin' guy is telling you.

You really ought to consider it.


We're spiritual beings.
If you look at the history of mankind, he has ALWAYS engaged himself in some way, spiritually, in some religious fashion.

Yes, because man has an innate spiritual hunger he must fill.
We are spiritual, as well as physical, beings.

But when the object of his worship is incorrect, suffering will only increase, because man is a being who must be connected to God and he must live by God's grace.

Apart from this is DEATH.
And this death is what all have as a result of coming from the seed of Adam.

God immediately promised the seed of ... the woman, who is Christ, who man must take in order to gain spiritual life.

This is being "born again," which I have been.

I live now, where in times past, I was dead man walking.
There is a BIG difference and the words that I type can not really explain it - you must experience it, to come alive.

I've seen it from both ends, mvscal - like what you see, only physical, and what I see now, that there most definitely IS a spiritual world.

I testify to it, again, because it is real.

Believe me, with my pragmatic nature, if it wasn't confirmed to me, I would NEVER be in here talking about it.

Goober McTuber wrote:You've obviously confused discovering with learning. And your role is that of a pedantic, nitpicking contrarian who can't see beyond his own upper sigmoid.

There is no confusing the two. They are one in the same. Learning can be nothing more than discovering for yourself that which is already known. Or it can be like Newton "discovering" gravity. Either way, the process of acquiring knowledge works the same.

poptart wrote: We're spiritual beings.
If you look at the history of mankind, he has ALWAYS engaged himself in some way, spiritually, in some religious fashion.

Yes, because man has an innate spiritual hunger he must fill.
We are spiritual, as well as physical, beings.

But when the object of his worship is incorrect, suffering will only increase, because man is a being who must be connected to God and he must live by God's grace.

Well said. I think the argument is that those seeking to fill a spiritual need, are really simply, lower evolved species of human or humans with fucked up brain chemistry.

Meditation, prayer, foods, lack of foods, fungus, all sorts of interesting chemical reactions in the brain alter ones perception of reality giving the appearance of "another world".

The science behind "spirituality" is quite fascinating though.

BSmack wrote:There is no confusing the two. They are one in the same. Learning can be nothing more than discovering for yourself that which is already known. Or it can be like Newton "discovering" gravity. Either way, the process of acquiring knowledge works the same.

You can go ahead and admit that you did not discover gravity, Brian.

ppanther wrote:You can go ahead and admit that you did not discover gravity, Brian.

Keep trying to pigeonhole me. It is rather amusing. But you discovered gravity and so did I. Now, do you want to ask me if I was the FIRST person to discover gravity? In that case I would have to answer no. Why? Because I am reasonably certain that others did so before me.

Why is this so hard for you to understand?

poptart wrote:I would just suggest for you to try to consider that there might be a spiritual world, mvscal.

OK. Based on what evidence? What you describe as mankind's spiritual activities are nothing more than our desire to understand the world around us and our fear of death. It is an entirely human reaction to the unknown.

There is no such thing as a "spiritual world" beyond our own.

mvscal wrote:

poptart wrote:I would just suggest for you to try to consider that there might be a spiritual world, mvscal.

OK. Based on what evidence? What you describe as mankind's spiritual activities are nothing more than our desire to understand the world around us and our fear of death. It is an entirely human reaction to the unknown.

There is no such thing as a "spiritual world" beyond our own.

In your opinion. The answers will come when we die and unfortunately I won't be able to tell you nor you me - the absolute truth.

But your opinion is respected, understood and not entirely inconceivable. If when I die I find that you are absolutely correct, I will not regret the time I spent believing in spiritual matters and considering them through meditation and prayer.

It is, for me, a crutch I need because I am crippled.

Tom In VA wrote: It is, for me, a crutch I need because I am crippled.

Are you going to start phoning people at 3AM and sing to them?

630 AM

Provide comfort to those who have to wake up for work after being awakened by the 300AM shift.

BSmack wrote:Keep trying to pigeonhole me. It is rather amusing. But you discovered gravity and so did I. Now, do you want to ask me if I was the FIRST person to discover gravity? In that case I would have to answer no. Why? Because I am reasonably certain that others did so before me.

Why is this so hard for you to understand?

I'm not trying to pigeonhole you, Brian. I'm actually quite bewildered that you think you discovered gravity. You learned about what someone else discovered and you accepted it to be true. You did not discover gravity.

The really crazy thing is that your ego is so bloated that I think you honestly don't know that you didn't discover gravity. Really, really bizarre.

I think we've entered into an imbroglio centered around semantics.

When BSmack says "discovered" he's using it to explain the instance in which one "experiences" something. Such as my first experience with gravity being the equal of me discovering gravity - for myself.

I don't know if that helped but maybe we can all discuss it @630 AM when I call.

Tom In VA wrote:When BSmack says "discovered" he's using it to explain the instance in which one "experiences" something. Such as my first experience with gravity being the equal of me discovering gravity - for myself.

Ding!

Give that man a cigar.

Except... Brian knows exactly what I meant, and is being deliberately obtuse. No mystery there.

ppanther wrote:Except... Brian knows exactly what I meant, and is being deliberately obtuse. No mystery there.

Exactly what point were you trying to make?

poptart wrote:I would just suggest for you to try to consider that there might be a spiritual world, mvscal.

mvscal wrote:OK. Based on what evidence?

The history of the Jews in the Bible shows that whenever they lost hold of the Covenent, they went into captivity.
They had serious hardship in captivity, God would help them to come back out, they would hold the Covenant once again - then lose hold of it, suffer more -- rinse, repeat ...

People of the now are in captivity, but they can't really identify why they are having hardship.
They have a vague knowing that something just isn't right - and they have many problems.
They try to improve on something, correct a situation, be more diligent, or whatever.
But this will never bring them out of the captivity they are in.

You ask for evidence of the spiritual world.
It's a fair request.

I mentioned that for me to type things out will not really explain it as evidence for you.

John 4:24
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Hebrews 11:6
But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

- God is Spirit
- We must believe that He is, and He rewards those who diligently seek Him

So I suggest this:

Seek Him and truthfully see if He gives you the spiritual evidence that I have spoken of.

Go to a quiet place.
Say, "God, I really don't see evidence of You. But I would like to know You if you are there. I'm told that I am in captivity and I do feel that things could be better, so IF Christ is really real, yes, I am willing to accept that."

Soften you heart and seek it out to see if the spiritual world is really there.

BSmack wrote:Exactly what point were you trying to make?

Give me a break, Brian. If you're not being deliberate, well then, you're just obtuse. You pick.

ppanther wrote:

BSmack wrote:Exactly what point were you trying to make?

Give me a break, Brian. If you're not being deliberate, well then, you're just obtuse. You pick.

You asked the question. Is it too much for you to articulate the point you were trying to make by asking the question? If it is, maybe you shouldn't have asked to begin with. There's no doubt you were trying to lead me into saying something that would support some point you were trying to make. Just say it.

Bri, this started when ppanther asked you ...

ppanther wrote:How much of what you believe has been discovered or revealed by you personally?

And you replied with ...

BSmack wrote:Exactly all of it.

It should be noted that she specifically said, "you personally."

You've backed off on that and indicated that you have verified those things you believed and not that you actually PERSONALLY discovered them.

You knew her point and you tried to squish away from it because she cornered you while in the midst of your own self-high-five session.

"Tart,

I am familiar with the contents of this thread. If you know what point it is that ppanther was trying to make, please state it. Otherwise, go shove a bible up your ass.

haha

She can speak for herself, but I think her point is that you do take many things on faith, and your "liberalism" somehow doesn't extend itself much toward Christians.

And ... your ego is fairly large, too. :)


But I'd rather you think about the important messages I've brought in the thread and not worry about her calling you out.

Maybe you deserved it?

poptart wrote:I think her point is that you do take many things on faith.

Not really. Although there are assumptions we all make in life, the ones I make are backed by reasoned analysis. They have nothing to do with faith.

And your "liberalism" somehow doesn't extend itself much toward Christians. And ... your ego is fairly large, too. :)

If by "large ego" you mean "doesn't buy into fairy tales spun by sheepherders 2000 years ago", you are correct.[/quote]

BSmack wrote:Not really. Although there are assumptions we all make in life, the ones I make are backed by reasoned analysis.

I'm sure you believe this to be true, Brian. So at least you have that going for you.

ppanther wrote:

BSmack wrote:Not really. Although there are assumptions we all make in life, the ones I make are backed by reasoned analysis.

I'm sure you believe this to be true, Brian. So at least you have that going for you.

The sun has risen every day of my life. Therefore I make a reasoned assumption that it will rise again tomorrow. That is what I am talking about.

So which part of human nature, did the bible get wrong ? Based on your analysis.

Tom In VA wrote:So which part of human nature, did the bible get wrong ? Based on your analysis.

WTF are you talking about? Is there a part of the 12 step program that requires you to become a babbling retard?

Okay tough guy. ppanther, as usual, had it right BObtuse.

So B_Smack thinks he'll stroll into Theology Forum and school the slack-jawed thumpers on "science 'n stuff" and ends up
losing his shit and looking like an angry idiot.

Nice work, B. You're really good at this game.

Yeah, this episode of Bri sauntering in to *THUMP* the thumpers reminds me of the recent new story I read where some "smart" guy decided he was going to shoot a pesky squirrel out of a tree in his backyard.
He blasted away, broke a big branch with his shot, and got Darwin'd in about 6 seconds flat.


:)

Tom In VA wrote:

Okay tough guy. ppanther, as usual, had it right BObtuse.

Really Tom, you think I'm playing the tough guy with you? Seriously, I don't want to fight you. Now sit down and knock back a pitcher or 10? Now we're talking.

:P

Now, what was all this rambling on about human nature?

poptart wrote:Yeah, this episode of Bri sauntering in to *THUMP* the thumpers reminds me of the recent new story I read where some "smart" guy decided he was going to shoot a pesky squirrel out of a tree in his backyard.
He blasted away, broke a big branch with his shot, and got Darwin'd in about 6 seconds flat.

Yea, you really overwhelmed me with all that non biblical, peer reviewed evidence. x10