Twist on Voltaire

Originally posted by FMF
It's a debate and discussion forum; all any of us are doing here is trading and sharing our ideas, opinions and experiences.

Thanks for the lecture. Again. Why do you feel the need to state the obvious? No relation to what I posted either.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Understand what you're saying; but if everybody agreed on a given topic, how could we be certain that it was the truth?

As others have stated, disagreements and alternative opinions are healthy as they have us reflect on and possibly modify what we believe.

For example; if everybody in a discussion agreed that the world was flat, we would feel ...[text shortened]... ibly concede that we didn't know the truth after all.

P.S The world is neither flat or round.

That depends on the definiton of world that you are using. 😏

Originally posted by josephw
Thanks for the lecture. Again. Why do you feel the need to state the obvious? No relation to what I posted either.

I don't see how it is a "lecture". You said: "Maybe the reason you find it that way is because you're always arguing against the wind. You base all your conclusions on your own rationale disregarding the possibility of Devine authority." I am acknowledging that you are stating your opinion and that you always do, just as I do.

But unless people like you see yourself as "the wind" then I do not see how I can realistically be described as "always arguing against the wind".

This Spirituality Forum is merely a venue for discussion; all any of us here are doing here ~ that includes you with your constant insistence that you know 'the real truth' ~ and it includes me, as yet unconvinced by you simply asserting it over and over again ~ all we are doing is swapping our opinions.

There are times ~ when you appear to be channeling Dasa, as JS357 put it ~ when you seem to forget what is actually going on here. You are no more or less "always arguing against the wind" than I am or anyone else is here.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Understand what you're saying; but if everybody agreed on a given topic, how could we be certain that it was the truth?

As others have stated, disagreements and alternative opinions are healthy as they have us reflect on and possibly modify what we believe.

For example; if everybody in a discussion agreed that the world was flat, we would feel ...[text shortened]... ibly concede that we didn't know the truth after all.

P.S The world is neither flat or round.

We can debate about what paint is best to use on the exterior of a house, but when it is about matters that none of us really knows anything about, like the origin of the universe, it's essential that we rely on the one that created life to tell us how life came about and how to live it.

In other words, without an objective standard of Truth about the matters of the life we're living and the world we live in we're never going to know what The Truth is about those matters, no matter how many debates we have.

Originally posted by FMF
I don't see how it is a "lecture". You said: "Maybe the reason you find it that way is because you're always arguing against the wind. You base all your conclusions on your own rationale disregarding the possibility of Devine authority." I am acknowledging that you are stating your opinion and that you always do, just as I do.

But unless people like you see ...[text shortened]... ere. You are no more or less "always arguing against the wind" than I am or anyone else is here.

It's not my opinion that you're arguing against. It's against the wind that you argue as long as you believe that everyone is merely expressing opinions.

You disregard objective truth when you state that it is only an opinion that objective truth exists. You seem to think that because you claim to have been a Christian for 28 years and then dropped out of it because you think you learned better, that you now have a basis of authority for discarding God's Word from the arena of discussion by relegating the Word of God as The authority on matters of life and living to the heap pile of opinions.

God's Word isn't an opinion, and as long as you think it is you're arguing against the wind.

Originally posted by josephw
In other words, without an objective standard of Truth about the matters of the life we're living and the world we live in we're never going to know what The Truth is about those matters, no matter how many debates we have.

If not through discovery and debate, how else can "an objective standard of Truth" be obtained and agreed upon? I don't see how one has any chance of identifying something as being "objective" unless there is some effort to reach consensus and acceptance. It is not enough for someone with your beliefs to simply declare them to be "The Truth" when you are then unable to convince people that they are anything other than your "subjective" assertions.

Originally posted by josephw
It's not my opinion that you're arguing against. It's against the wind that you argue as long as you believe that everyone is merely expressing opinions.

But just now when I said "It's a debate and discussion forum; all any of us are doing here is trading and sharing our ideas, opinions and experiences" you said "Why do you feel the need to state the obvious?" Which is to be? Was I stating the obvious, like you said, or was I mistaken? You can't have it both ways.

Originally posted by josephw

You disregard objective truth when you state that it is only an opinion that objective truth exists. You seem to think that because you claim to have been a Christian for 28 years and then dropped out of it because you think you learned better, that you now have a basis of authority for discarding God's Word from the arena of discussion by relegating the Word of God as The authority on matters of life and living to the heap pile of opinions.

I do not claim to be or have any "authority" over you or anyone else. And as I am no longer a Christian, is it really any wonder to you that your constant Christian assertions about "The Truth" do no strike me as being in the slightest bit "objective"?

Originally posted by FMF
It's a debate and discussion forum; all any of us are doing here is trading and sharing our ideas, opinions and experiences.

However, I can't help but think that some posters post in a most obnoxious and misleading way just for giggles to get someone who actually fervently believes in what they're saying to explode and hopefully self-destruct.

Please don't tell me this is never your motivation, for example. My BS detector is on alert already today.

There are those who *are* interested in "sharing ideas, opinions and experiences" but when one blatantly says whatever they think will 'set-off' the other poster just for their own amusement (even if that amusement is just trying to make the other person look like a fool), whether they really believe it or not, it throws a spanner in those works, and makes a mockery of the entire system. To then fall back on this "It's a debate and discussion forum; all any of us are doing here is trading and sharing our ideas, opinions and experiences" position is a lie of the highest order, and a further insult to those you are already circumferentially insulting.

"Forum combat" is not a valid sport, it is misanthropic and selfish, and is counter to the honest exchange of ideas. Some people here do not care what they "sound like", as long as they state their honest opinions. Others couldn't give a rat's ass about honesty, as long as they appear to be "winning". When this is your "game", don't be surprised when people eventually don't want to "play" with you. This is something most people learn in kindergarten.

Originally posted by Suzianne

However, I can't help but think that some posters post in a most obnoxious and misleading way just for giggles to get someone who actually fervently believes in what they're saying to explode and hopefully self-destruct.

Please don't tell me this is never your motivation, for example. My BS detector is on alert already today.

There are those who *are* interested in "sharing ideas, opinions and experiences" but when one blatantly says whatever they think will 'set-off' the other poster just for their own amusement (even if that amusement is just trying to make the other person look like a fool), whether they really believe it or not, it throws a spanner in those works, and makes a mockery of the entire system. To then fall back on this "It's a debate and discussion forum; all any of us are doing here is trading and sharing our ideas, opinions and experiences" position is a lie of the highest order, and a further insult to those you are already circumferentially insulting.

"Forum combat" is not a valid sport, it is misanthropic and selfish, and is counter to the honest exchange of ideas. Some people here do not care what they "sound like", as long as they state their honest opinions. Others couldn't give a rat's ass about honesty, as long as they appear to be "winning". When this is your "game", don't be surprised when people eventually don't want to "play" with you. This is something most people learn in kindergarten.

I think people get that you don't like my posts, Suzianne. But I cannot think of any "lie" I have ever told and I don't think you can point to any sequence of my posts anywhere at any time on any topic in which I was not "honestly" putting forward my opinions and ideas and engaging those of the people I disagree with head on and on-topic. If you can come up with any examples, maybe it would help.

Originally posted by FMF
I think people get that you don't like my posts, Suzianne. But I cannot think of any "lie" I have ever told and I don't think you can point to any sequence of my posts anywhere at any time on any topic in which I was not "honestly" putting forward my opinions and ideas and engaging those of the people I disagree with head on and on-topic. If you can come up with any examples, maybe it would help.

You cannot be called out on a lie if no one knows your true feelings or motivations. Others here have learned from you on this.

"On-topic". Yeah, right. I've seen you badger people for page after page after page after page without even taking a second look back at the topic. You've derailed more good topics than I can list with this nonsense. The only reason others accept this from you is that you pick your targets carefully and only attack those who are already on their way to becoming forum pariahs and therefore they actually thumb you up for these attacks. But don't think for a minute that they thumb you up for staying "on-topic". They thumb you up because you deride people with a gusto that they themselves cannot muster. Perhaps they are worried about looking like an ass. That might indeed be the end result were it anyone but you tilting at that windmill.

Don't mistake my disgust of your activities as me saying that you're not good at what you do. You are a master. You're not about to be tripped up by someone who does not subscribe to your tactics. I have no fantasies that I can defeat you at your game, in fact, I find it noxious that I have to at least make an attempt to circumvent your guile in the first place. That doesn't mean I have to like it, or remain silent about it. Silence is often seen as acceptance. I simply reject your attempts to make anyone you disagree with look like a fool. Perhaps by raising my voice above the din on this issue, others can also see what you are about.

Originally posted by Suzianne

You cannot be called out on a lie if no one knows your true feelings or motivations. Others here have learned from you on this.

"On-topic". Yeah, right. I've seen you badger people for page after page after page after page without even taking a second look back at the topic. You've derailed more good topics than I can list with this nonsense. The only reason others accept this from you is that you pick your targets carefully and only attack those who are already on their way to becoming forum pariahs and therefore they actually thumb you up for these attacks. But don't think for a minute that they thumb you up for staying "on-topic". They thumb you up because you deride people with a gusto that they themselves cannot muster. Perhaps they are worried about looking like an ass. That might indeed be the end result were it anyone but you tilting at that windmill.

Don't mistake my disgust of your activities as me saying that you're not good at what you do. You are a master. You're not about to be tripped up by someone who does not subscribe to your tactics. I have no fantasies that I can defeat you at your game, in fact, I find it noxious that I have to at least make an attempt to circumvent your guile in the first place. That doesn't mean I have to like it, or remain silent about it. Silence is often seen as acceptance. I simply reject your attempts to make anyone you disagree with look like a fool. Perhaps by raising my voice above the din on this issue, others can also see what you are about.

Suzianne, like I said, I think people get that you don't like my posts. As it happens, I think I am one of the more forthright and meet-it-head-on posters here; and I think I bring some different perspectives to the mix, in part [perhaps] to the long part of my life that I spent as a Christian. If you can come up with any examples of the "obnoxious", "misleading", "disgusting", "lies", "dishonest", "hatred", "hateful" thing or a list of the people you say look like "fools" when I debate with them, then maybe it would help to pin down what you are on about... other than the fact that you don't like my posts or my ideas.

Originally posted by FMF
If not through discovery and debate, how else can "an objective standard of Truth" be obtained and agreed upon? I don't see how one has any chance of identifying something as being "objective" unless there is some effort to reach consensus and acceptance. It is not enough for someone with your beliefs to simply declare them to be "The Truth" when you are then unable to convince people that they are anything other than your "subjective" assertions.

"If not through discovery and debate, how else can "an objective standard of Truth" be obtained and agreed upon?"

By believing. If you don't believe it you won't receive it.

Originally posted by josephw
[b]FMF: "If not through discovery and debate, how else can "an objective standard of Truth" be obtained and agreed upon?"

By believing. If you don't believe it you won't receive it.[/b]

So you contend that you believing something and you 'receiving' it somehow makes it "objective"?

Originally posted by FMF
So you contend that you believing something and you 'receiving' it somehow makes it "objective"?

That is the prime example of 'my religion is the TRUE religion, my god is the TRUE god and ALL other religions obviously worship other gods so THEY are FALSE religion while my religion is the only TRUE religion' so everything said in that religion is objective not subjective.

It's an example of what I said about scientists, they have the right to be wrong, to make mistakes.

TRUE religion is certainty. No halfway nonsense. I am CERTAIN my religion is the TRUE religion and no other religion is truth, all of them false as well as any science that gets in the way. Stay out of my way, that science is ok, dental science, ok. Geology, not a real science. Computer science, ok, evolution science, not science, it gets in my way.