Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Theism and Atheism => Topic started by: Grace of God on April 09, 2018, 08:38:35 PM
-
just wondering..
-
Probably not and no Jews either it would seem, except me, of course, and I am lapsed.
-
We had a couple o JWs in the early days....oh and a mormon of many usernames who was banned.
-
A few morons, but no Mormons, to my knowledge.
-
Probably not and no Jews either it would seem, except me, of course, and I am lapsed.
it seems funny that any forum about religion are always full of atheists... :)
-
it seems funny that any forum about religion are always full of atheists... :)
He’s not an atheist.
-
A few morons, but no Mormons, to my knowledge.
You say the sweetest things. ;D
-
I have both Mormons and JWs in my family. Reduces down the number of weddings at which I’m welcome considerably. :D
-
it seems funny that any forum about religion are always full of atheists... :)
I think that point needs some consideration.
Firstly, forums such as this have only become available in comparatively recent times.
Even those much younger than I am would probably have found that questioning religious beliefs was bad manners; when I was young, the subject was about the worst breach of good manners you could think of.
Those who were sceptics would be, therefore, cautious about bringing up the subject, especially as there were so few people prepared to do any such discussion and even fewer amongst one's neighbours,acquaintances, friends and people metsocially. .
Then, with the internet, and a rapid increase in the number of people of all ages with computers, there arrived a place for such discussions.
I always loved discussion groups, but with severe sight loss, the amazing asset of a computer with super software enabled me to look around, and, amongst others, I found the BBC message boards.
Atheists have never looked back.
-
I think that point needs some consideration.
Firstly, forums such as this have only become available in comparatively recent times.
Even those much younger than I am would probably have found that questioning religious beliefs was bad manners; when I was young, the subject was about the worst breach of good manners you could think of.
Those who were sceptics would be, therefore, cautious about bringing up the subject, especially as there were so few people prepared to do any such discussion and even fewer amongst one's neighbours,acquaintances, friends and people metsocially. .
Then, with the internet, and a rapid increase in the number of people of all ages with computers, there arrived a place for such discussions.
I always loved discussion groups, but with severe sight loss, the amazing asset of a computer with super software enabled me to look around, and, amongst others, I found the BBC message boards.
Atheists have never looked back.
Atheism is merely the lack of belief in Gods , Anything more is horrendous bad manners, cheerleading and sanctimonious bullshit.
-
just wondering..
They left due to the appalling bad manners of a few of the antitheists on this board in my opinion.
-
They left due to the appalling bad manners of a few of the antitheists on this board in my opinion.
Yer not wrong there, Jock. Some atheists on here are bloody rude (and so am I sometimes, but only reactively and after much provocation).
-
Yer not wrong there, Jock. Some atheists on here are bloody rude (and so am I sometimes, but only reactively and after much provocation).
I am of the opinion you are the rudest poster to have inhabited this forum for a very long time. ::)
-
I am of the opinion you are the rudest poster to have inhabited this forum for a very long time. ::)
I find Steve quite humble and prepared to listen.
The rudeness in antitheism is the assumption/suspicion of evil, thickness or mental incapacity of people other than themseves.
-
I find Steve quite humble and prepared to listen.
The rudeness in antitheism is the assumption/suspicion of evil, thickness or mental incapacity of people other than themseves.
[/quote
Are we talking about the same guy? ::)
-
StevenH isn't a rude person LR. I didn't see what he said when he was banned a while ago but he admits he was OTT under severe provocation. There is a lot of quite arrogant and rude provocation on here, I'm surprised you can't see it. Steven is mild by comparison & does write interesting, thoughtful posts.
-
StevenH isn't a rude person LR. I didn't see what he said when he was banned a while ago but he admits he was OTT under severe provocation. There is a lot of quite arrogant and rude provocation on here, I'm surprised you can't see it. Steven is mild by comparison & does write interesting, thoughtful posts.
I am surprised you can't see how very rude he is. But this is way off topic.
-
They left due to the appalling bad manners of a few of the antitheists on this board in my opinion.
sounds right... :)
-
I'm not blind to people's flaws LR - including my own - but speaking objectively, Steven is not as bad as many others.
Yes it is off topic but started because someone said there was considerable rudeness aimed at old posters who were JW or Mormon. I can certainly imagine that and not all of the abuse would have come from non-Christians!
It's quite significant that we have no observant Jews on the forum and only one Muslim, thankfully a robust Muslim.
-
I'm not blind to people's flaws LR - including my own - but speaking objectively, Steven is not as bad as many others.
Yes it is off topic but started because someone said there was considerable rudeness aimed at old posters who were JW or Mormon. I can certainly imagine that and not all of the abuse would have come from non-Christians!
It's quite significant that we have no observant Jews on the forum and only one Muslim, thankfully a robust Muslim.
We will have to agree to differ on this subject.
-
I am of the opinion you are the rudest poster to have inhabited this forum for a very long time. ::)
Bollocks.
-
We will have to agree to differ on this subject.
That's what you always say when you've lost the argument.
-
I have to be fair here and say that I believe most arguments are not won or lost, they result in stalemate. I see things differently to L'ilRoses & obviously believe I'm right in this case but that doesn't mean I am right. My belief is tht LR nails her colours to particular flags and won't budge from that position - we can be thankful she isn't a right wing extremist :). Probably doesn't read many posts in depth or think a great deal but I could be wrong about that.
You & she seem to have hostility between you from before I joined R&E & that colours her opinion.
Yet I'm sure she doesn't really bother you Steven. How could she?
We move on.
No JWs or Mormons here, no Jews, haven't come across many Hindus or Buddhists and only one Muslim who is thankfully a competent, articulate strong woman. It's a pity there isn't more diversity but it is what it is & not bad.
-
I'm not blind to people's flaws LR - including my own - but speaking objectively, Steven is not as bad as many others.
Yes it is off topic but started because someone said there was considerable rudeness aimed at old posters who were JW or Mormon. I can certainly imagine that and not all of the abuse would have come from non-Christians!
It's quite significant that we have no observant Jews on the forum and only one Muslim, thankfully a robust Muslim.
. . . and one Pagan and one Pantheist pagan (I think that is the descriptuion, but I would happily be corrected)
NOTE - Corrected by the person concerned, not every one who wants to take a pop!.
-
I find people at both ends of the spectrum of religious - atheist (antitheist, whatever) to be wearing and worrying. As a wise person once said:
“There’s nothing quite as frightening as someone who knows they are right.”
(It was Faraday btw)
-
I find people at both ends of the spectrum of religious - atheist (antitheist, whatever) to be wearing and worrying. As a wise person once said:
“There’s nothing quite as frightening as someone who knows they are right.”
(It was Faraday btw)
A wise saying.
We have no way of knowing with absolute certainty if there is any god out there, or an afterlife of some sort. I am of the opinion none of the gods worshipped by humans exist, but I could be very wrong, which is quite scary.
-
I find people at both ends of the spectrum of religious - atheist (antitheist, whatever) to be wearing and worrying. As a wise person once said:
“There’s nothing quite as frightening as someone who knows they are right.”
(It was Faraday btw)
I agree Trent. We may think we are right on some issues but unless it's something provable beyond all doubt, like wiring a plug (blue is neutral etc), we don't actually know & have to be open to others who have different interpretations and experiences.
Also Owl said something on previous page & I want to say sorry to Owl for not including his beliefs, (which he doesn't declare as absolute facts); in the past I was delighted he answered my questions with good explanations.
The world & people in it are interesting.
-
A little history. GoG.
This forum is a successor to a forum run by the BBC and many of the posters here posted on the BBC forum. My recollection is that the balance of believers/non-believers is pretty much the same as in BBC days but a larger overall membership - then - resulted in a variety of religious views being expressed.
One of the most remarkable series of postings came from a member calling himself Nicholas Marks. If I recall correctly he seemed to present highly idiosyncratic views close to - but not identical to - JW/Adventist beliefs. He believed that Christ was the greatest scientist that ever lived.
-
A little history. GoG.
This forum is a successor to a forum run by the BBC and many of the posters here posted on the BBC forum. My recollection is that the balance of believers/non-believers is pretty much the same as in BBC days but a larger overall membership - then - resulted in a variety of religious views being expressed.
One of the most remarkable series of postings came from a member calling himself Nicholas Marks. If I recall correctly he seemed to present highly idiosyncratic views close to - but not identical to - JW/Adventist beliefs. He believed that Christ was the greatest scientist that ever lived.
By any stretch or measure Nicholas Marks underwent by far the most disrespectful treatment from the antitheists on this board. I'm sure there are red faces as people are made to remember their treatment of him.
-
Yes, Nicholas was/is a JW, with a difference. In recent years he seems to appear once annually for a few weeks only to disappear again; he can be found though on Google+. He certainly responded to any attacks with much grace.
Christians I miss on here are.... Keturah, 2Corrie, Honey56, McGillicious, Pow Wow. TW could be impatient but he had good understanding of biblical knowledge.
Non-believers that I miss are.... Jack Knave and feelin_blue.
Lapsed Atheist was as his username describes - it would be good to see him posting again.
-
I have to be fair here and say that I believe most arguments are not won or lost, they result in stalemate.
Too damned true! Mostly with the Christians on one side and everyone else on the other!
I see things differently to L'ilRoses & obviously believe I'm right in this case but that doesn't mean I am right. My belief is tht LR nails her colours to particular flags and won't budge from that position
Just like the Christians!!
We move on.
It's a pity there isn't more diversity but it is what it is & not bad.
There might be more diversity if it were not for the tunnel-vision - there-is-only-one-true-religion - of the Cristians. There is only one Pagan and he is only here one in a while mostly because of the contempt heaped upon my beliefs by the majority of the Christians.
I opened a thread asking anyone who wished to have my beliefs explained in an attempt to reduce this unpleasant attitude to Paganism and the Craft and I think I got only one or maybe two posts on it!
Maybe the title of the Forum should be changed to The Left Wing Christian and Atheist/Agnostic Forum?
-
Too damned true! Mostly with the Christians on one side and everyone else on the other!
Just like the Christians!!
There might be more diversity if it were not for the tunnel-vision - there-is-only-one-true-religion - of the Cristians. There is only one Pagan and he is only here one in a while mostly because of the contempt heaped upon my beliefs by the majority of the Christians.
I opened a thread asking anyone who wished to have my beliefs explained in an attempt to reduce this unpleasant attitude to Paganism and the Craft and I think I got only one or maybe two posts on it!
Maybe the title of the Forum should be changed to The Left Wing Christian and Atheist/Agnostic Forum?
As far as I know there hasn't been any onslaught by the Christians on here on pagans.
The thread you opened garnered three pages not one or maybe two posts.
Pagans here on the other hand have largely joined the antitheist posse at the drop of a hat.
-
I'm sorry Owlswing feels the way he does. Early this morning I read every post on his thread on the Pagan section, it went into three pages. Was interesting.
-
I'm sorry Owlswing feels the way he does. Early this morning I read every post on his thread on the Pagan section, it went into three pages. Was interesting.
Blimey didn't you have anything better to do? ::)
-
At least the pagans set up a questions to pagan's thread.
Unlike the Atheists/antitheists....who seem to have a bit of the ''Ve ask Ze Qvestions'' attitude.
-
At least the pagans set up a questions to pagan's thread.
Unlike the Atheists/antitheists....who seem to have a bit of the ''Ve ask Ze Qvestions'' attitude.
http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=14203.msg683814#msg683814
-
http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=14203.msg683814#msg683814
Sorry. I'm wrong about atheists not setting a questions for atheists.
However the OP (Nearly Sane) and the subsequent post (Bluehillside) seek to shut down discussion IMV.
-
Blimey didn't you have anything better to do? ::)
Thank you for making my point for me
-
Sorry. I'm wrong about atheists not setting a questions for atheists.
However the OP (Nearly Sane) and the subsequent post (Bluehillside) seek to shut down discussion IMV.
Because in the sense of questions about atheism in the sense of what it comprises of - that's all there is. There is no set of beliefs similar to Owlswing's to ask questions about.
-
Blimey didn't you have anything better to do? ::)
;D It was very early this morning while I was drinking tea and thinking about getting up. It was an interesting read LR but I'm only posting about it because Owlswing said he didn't have much response - & he did.
-
Because in the sense of questions about atheism in the sense of what it comprises of - that's all there is. There is no set of beliefs similar to Owlswing's to ask questions about.
I disagree. There's naturalism, materialism, secular humanism, physicalism. get back to your hutches ism, 7 types of atheism, Reason, Logic. Atheists are being secretive as if what they do believe in is made of fine porcelain.
-
I disagree. There's naturalism, materialism, secular humanism, physicalism. get back to your hutches ism, 7 types of atheism, Reason, Logic. Atheists are being secretive as if what they do believe in is made of fine porcelain.
But those are individual atheists. It's not part of atheism. You can ask me questions but nothing I say need have any application to anyone else.
-
But those are individual atheists. It's not part of atheism. You can ask me questions but nothing I say need have any application to anyone else.
This post just piles on the sense of evasion for outsiders looking into your brotherhood.
-
I disagree. There's naturalism, materialism, secular humanism, physicalism. get back to your hutches ism, 7 types of atheism, Reason, Logic. Atheists are being secretive as if what they do believe in is made of fine porcelain.
FFS Vlad, what is it about the meaning of atheism (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/atheism) that is confusing to you?
Atheists may or may not believe in other things, like your favourite list of -isms but none of them are a part of being an atheist. Atheists may be rational, logical, and rely on evidence, or they may not believe in gods because they read it in the tea leaves or dead aunty Jane told them in a seance.
What's so hard?
-
This post just piles on the sense of evasion for outsiders looking into your brotherhood.
I don't have any brotherhood with atheists. It's a meaningless thing for the vast majority of my time. The only thing that atheists necessarily have in common is a lack of belief in gods.
-
FFS Vlad, what is it about the meaning of atheism (https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/atheism) that is confusing to you?
Atheists may or may not believe in other things, like your favourite list of -isms but none of them are a part of being an atheist. Atheists may be rational, logical, and rely on evidence, or they may not believe in gods because they read it in the tea leaves or dead aunty Jane told them in a seance.
What's so hard?
No. According to Gray there are 7 types of atheism, According to Dawkins there are 3 or 4. So who is wrong. Clue....go and look in a mirror.
-
No. According to Gray there are 7 types of atheism, According to Dawkins there are 3 or 4. So who is wrong. Clue....go and look in a mirror.
Even if either of them were right, the only common thing across such types is a lack of belief in gods. I suspect there are as many types of atheists as there are atheists
-
No. According to Gray there are 7 types of atheism, According to Dawkins there are 3 or 4. So who is wrong. Clue....go and look in a mirror.
There are probably thousands of 'types of atheist' if you set out enough additional criteria and I doubt you'd have covered them all even then - unless one of the categories was "none of the above".
There is still no atheist creed - no atheist set of beliefs. Atheists are all the people who have no belief in gods. That's it.
-
Even if either of them were right, the only common thing across such types is a lack of belief in gods. I suspect there are as many types of atheists as there are atheists
I have you down as a ''back to your hutches and shut the fuck upabout world views'' camp. It seems that suits someone who wants to takes pot shots but doesn't wish to bother with returned fire.
-
There are probably thousands of 'types of atheist' if you set out enough additional criteria and I doubt you'd have covered them all even then - unless one of the categories was "none of the above".
There is still no atheist creed - no atheist set of beliefs. Atheists are all the people who have no belief in gods. That's it.
Shut the fuck up then.
-
Shut the fuck up then.
So it's not that you don't get answers, you just don't like the answers and then seek to shut down discussion.
-
Shut the fuck up then.
Temper, temper you don't like it when others prove you to be in the wrong. ::)
-
So it's not that you don't get answers, you just don't like the answers and then seek to shut down discussion.
If you are going to knock religious prescriptions and views on the big issues I think you ought to outline what the alternative view is otherwise you just end up looking unreasonable.
What happens is ''That's crap but you can't ask me why because I'm an atheist and have no burden of proof for anything ever in my life na na na na na.
-
If you are going to knock religious prescriptions and views on the big issues I think you ought to outline what the alternative view is otherwise you just end up looking unreasonable.
What happens is ''That's crap but you can't ask me why because I'm an atheist and have no burden of proof for anything ever in my life na na na na na.
Of course I have a burden of proof for positive claims I make. It would help if you didn't just misrepresent people, It makes discussion difficult. I don't particularly knock 'religious' prescriptions as that's way too simplistic. I disagree with some religious people on some things and agree with some on others. Exactly the same as I do with atheists. I don't think that someone being a theist tells me anything much about them or what I think of them,
-
I have you down as a ''back to your hutches and shut the fuck upabout world views'' camp. It seems that suits someone who wants to takes pot shots but doesn't wish to bother with returned fire.
No. as I've covered I don't think I have anything as coherent as a world view and I suspect that very few people actually do. And I'm perfectly happy to discuss why I think that. You have to get overseeing disagreement as somehow being unwilling to talk about things. It's a misrepresentation that you use frequently and it makes it difficult to have anything approaching a discussion because I have to continually point out that you are misrepresenting me.
I have to note the irony that you are the one who has just told someone to shut the fuck up.
-
Shut the fuck up then.
Wow Vlad - you really have a problem with comprehension. Atheism is having no belief in gods - it specifies no other beliefs, it has no creed.
Think about it.
Specifically it does not specify that not believing in gods is the only belief you can hold with regard to religion.
Penny dropping?
Obviously those atheists who are bothered to post here do so for some other reason than simply being an atheist. In my case it's because I think irrational, baseless beliefs such as religion, other superstition, homeopathy, etc. should be challenged and this is one place that accommodates that.
However, I cannot speak for other atheists here. You have just as much information about what they believe as I do.
-
There are probably thousands of 'types of atheist' if you set out enough additional criteria and I doubt you'd have covered them all even then - unless one of the categories was "none of the above".
There is still no atheist creed - no atheist set of beliefs. Atheists are all the people who have no belief in gods. That's it.
To be fair, that's true of theists as well. I don't think you can really tell anything useful just because someone states they believe in god(s).
-
Of course I have a burden of proof for positive claims I make. It would help if you didn't just misrepresent people, It makes discussion difficult. I don't particularly knock 'religious' prescriptions as that's way too simplistic. I disagree with some religious people on some things and agree with some on others. Exactly the same as I do with atheists. I don't think that someone being a theist tells me anything much about them or what I think of them,
You can be an atheist but what is often proposed is Vacuumism as if what religion covers can be excised without expansion into the space. As Gray points out atheists find some system or means of reinflating the space left by religion and unsurprisingly it begins very much to look like religion hence Dawkins evangelicalism, Pinker's inexorable progress, enlightenement, secular humanisms good bloke theory, self created and eternal unconscious universes, mathematical universes and the like.
-
You can be an atheist but what is often proposed is Vacuumism as if what religion covers can be excised without expansion into the space. As Gray points out atheists find some system or means of reinflating the space left by religion and unsurprisingly it begins very much to look like religion hence Dawkins evangelicalism, Pinker's inexorable progress, enlightenement, secular humanisms good bloke theory, self created and eternal unconscious universes, mathematical universes and the like.
You are going down a false dichotomy route here, The 'opposite' of atheist is theist, not religious, There are atheists who are religious and theists who are not.
-
it seems funny that any forum about religion are always full of atheists... :)
You're right GoG, in my case I find it fascinating, that people really still do hold on to such ancient, more or less bronze age, so obviously man made, magical, mystical, superstition based, nonsensical ideas.
Some of the real devotees of these ideas amaze me with some of the stuff they come out with and most of the ideas I read I feel have to be challenged mainly due to the complete absence, zero amount of viable evidence they have that would back their beliefs/ideas up.
Anyway that's my main reason for looking at the pages where there are still people that hold these rather strange beliefs/ideas about how they think the world works.
I would add that most people that hold these, strange to me, beliefs/ideas, the ones I mix with in my general life are usually very pleasant affable people just as I'm sure those on the forum are much the same, it is only the ideas I criticise here and I'm sure most of the believers we so called atheists challenge here are generally good, decent people.
Regards ippy
-
To be fair, that's true of theists as well.
The bare fact of theism - yes, of course. There are however (at least in theory) ready-made categories of theist (religion, denomination, etc.) that an individual might choose to identify with.
I don't think you can really tell anything useful just because someone states they believe in god(s).
Depends how 'useful' you find that bit of information, I guess...
-
The bare fact of theism - yes, of course. There are however (at least in theory) ready-made categories of theist (religion, denomination, etc.) that an individual might choose to identify with.
Depends how 'useful' you find that bit of information, I guess...
Indeed there are categories but that is surely as Vlad has been raising true about atheists if we just want to use crude classification classifications?
-
Indeed there are categories but that is surely as Vlad has been raising true about atheists if we just want to use crude classification classifications?
Possibly but there are (AFAIK) no atheist equivalents to religions/denominations that have 'doctrines' you can sign up to (with the possible exception of humanism - I don't know enough about it to be sure). Vlad mentioned seven types of atheism and I have no idea what they are. IIRC Dawkins' categories are just about how strong your disbelief is.
In any event, the actual point raised by Vlad was about atheist questions and answers - which simply isn't feasible for the reasons stated by yourself here: Questions for atheists (http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=14203.0).
-
Possibly but there are (AFAIK) no atheist equivalents to religions/denominations that have 'doctrines' you can sign up to (with the possible exception of humanism - I don't know enough about it to be sure). Vlad mentioned seven types of atheism and I have no idea what they are. IIRC Dawkins' categories are just about how strong your disbelief is.
In any event, the actual point raised by Vlad was about atheist questions and answers - which simply isn't feasible for the reasons stated by yourself here: Questions for atheists (http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=14203.0).
Again though you can be a theist and not sign up to doctrines, or indeed sign up to some categorisation and not accept all the doctrines. And you can be atheist and sign up to religions. The bare fact of I have belief in god(s)/ I lack belief is useless as an assumption about anything beyond that.
The difference is that as one is a positive claim it more easily generates questions e.g. What do you mean by god(s) which apply for the theist, which don't for an atheist.
ETA: The 7 types is a reference to John Gray's book that I started the following thread on - the review on the thread doesn't make clear what they arw. Glad has taken it as some form of useful classification action without having read the book.
http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=15481.0
-
;D It was very early this morning while I was drinking tea and thinking about getting up. It was an interesting read LR but I'm only posting about it because Owlswing said he didn't have much response - & he did.
I have just re-read the thread myself and three pages is actually two pages and one [post and most of the is a discussion between three people, myself, Rhiannon and Shaker.
Most of the rest was not duscussing Paganism as a religious belief but questioning the 'magic' parts of ritual rathger than the deities in which we believe and our basis for that belief.
In all honesty I expected nothing else when I opened the thread so I can hardly say that, at the time, I was disppointed.
Re-reading has however resurrected my respect and affection for the Shaker whom I miss greatly on this forum.
-
The difference is that as one is a positive claim it more easily generates questions e.g. What do you mean by god(s) which apply for the theist, which don't for an atheist.
Yes, that is the fundamental difference but it's the collective nature of many theist beliefs that makes "questions for..." type topics possible, which is what prompted this discussion.
-
By any stretch or measure Nicholas Marks underwent by far the most disrespectful treatment from the antitheists on this board. I'm sure there are red faces as people are made to remember their treatment of him.
Yes, Nicholas was/is a JW, with a difference. In recent years he seems to appear once annually for a few weeks only to disappear again; he can be found though on Google+. He certainly responded to any attacks with much grace.
There are people on this forum who could represent Great Britain at the Olympic Games if Derailing were a competitive event.
Anyway, back to Sparky (presumed JW).
Was not the last time we saw him was when he was predicting immediate planetary chaos because of the approach of the planet Nibiru? Well, it is impossible to know whether Nibiru is out there because the sky seems permanently covered by cloud.
I always had a suspicion that Nicholas was a very highly skilled WUM. How else to describe his accurate righteousness?
-
NM hasn't looked in since December, maybe he has had his say? :D
-
I have just re-read the thread myself and three pages is actually two pages and one [post and most of the is a discussion between three people, myself, Rhiannon and Shaker.
Most of the rest was not duscussing Paganism as a religious belief but questioning the 'magic' parts of ritual rathger than the deities in which we believe and our basis for that belief.
In all honesty I expected nothing else when I opened the thread so I can hardly say that, at the time, I was disppointed.
Re-reading has however resurrected my respect and affection for the Shaker whom I miss greatly on this forum.
It might be that Robbie is referring to the separate thread on the FSA - I don't think it's clear
-
Re-reading has however resurrected my respect and affection for the Shaker whom I miss greatly on this forum.
I miss Shaker too, but I think he will be back. He's had other real life things to deal with lately.
-
I miss Shaker too, but I think he will be back. He's had other real life things to deal with lately.
Hi Trent!
Is your comment a nice polite way of saying that most of what goes on here is not real?
It does sometimes seem to swim very close to the borders of high fantasy and I do not, by that, mean Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings although it is sometimes just as entertaining.
-
Outing myself as the pantheistic pagan here, although as GoG is gone I guess that matters not.
I always thought NickMarks was treated well here. With bafflement sometimes. But I loved his posts, even if I didn’t have the first clue what he was on about. The images conjured up by lines like ‘I will have to test this out in my laboratory’...
-
Outing myself as the pantheistic pagan here, although as GoG is gone I guess that matters not.
I always thought NickMarks was treated well here. With bafflement sometimes. But I loved his posts, even if I didn’t have the first clue what he was on about. The images conjured up by lines like ‘I will have to test this out in my laboratory’...
I was hoping that it would not be necessary for you to be outed, by yourself or anu other, when I wrote the 'pantheist comment.
I trust you are still in contact with the Shaker and that he is well - please pass on to him my very best wishes - I don't know about others but he is, by me, sorely missed.
-
I was hoping that it would not be necessary for you to be outed, by yourself or anu other, when I wrote the 'pantheist comment.
I trust you are still in contact with the Shaker and that he is well - please pass on to him my very best wishes - I don't know about others but he is, by me, sorely missed.
I don’t mind outing myself, or anyone else doing it, I’m happy with what I am. :)
I’ll pass on your good wishes.
-
Shaker sends his best to everyone here. :)
-
Shaker sends his best to everyone here. :)
Thanks Lady Rhi.
-
The thread I was referring to was 'Questions on pagan beliefs - from topic from historical Jesus thread', on Pagan topic.
Sorry you were disappointed with the lack of interest Owlswing. I was interested in what you had to say & also what Rhiannon said on the thread which was very descriptive. There are many threads that don't have a lot of response though, doesn't mean people don't read them.
-
The thread I was referring to was 'Questions on pagan beliefs - from topic from historical Jesus thread', on Pagan topic.
Sorry you were disappointed with the lack of interest Owlswing. I was interested in what you had to say & also what Rhiannon said on the thread which was very descriptive. There are many threads that don't have a lot of response though, doesn't mean people don't read them.
This is probably going to be about 12,000 miles off topic (but it won't be the first time)!
When you post a thread that invites questions from people who have demonstrated, in abundance, that they haven't got a bloody clue what a subject involves it is not the number of readers that makes the posting worthwhile.
As has be stated there are only two Pagans on this Forum and they follow paths that are about as alike as Trump's and Putin's politics and anyone can read Tarot yopu do not have to be a Pagan to do it.
Anyway, the post is now ancient history so unlike Christ there is going to be no resurrection., but I thnk you for your positive comments, they are most welcome.
-
I think Trump & Putin's respective paths are a lot more similar than you are implying ;)
But I get your drift.
-
just wondering..
Anyone who is a christian is a Jew,. BECAUSE the messiah is Jewish and the facts are the last covenant for all whom God accepts.
-
Grace of God no doubt meant observant Jews who do not accept Christ as Messiah.
-
Anyone who is a Christian is a Jew,. BECAUSE the messiah is Jewish and the facts are the last covenant for all whom God accepts.
Anyone who is a Christian could be a Jew,. BECAUSE the, so called, messiah was supposed to have been Jewish and the story is that the last covenant for all whom this supposed God accepts, so a lot of people believe.
Sass, I'm sure the adjustments I've made, above, is nearer to what you really meant, only there's no evidence to be had that could support things you wrote, as though they were facts.
Regards ippy
-
There are people called "Messianic Jews" (& "Jews for Jesus"),who converted to Christianity from Judaism but retain many Jewish traditions. Jews who are not Messianic say they are not Jews!
I stay out of all that, never met one & if I did I doubt we'd talk religion.
However I'm pretty sure GofG (who has disappeared, I think he/she was a WUM) was not talking about 'Messianic Jews' but observant/Orthodox Jews.
(Btw Sassy good to see you, you've not been around for a while. Hope you & family are OK.)