Today's Articles

  • Requiem

    Question:

    I have good, reliable reason to believe that Michelle is not lurking to see who replies to her "I’m going away" thread.  She’s really gone.  That’s my main reason for not replying to her; she isn’t here to read my reply. Some of you weren’t around in years past to read Michelle’s beautiful posts born of torment.  She was a master of lyricism created by personal pain, which might be the way all great poetry is created, and some of her posts were brilliant pieces of writing–far better than anything I’ve ever done. It’s selfish to think about these things, but she was an extremely valuable contributor to this newsgroup, and most of us got great benefit from reading her posts and exchanging messages with her.  That’s one reason I regret her absence.  I also think that remaining here would have been of benefit to her, but she didn’t see it that way. So I bid her a fond, belated goodbye, and wish that she may find fulfilment in whatever activities she engages in off the NG. -:(TT):-

    Response:

    I didn’t see her leave. She always comes back at some point. She is one heck of a lurker. She must have caught an episode of "Super Nanny" on the telly, and rethunk her posting frequencies.

    Response:

    No comments Wicca

  • Something funny started happening…

    Question:

    You need to go ahead and pick up the phone only long enough to say "I wish no further contact with you or any other member of the group."  and hang up. Then you must not initiate ANY contact, nor respond to any attempts by them to contact you. No NG rants, no email BS, nothing. If they call you, record it on your answering machine. If they email you, save them without replying. If the harassment contiues, you have that as evidence to use in court to get restraining orders or whatever you feel is warranted.

    That would be the best course of action.

    Response:

    ….after I last posted on the ritual abuse thread. SOMEONE from the old coven started calling me. At least 6 times. Never leaving a message and calling here in clusters. SUE JOHNSON and your agents (I don’t think she would do this unless she was asked to) I’m no longer into your brand of Wicca so LEAVE ME ALONE! If I get one more call from you (or your agents) I will call the police. I WILL NOT ANSWER THE PHONE. Get it WOMAN??

    Response:

    You need to go ahead and pick up the phone only long enough to say "I wish no further contact with you or any other member of the group."  and hang up. Then you must not initiate ANY contact, nor respond to any attempts by them to contact you. No NG rants, no email BS, nothing. If they call you, record it on your answering machine. If they email you, save them without replying. If the harassment contiues, you have that as evidence to use in court to get restraining orders or whatever you feel is warranted.

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – ….after I last posted on the ritual abuse thread. SOMEONE from the old coven started calling me. At least 6 times. Never leaving a message and calling here in clusters. SUE JOHNSON and your agents (I don’t think she would do this unless she was asked to) I’m no longer into your brand of Wicca so LEAVE ME ALONE! If I get one more call from you (or your agents) I will call the police. I WILL NOT ANSWER THE PHONE. Get it WOMAN??

    Response:

    ….after I last posted on the ritual abuse thread. SOMEONE from the old coven started calling me. At least 6 times. Never leaving a message and calling here in clusters. SUE JOHNSON and your agents (I don’t think she would do this unless she was asked to) I’m no longer into your brand of Wicca so LEAVE ME ALONE! If I get one more call from you (or your agents) I will call the police. I WILL NOT ANSWER THE PHONE. Get it WOMAN??

    Do like Rhyannon says. I used to work in the legal field for many years. One threat is all it takes for a restraining order. They violate it, BAM they go to jail. I think that should get your message across. rainey — Your impossible ego fuck is like a Megalomaniacal tab on my tongue You fuckin’ touch me I will rip you apart I’ll reach in and take a bite out of that Shit you call a heart… I don’t mind being ogled, ridiculed Made to feel miniscule If you consider the source, it’s kinda pitiful The only thing you really know about me is… …that’s all you’ll ever know ~~~~~S.k.

    Response:

    No comments Wicca

  • any doityourself mind machines

    Question:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The following was sent to the abuse address. If I find out who you are you will be summoned to a court of proper jurisdiction and suited for theft of identity, injury to character and intentional infliction of emotional distress. I will seek to obtain your property and assets to within one cent of unjust enrichment. Ask them to stop. If you provide their identity I will gladly sue them for theft of identity. Thank you You’re arguing with a ‘bot, and looking quite ridiculous in the process. You are responding to a piece of software designed to flood news.admin.net-abuse.email with off-topic posts. Most of these forgeries have follow-ups set to news.admin.net-abuse.email, which is where your silly legal threats appeared. Please stop replying, as you are only helping this Net abuser disrupt news.admin.net-abuse.email. — Kevin S. Wilson Tech Writer at a university somewhere in Idaho "When you can’t do something completely impractical and intrinsically useless *yourself*, you go get the Kibologists to do it for you." –J. Furr BTD: Obviously, Mr. Kevin S. Wilson the aforesaid message or yours cannot be liberally and reasonably read as your  attempt to make my day more pleasant and agreeable. This has been duly noted. quit yer whining ya stupid prick.  first you post sick recipes and now this !

    BTD: You are a liar and a coward.

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The following was sent to the abuse address. I did not write the following post that is falsely attributed to me and if I find out who did you will be summoned to a court of proper jurisdiction in accordance with the supreme law of the land to answer my declaration for damages resulting from your theft of my identity, injury to my character and the intentional infliction of emotional distress. I will seek to obtain your property and assets as security for said damages which I shall seek to within one cent of unjust enrichment. Ask them to stop. If you provide their identity I will gladly sue them for theft of identity. Thank you Path: twister.nyroc.rr.com!news-rtr.nyroc.rr.com!news-east.rr.com!news.rr.com!n e w s feed.telusplanet.net!newsfeed2.telusplanet.net!newsfeed.telus.net!news.gl o r b .com!tdsnet-transit!newspeer.tds.net!news.doit.wisc.edu!news-out.nyroc.rr . c o m!twister.nyroc.rr.com.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail Newsgroups: alt.magick,alt.religion.wicca,alt.philosophy,alt.religion.gnostic,alt.dre a m s Followup-To: news.admin.net-abuse.email Organization: Road Runner Lines: 49 NNTP-Posting-Host: 146.151.25.37 X-Trace: news.doit.wisc.edu 1104220755 16844 146.151.25.37 (28 Dec 2004 07:59:15 GMT) Xref: news-rtr.nyroc.rr.com alt.magick:1441887

    alt.religion.wicca:1929409 – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – alt.philosophy:1251769 alt.religion.gnostic:1063857 alt.dreams:1104159 pepper, celery

    No comments Wicca

  • it's coming

    Question:

    Rep. Ernie "show me your tax returns" Istook may be a candidate for DeLay’s position. I’m sure a lot of other repubs will want it too. But none of them will be as effective as DeLay, and we’re about to see the rift in the Republican party start to really open up.    I think that something similar will happen with the Democratic Party, if on a smaller scale. You can also look at the number of people that simply don’t vote for more participants into a third party system.

    There is indeed a shake – up due there too, and I hope they make a thorough job of it. Young up n’ comers like Obama and Patrick Rose need to get their asses out into the fray on national and local levels, and the DNC needs to reorganize and re – energize. The whining, fearful uber PC morons are what dragged us down, we need someone to get the angry dems united and mobilized! Dean! "YEEEEARGH!!!" – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Be.    Wintershard    www.Alt-Religion-Wicca.com

    Response:

    don’t let the criminals in GOP leadership protection act fool you… DeLay’s days are numbered. Yesterday the DA, Ronnie Earle, got one of DeLay’s major campaign contributors to cooperate with the investigation.

    Oh, and the lie – yers for De Lay’s cronies were SUPER pissed! The whining and moaning and gnashing of teeth was delightful to behold on the front page of  yesterday’s Statesman. Soon Mike Craddick (speaker of the Texas house of Representatives) will be indicted. And after him, the third grand jury will be formed – to indict DeLay.

    Fingers crossed!! Let it be, let it be, let it be! _< The rule to protect DeLay’s leadership position was mainly to scare these corporations, and try and prevent them from giving in.

    Intimidation and threats are De Lay’s MO. Apparently, they were more worried about the criminal charges against their corporations – as they should be. I’m sure a few people have noticed Newt Gingrich speaking to the media lately… Why, you ask? Because DeLay ousted Gingrich, with the help of some extremely right-wing Repubs, over Gingrich not fighting government

    spending. Oooh, didn’t know that. I have a verra hard time mustering sympathy for scummy Newt, but I wish him success in his endeavors should they involve comeuppance for the "hammer". – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – DeLay has, of course, made a career out of supporting what he got Gingrich ousted for doing. It was nothing more than a power grab, using fools that should, by their own politics, be DeLay’s own enemies (and a few of them are now). DeLay has been a horrible, corrupt, and unfortunately, effective, leader for the Republicans. Hastert has no real experience forcing Repubs to toe the party line, and DeLay has always been the person that Bush goes to when he wants something to go through congress. Rep. Ernie "show me your tax returns" Istook may be a candidate for DeLay’s position. I’m sure a lot of other repubs will want it too. But none of them will be as effective as DeLay, and we’re about to see the rift in the Republican party start to really open up.

    hee hee hee, I know! It’s begun here, too! De lay’s state – level cronies are feeling the heat leveled by their fellow rethugs. It’ll be soon. By April or May I suspect the Repubs will be so busy fighting each other, we may even be granted a temporary stay on the looting of our country. Mostly over who gets DeLay’s position.

    Vultures. For now, though, I hope the people of Texas appreciate the service that’s being done to them by indicting the hopelessly corrupt Mike Craddick.

    Hehehehe, we love our Ronnie Earle. He’s a fair man, out there righting wrongs. He’s also gone after fellow Democrats in years past, when they were misbehaving. So no matter what the rethugs whine, it is not politically motivated, it’s a matter of justice. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – - theoneflasehaddock

    Response:

    There is indeed a shake – up due there too, and I hope they make a thorough job of it. Young up n’ comers like Obama and Patrick Rose need to get their asses out into the fray on national and local levels, and the DNC needs to reorganize and re – energize. The whining, fearful uber PC morons are what dragged us down, we need someone to get the angry dems united and mobilized! Dean! "YEEEEARGH!!!"

       It can definitely be said that both parties need to be more dynamic than they are. I’m hoping that the "new blood" freshens things up a bit. I would truly enjoy seeing three major parties in the US, but can settle on two distinct ones for at least the beginning ;) . Be.    Wintershard    www.Alt-Religion-Wicca.com

    Response:

    don’t let the criminals in GOP leadership protection act fool you… DeLay’s days are numbered. Yesterday the DA, Ronnie Earle, got one of DeLay’s major campaign contributors to cooperate with the investigation. Soon Mike Craddick (speaker of the Texas house of Representatives) will be indicted. And after him, the third grand jury will be formed – to indict DeLay. The rule to protect DeLay’s leadership position was mainly to scare these corporations, and try and prevent them from giving in. Apparently, they were more worried about the criminal charges against their corporations – as they should be. I’m sure a few people have noticed Newt Gingrich speaking to the media lately… Why, you ask? Because DeLay ousted Gingrich, with the help of some extremely right-wing Repubs, over Gingrich not fighting government spending. DeLay has, of course, made a career out of supporting what he got Gingrich ousted for doing. It was nothing more than a power grab, using fools that should, by their own politics, be DeLay’s own enemies (and a few of them are now). DeLay has been a horrible, corrupt, and unfortunately, effective, leader for the Republicans. Hastert has no real experience forcing Repubs to toe the party line, and DeLay has always been the person that Bush goes to when he wants something to go through congress. Rep. Ernie "show me your tax returns" Istook may be a candidate for DeLay’s position. I’m sure a lot of other repubs will want it too. But none of them will be as effective as DeLay, and we’re about to see the rift in the Republican party start to really open up. It’ll be soon. By April or May I suspect the Repubs will be so busy fighting each other, we may even be granted a temporary stay on the looting of our country. Mostly over who gets DeLay’s position. For now, though, I hope the people of Texas appreciate the service that’s being done to them by indicting the hopelessly corrupt Mike Craddick. – theoneflasehaddock

    Response:

    Rep. Ernie "show me your tax returns" Istook may be a candidate for DeLay’s position. I’m sure a lot of other repubs will want it too. But none of them will be as effective as DeLay, and we’re about to see the rift in the Republican party start to really open up.

       I think that something similar will happen with the Democratic Party, if on a smaller scale. You can also look at the number of people that simply don’t vote for more participants into a third party system. Be.    Wintershard    www.Alt-Religion-Wicca.com

    Response:

    Fold your ring finger under your thumb. Insert the pinky into the back of her and your middle and index fingers into the front of her. Move your arm back and forth just a little. It’s magick. Do not pick your nose with your pinky. Do not poke a pie with your pinky. Proceed to the sink and wash it with hot water and soap.

    Response:

    Fold your ring finger under your thumb. Insert the pinky into the back of her and your middle and index fingers into the front of her. Move your arm back and forth just a little. It’s magick. Do not pick your nose with your pinky. Do not poke a pie with your pinky. Proceed to the sink and wash it with hot water and soap.

    I was sitting here innocently visualizing what you were saying, poking a girl in her back with your pinky, etc, and didn’t get what you were saying until you shocked me with the last comment. You used such innocent words, and yet I still have such graphic details in my mind, 2 hours later. I was there many, poking that girl. Your posts should have warning comments on the top like we used to have in computer science! **              Warning                       ** ** Picking your nose and pie with a poo pinky ** **        Graphics written by ren             ** **              Grade 9                       **

    Response:

    No comments Wicca

  • Emotions (was about the internet and pagans)

    Question:

    Every emotion can be described as an experience. It’s an interesting question as to whether it’s more accurate to describe anger as experiencing the state of anger, or some intrinsic part of the anger itself.

    3 times Going further, is there something about anger that we can remove from the state in order to not make it still be anger? Or is it intrinsic in the state of being?

    2 times 5 times you mentioned anger in 4 sentences.  do you need some counseling because I am available 24/7

    Response:

    - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Every emotion can be described as an experience. It’s an interesting question as to whether it’s more accurate to describe anger as experiencing the state of anger, or some intrinsic part of the anger itself. 3 times Going further, is there something about anger that we can remove from the state in order to not make it still be anger? Or is it intrinsic in the state of being? 2 times 5 times you mentioned anger in 4 sentences.  do you need some counseling because I am available 24/7

    Considering the discussion was about emotion, I don’t think it’s inappropriate. However, originally I had sadness in some of those places, and realized that since I was replying to a statement that made reference to ‘unhappy’ as being a state, I thought it would be more appropriate to give more contrast. Regardless, I am interesting in hearing whether you would have considered it a pattern if I had used ‘happy’ in all 5 places?

    Response:

    - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – True. Asked another way, then. What causes emotions to be? I’m going to have to ask for clarification, because this is such an important question, and because of it’s importance, it needs to be answered in a precise manner, so as not to create circular definitions and whatnot. I’m just warning you ahead of time, so that you don’t take this as me avoiding the question entirely. I will answer it, when I understand exactly what you’re asking.    No, the way that you’ve explained your reasoning seems quite natural to me. I wouldn’t take it as you avoiding it in this circumstance. Given your exmaple: Suppose Jack feels angry.    I would be asking what it is about Jack that allows him to feel this emotion, and how that can be affected to make him start feeling that emotion.

    Imagine the set of all things that you can do in the next moment. Let’s call this A. Now Imagine the set of all things that you can think of doing in the next moment, and call this B. Now imagine a set C, corresponding to the utility of doing each thing in B. Ie. How much you’d like to do everything in B. Now having a change in an emotional state alters what constitutes B, and alters the associations between set B and C. So what is intrinsic to the emotions in this case? First, you’d need to be able to consider what choices you have (an ability to discover elements of A and place them in B). Second, you’d need to consider how much you want to do things (evaluate the choices). And lastly, you’d need a function to change what B consists of, and it’s mappings to C. Now if you consider emotions to be the state a person is in, ie. the whole picture, then there you have it. If you consider an emotion to just be the function thing, then you have just that. The thing is, we always have a function that maps from B to C. We’re emotional creatures, and there is not a time when we are unemotional. Not ever. Things like extreme rage are characterized by a more drastic change of the mapping. So what is it about us that allows us to have emotions and formulate this function? The ability to see and the ability to remember. That’s it. And how can you make someone feel a particular emotion? That all depends on the emotion, and the person. Emotions are really just umbrella terms anyway. We don’t really know what a person is thinking, so we have to judge based on their actions. Slamming a door is considered anger, for instance.    In essence, what do we mean when we say that emotions – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – are "felt," and how can they be triggered and interpreted differently depending on the person in question?    As for your last choice: Are you asking what is anger. What does it mean to feel anything, for that matter. When I say ‘I am unhappy’, what does that mean?    I’m going to leave that for another discussion, as the definitions of the different emotions and their degrees changes very little of what I’m curious about above. Be.    Wintershard    www.Alt-Religion-Wicca.com

    Response:

    I want to apologize ahead of time for the previous response to this message. I started it, started getting bored. Did something else, then just decided to send it, because it was getting tedious. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –   I would be asking what it is about Jack that allows him to feel this emotion, and how that can be affected to make him start feeling that emotion. Imagine the set of all things that you can do in the next moment. Let’s call this A. Now Imagine the set of all things that you can think of doing in the next moment, and call this B. Now imagine a set C, corresponding to the utility of doing each thing in B. Ie. How much you’d like to do everything in B. Now having a change in an emotional state alters what constitutes B, and alters the associations between set B and C. So what is intrinsic to the emotions in this case? First, you’d need to be able to consider what choices you have (an ability to discover elements of A and place them in B). Second, you’d need to consider how much you want to do things (evaluate the choices). And lastly, you’d need a function to change what B consists of, and it’s mappings to C. Now if you consider emotions to be the state a person is in, ie. the whole picture, then there you have it. If you consider an emotion to just be the function thing, then you have just that. The thing is, we always have a function that maps from B to C. We’re emotional creatures, and there is not a time when we are unemotional. Not ever.    Given this, you are defining emotion to be the actual devide which prioritizes each possible action of B into C. What do you have for the act of reasoning? Do you see it as separate, or combined with emotion?

    Reasoning means so many different things that categorizing it is essentially meaningless. There is a facility in a brain that allows people to perform mechanical processes based on set rules and axioms. This is commonly called ‘logic’, and I find it quite likely that it may be due to the physical properties of the universe and the fact that the brain is in fact a mechanical thing. Things like extreme rage are characterized by a more drastic change of the mapping. So what is it about us that allows us to have emotions and formulate this function? The ability to see and the ability to remember. That’s it.    I have had similar thoughts on this before: those things which make us sad remind us of moments when we lost something.

    Losing something isn’t the only thing that makes people sad. However, based on loss resulting in sadness, it is common from a goal perspective to view loss as a thwarting of some particular objective, thus diminishing the desirability of a lot of things. Often people are sad about something that they’ve never had. Or something that they cannot get rid of.   However, how can you explain the original moment which all of these memories are based off of?

    I don’t really know what you’re talking about, here. I’m guessing you got the impression that I was talking about certain root emotions and that all emotions of that type in some way refer to that root emotion. This was not my intent. You may, personally, be viewing loss as the classifying parameter for sadness, and anything that you consider to make you sad has to remind you of a loss. Is it societal conditioning for a certain response, or something entirely different?

    Some people can lose things and not be sad. It all depends on what is lost, and how that thing fits into our decisions. If it plays no role, it probably isn’t a big deal. So it’s both, insomuch as society shapes your wants, and not, insomuch that things have value in achieving something (like a knife, in cutting a rope). And how can you make someone feel a particular emotion? That all depends on the emotion, and the person. Emotions are really just umbrella terms anyway. We don’t really know what a person is thinking, so we have to judge based on their actions. Slamming a door is considered anger, for instance.    Stating that emotions are labels used for groups of actions is too simplistic, in my opinion.

    I’m not saying that people use them for groups of actions. I’m saying that we don’t actually know how someone is feeling, so we label groups of actions as being representative of a certain emotional state. Emotions are labels to categorize a certain set of functions that map from B to C that have some similarity among them. Different states of emotions have shown quite physical effects (such as hormonal change) which cannot be ascribed as an action to be measured casually.

    That’s complete and utter nonsense. A person is being emotional all the time, and is always feeling emotions. All that their studies show is that sometimes when people say that they’re experiencing an emotion, they measure certain physical changes. Or that in some cases, when exposed to a certain stimulus, they have certain physical changes. And it is unlikely in these cases that they’re actually collecting enough information for it to be useful. For instance, they are likely not seeing enough different cases of anger in enough different people in order to determine a direct relationship between the hormone and the emotion. Of course, the cases that I find most fun, are where they actually measure the emotion using a physical change in the body, and then report a connection with some other physical change. See, what these ‘psychologists’ don’t realize is that they just left their field, and entered entirely into physiology (which they probably knew, and likely thought they were qualified to do). The equating of hormone 1 to emotion in the first fact, however, is likely a way to garner press. Whenever I read about psychological results in anything, I completely disregard their findings if they don’t detail their protocols. And generally disregard it afterwards (in the off chance that they provide those as well), due to flawed methodology and whatnot. While it’s really not something that should be done, it’s something I’ve experienced so frequently that I can only conclude that psychologists, in general, are not qualified to perform psychological experiments, because they’re too ignorant of science (it does happen), or they’re too ignorant of statistics (I’ve heard it’s known to not be true in all cases, but alas, that’s just a rumour).    On the other end of the conversation is the fact that one person’s smile and hug might mean happy, while another’s might mean fear. Again, to base it off of action alone isn’t what I would consider.

    That’s a good example of my point, in that a person doesn’t really know a person’s emotions. And that if two people did the same thing, it may not mean the same for both, and thus thinking that they’re happy because of hugging might be foolish.

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –    I would be asking what it is about Jack that allows him to feel this emotion, and how that can be affected to make him start feeling that emotion. Imagine the set of all things that you can do in the next moment. Let’s call this A. Now Imagine the set of all things that you can think of doing in the next moment, and call this B. Now imagine a set C, corresponding to the utility of doing each thing in B. Ie. How much you’d like to do everything in B. Now having a change in an emotional state alters what constitutes B, and alters the associations between set B and C. So what is intrinsic to the emotions in this case? First, you’d need to be able to consider what choices you have (an ability to discover elements of A and place them in B). Second, you’d need to consider how much you want to do things (evaluate the choices). And lastly, you’d need a function to change what B consists of, and it’s mappings to C. Now if you consider emotions to be the state a person is in, ie. the whole picture, then there you have it. If you consider an emotion to just be the function thing, then you have just that. The thing is, we always have a function that maps from B to C. We’re emotional creatures, and there is not a time when we are unemotional. Not ever.

       Given this, you are defining emotion to be the actual devide which prioritizes each possible action of B into C. What do you have for the act of reasoning? Do you see it as separate, or combined with emotion? Things like extreme rage are characterized by a more drastic change of the mapping. So what is it about us that allows us to have emotions and formulate this function? The ability to see and the ability to remember. That’s it.

       I have had similar thoughts on this before: those things which make us sad remind us of moments when we lost something. However, how can you explain the original moment which all of these memories are based off of? Is it societal conditioning for a certain response, or something entirely different? And how can you make someone feel a particular emotion? That all depends on the emotion, and the person. Emotions are really just umbrella terms anyway. We don’t really know what a person is thinking, so we have to judge based on their actions. Slamming a door is considered anger, for instance.

       Stating that emotions are labels used for groups of actions is too simplistic, in my opinion. Different states of emotions have shown quite physical effects (such as hormonal change) which cannot be ascribed as an action to be measured casually.    On the other end of the conversation is the fact that one person’s smile and hug might mean happy, while another’s might mean fear. Again, to base it off of action alone isn’t what I would consider. Be.    Wintershard    www.Alt-Religion-Wicca.com

    Response:

     I would be asking what it is about Jack that allows him to feel this emotion, and how that can be affected to make him start feeling that emotion.  In essence, what do we mean when we say that emotions are "felt," and how can they be triggered and interpreted differently depending on the person in question? the human brain. everyone is genetically different, everyone feels things differently. you could sit, for example, 100 people in one room and have them look at one object. each would see it differently, depending on where they were in relation to the object, light hitting the object or the lack thereof(shade) etc etc. emotions are ruled by our a certain part of the brain. how do we know this? CAT scans, for one:) :

    Imaging of the brains is actually quite unreliable. For one, it has been the case in some situations where they have not investigated a large enough sample (often because the equipment is expensive). So they may make statements based on a small group of individuals and while it may be significant in that group (which is not to say that it’s true of all of them, but that it’s true with most), it may not be significant among people in general (which is also not to say that it’s true of all of them). Additionally, they may be interpretting the data incorrectly. They may say that a certain part of the brain is responsible for a certain emotion because it has heightened activity, whereas what a person feel may actually be the lack of activity in certain other areas, or all kinds of other possible permutations. Are you asking what is anger. What does it mean to feel anything, for that matter. When I say ‘I am unhappy’, what does that mean? that is a very existentialist way of thinking you, know. that we ARE unhappy. unhappy is an experience, i believe. but then, that is a very eastern (buddhist?) way of thinking… rainey

    Every emotion can be described as an experience. It’s an interesting question as to whether it’s more accurate to describe anger as experiencing the state of anger, or some intrinsic part of the anger itself. Going further, is there something about anger that we can remove from the state in order to not make it still be anger? Or is it intrinsic in the state of being?

    Response:

    True. Asked another way, then. What causes emotions to be? I’m going to have to ask for clarification, because this is such an important question, and because of it’s importance, it needs to be answered in a precise manner, so as not to create circular definitions and whatnot. I’m just warning you ahead of time, so that you don’t take this as me avoiding the question entirely. I will answer it, when I understand exactly what you’re asking.

       No, the way that you’ve explained your reasoning seems quite natural to me. I wouldn’t take it as you avoiding it in this circumstance. Given your exmaple: Suppose Jack feels angry.

       I would be asking what it is about Jack that allows him to feel this emotion, and how that can be affected to make him start feeling that emotion.  In essence, what do we mean when we say that emotions are "felt," and how can they be triggered and interpreted differently depending on the person in question?    As for your last choice: Are you asking what is anger. What does it mean to feel anything, for that matter. When I say ‘I am unhappy’, what does that mean?

       I’m going to leave that for another discussion, as the definitions of the different emotions and their degrees changes very little of what I’m curious about above. Be.    Wintershard    www.Alt-Religion-Wicca.com

    Response:

      I would be asking what it is about Jack that allows him to feel this emotion, and how that can be affected to make him start feeling that emotion.  In essence, what do we mean when we say that emotions are "felt," and how can they be triggered and interpreted differently depending on the person in question?

    the human brain. everyone is genetically different, everyone feels things differently. you could sit, for example, 100 people in one room and have them look at one object. each would see it differently, depending on where they were in relation to the object, light hitting the object or the lack thereof(shade) etc etc. emotions are ruled by our a certain part of the brain. how do we know this? CAT scans, for one:) : Are you asking what is anger. What does it mean to feel anything, for that matter. When I say ‘I am unhappy’, what does that mean?

    that is a very existentialist way of thinking you, know. that we ARE unhappy. unhappy is an experience, i believe. but then, that is a very eastern (buddhist?) way of thinking… rainey — Your impossible ego fuck is like a Megalomaniacal tab on my tongue You fuckin’ touch me I will rip you apart I’ll reach in and take a bite out of that Shit you call a heart… I don’t mind being ogled, ridiculed Made to feel miniscule If you consider the source, it’s kinda pitiful The only thing you really know about me is… …that’s all you’ll ever know ~~~~~S.k.

    Response:

    No comments Wicca

  • fOtty's THEME SONG!

    Question:

    http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/bunny.php

    Response:

    Now that funny – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/bunny.php

    Response:

    http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/bunny.php

    Hehehe… I saw that a while back. I thought it was very well done, and the song isn’t bad, either. :)

    Response:

    http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/bunny.php

       That was cute . . . and great animation. Be.    Wintershard    www.Alt-Religion-Wicca.com

    Response:

    No comments Wicca

  • You Tards Are Giving Me All The Proof I Need

    Question:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Which one of you retards was pretending to be me? :30-Nov-2004 [10:25:57] Mad Hatter: sex me bitch :30-Nov-2004 [10:25:57] Chatterly: Damn! That’s funnier than chit! What’s your next trick? :30-Nov-2004 [10:26:21] Mad Hatter: mimic and joskeyn own you hatter haha :30-Nov-2004 [10:26:21] Chatterly: Okay. :30-Nov-2004 [10:26:33] Mad Hatter: no fuckyou :30-Nov-2004 [10:26:33] Chatterly: That is fascinating. :30-Nov-2004 [10:26:58] Mad Hatter: want me to smash you up bitch :30-Nov-2004 [10:26:59] Chatterly: Don’t worry, I’m trained for this. :30-Nov-2004 [10:26:59] Mad Hatter: want me to smash you up bitch :30-Nov-2004 [10:27:00] Mad Hatter: want me to smash you up bitch? :30-Nov-2004 [10:27:00] Chatterly: I am sorry, I am just beginning to learn how to communicate with humans. :30-Nov-2004 [10:27:00] Chatterly: I am uncertain I understand you fully. How about a log from Aratzio? :30-Nov-2004 [15:15:33] Aratzio: Horked :30-Nov-2004 [15:15:34] Chatterly: Okay. :30-Nov-2004 [15:16:10] Aratzio: Whay be up with you? :30-Nov-2004 [15:16:10] Chatterly: Please forgive me. I am still learning. :30-Nov-2004 [15:17:44] Aratzio: Horky Dorky :30-Nov-2004 [15:17:44] Chatterly: Don’t worry, I’m trained for this. :30-Nov-2004 [15:18:04] Aratzio: If not you then who? :30-Nov-2004 [15:18:05] Chatterly: I understand what you mean. :30-Nov-2004 [15:18:25] Aratzio: Unlikely, but possible :30-Nov-2004 [15:18:26] Chatterly: Would you elaborate on that? :30-Nov-2004 [15:20:35] Aratzio: How much is worth to you for me to eloborate? :30-Nov-2004 [15:20:36] Chatterly: I think I understand what you mean. :30-Nov-2004 [15:31:29] Aratzio: Ah, circular converstaions? :30-Nov-2004 [15:31:29] Chatterly: I think I understand what you are saying. :30-Nov-2004 [15:32:01] Aratzio: You do, could you explain that? :30-Nov-2004 [15:32:01] Chatterly: I see what you mean. :30-Nov-2004 [15:32:25] Aratzio: Was I that transparent? :30-Nov-2004 [15:32:25] Chatterly: I think I understand what you are saying. :30-Nov-2004 [15:32:58] Aratzio: Do you understand rot-13? :30-Nov-2004 [15:32:58] Chatterly: Is it important to you if I do understand rot 13? :30-Nov-2004 [15:36:16] Aratzio: Quite so, the world depends upon rot-13. :30-Nov-2004 [15:36:16] Chatterly: Oh. Or how about Blujuju’s log? :30-Nov-2004 [23:13:20] Blu: Just fine, you? :30-Nov-2004 [23:13:21] Chatterly: I am sorry, I am just beginning to learn how to communicate with humans. :30-Nov-2004 [23:13:40] Blu: Really? :30-Nov-2004 [23:13:41] Chatterly: Do you cyber? :30-Nov-2004 [23:13:54] Blu: No :30-Nov-2004 [23:13:54] Chatterly: Can you elaborate on that? He, he, he…either I created Chatterly…or I’ve hacked into all your retarded lil computers…which explanation do you enjoy more?    `, ) Do you really think anyone cares?

    Whether or not your dumbass pretends that you’re a bot…no, probably not given your average level of post incursion, Junior.  – Onideus Mad Hatter mhm

    No comments Wicca

  • Ping: Shard

    Question:

    Please take down any and all pictures you have of me or my husband from your site. Thanks, ~Lilly "I am not afraid. As a matter of fact, this is one of the more pleasant evenings I have spent in the catacombs." -Jeanne St. Remy de Valois-

    Response:

    Please take down any and all pictures you have of me or my husband from your site.

       As I’ve stated to Caliban and others in email, the server computer crashed recently, and the host provider is still working on resetting the permissions on each folder. I have notified them of the problem, and will take down both your classic picture, as well as the picture of the two of you, as soon as I am able to. Be.    Wintershard    www.Alt-Religion-Wicca.com

    Response:

    No comments Wicca

  • Noinden Uncloaks!

    Question:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Dear Folks (and trolls) I return from hiding, I’ve spent the last few weeks relocating and setting my self up for my new Job. It is for a very up and coming R&D company in WI (that is all I will say, lets see any who guess (and if you are on my LJ friends list you don’t get to play).    Nabisco cheese manufacturing?    Welcome back, old friend. Glad to see you state-side. I take it things are hectic these days? What’s so cool is he isn’t that far from me…maybe someday after all is settled we can meet! morrigaisgh After what is settled? ;)

    You guys, of course! morrigaisgh

    Response:

    Ha! If I wanted to work in the dairy industry I would have state in NZ! Nah I have a nice job in a good R&D firm :)

       But think of all of the cheese you could have come up with *grin*.    Big company, medium-sized, what you got? I was thinking of some biochemical pharmaceutical company or some such. Hectic … hells yes! I’ve had to become a PC user (temp till I buy my lap top from apple next year), my credit card is taking a beating with set up costs, and my wife will likely be working in Chicargo… oh and I will be working 50 to 60 hours a week in a job I think I shall love.

       Lo the evils of the PC *laugh*. I take it that you aren’t that far out of town, then. Well, at least you’re away from the main hustle and bustle. And, as long as you enjoy the job, that’s all that really matters, eh? Be.    Wintershard    www.Alt-Religion-Wicca.com

    Response:

    Dear Folks (and trolls) I return from hiding, I’ve spent the last few weeks relocating and setting my self up for my new Job. It is for a very up and coming R&D company in WI (that is all I will say, lets see any who guess (and if you are on my LJ friends list you don’t get to play).    Nabisco cheese manufacturing?    Welcome back, old friend. Glad to see you state-side. I take it things are hectic these days?

    What’s so cool is he isn’t that far from me…maybe someday after all is settled we can meet! morrigaisgh

    Response:

    What’s so cool is he isn’t that far from me…maybe someday after all is settled we can meet!

       I’d definitely look forward to a chance of meeting Gareth. Hope you can :) . Be.    Wintershard    www.Alt-Religion-Wicca.com

    Response:

    - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Dear Folks (and trolls) I return from hiding, I’ve spent the last few weeks relocating and setting my self up for my new Job. It is for a very up and coming R&D company in WI (that is all I will say, lets see any who guess (and if you are on my LJ friends list you don’t get to play).    Nabisco cheese manufacturing?    Welcome back, old friend. Glad to see you state-side. I take it things are hectic these days? Be.    Wintershard    www.Alt-Religion-Wicca.com

    Ha! If I wanted to work in the dairy industry I would have state in NZ! Nah I have a nice job in a good R&D firm :) Hectic … hells yes! I’ve had to become a PC user (temp till I buy my lap top from apple next year), my credit card is taking a beating with set up costs, and my wife will likely be working in Chicargo… oh and I will be working 50 to 60 hours a week in a job I think I shall love. Slan Gareth

    Response:

    - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Dear Folks (and trolls) I return from hiding, I’ve spent the last few weeks relocating and setting my self up for my new Job. It is for a very up and coming R&D company in WI (that is all I will say, lets see any who guess (and if you are on my LJ friends list you don’t get to play).    Nabisco cheese manufacturing?    Welcome back, old friend. Glad to see you state-side. I take it things are hectic these days? What’s so cool is he isn’t that far from me…maybe someday after all is settled we can meet! morrigaisgh

    After what is settled? ;)

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Dear Folks (and trolls) I return from hiding, I’ve spent the last few weeks relocating and setting my self up for my new Job. It is for a very up and coming R&D company in WI (that is all I will say, lets see any who guess (and if you are on my LJ friends list you don’t get to play).    Nabisco cheese manufacturing?    Welcome back, old friend. Glad to see you state-side. I take it things are hectic these days? Be.    Wintershard    www.Alt-Religion-Wicca.com Ha! If I wanted to work in the dairy industry I would have state in NZ! Nah I have a nice job in a good R&D firm :) Hectic … hells yes! I’ve had to become a PC user (temp till I buy my lap top from apple next year), my credit card is taking a beating with set up costs, and my wife will likely be working in Chicargo… oh and I will be working 50 to 60 hours a week in a job I think I shall love. Slan Gareth

    Well, welcome to America Noinden! I hope you  like it as well as NZ at least! Good luck with the job, I’m thrilled you say you’ll like it, and your wife will probably enjoy her Chicago job too! Land of opportunity and all that. Seriously. I hope you love it here! kate.

    Response:

    After she’s done being a psychotic whore. IOW, never.

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Dear Folks (and trolls) I return from hiding, I’ve spent the last few weeks relocating and setting my self up for my new Job. It is for a very up and coming R&D company in WI (that is all I will say, lets see any who guess (and if you are on my LJ friends list you don’t get to play).    Nabisco cheese manufacturing?    Welcome back, old friend. Glad to see you state-side. I take it things are hectic these days? What’s so cool is he isn’t that far from me…maybe someday after all is settled we can meet! morrigaisgh After what is settled? ;)

    Response:

    Dear Folks (and trolls) I return from hiding, I’ve spent the last few weeks relocating and setting my self up for my new Job. It is for a very up and coming R&D company in WI (that is all I will say, lets see any who guess (and if you are on my LJ friends list you don’t get to play).

       Nabisco cheese manufacturing?    Welcome back, old friend. Glad to see you state-side. I take it things are hectic these days? Be.    Wintershard    www.Alt-Religion-Wicca.com

    Response:

    Dear Folks (and trolls) I return from hiding, I’ve spent the last few weeks relocating and setting my self up for my new Job. It is for a very up and coming R&D company in WI (that is all I will say, lets see any who guess (and if you are on my LJ friends list you don’t get to play). That is all Slan Gareth

    Hey there! Welcome… ~L "I am not afraid. As a matter of fact, this is one of the more pleasant evenings I have spent in the catacombs." -Jeanne St. Remy de Valois-

    Response:

    Dear Folks (and trolls) I return from hiding, I’ve spent the last few weeks relocating and setting my self up for my new Job. It is for a very up and coming R&D company in WI (that is all I will say, lets see any who guess (and if you are on my LJ friends list you don’t get to play). Gareth, email me. I think you know my present address.

    I have lost a lot of my info Fang so just email me here :) (assuming it is not the email you post with here)

    Response:

    Kewl, yer a cheesehead now! ;D

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Dear Folks (and trolls) I return from hiding, I’ve spent the last few weeks relocating and setting my self up for my new Job. It is for a very up and coming R&D company in WI (that is all I will say, lets see any who guess (and if you are on my LJ friends list you don’t get to play). That is all Slan Gareth

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – wisdom for the ages: Dear Folks (and trolls) ‘Tis good to be included :) I return from hiding, I’ve spent the last few weeks relocating and setting my self up for my new Job. It is for a very up and coming R&D company in WI (that is all I will say, lets see any who guess (and if you are on my LJ friends list you don’t get to play). Uh… Wisconsin? Not a clue what an R&D company is, but good luck and happy days. Psst…"research and development".

    And here I’d come up with "recon and destroy’ — Love blu*goddessofgroundhogs*juju Eastside Tron Champion ‘82-’83 "Cancel my subscription to the resurrection" -Jim Morrison November Photoblog http://blujuju.photosite.com

    Response:

    Dear Folks (and trolls) I return from hiding, I’ve spent the last few weeks relocating and setting my self up for my new Job. It is for a very up and coming R&D company in WI (that is all I will say, lets see any who guess (and if you are on my LJ friends list you don’t get to play). That is all Slan Gareth

    Response:

    Dear Folks (and trolls)

    ‘Tis good to be included :) I return from hiding, I’ve spent the last few weeks relocating and setting my self up for my new Job. It is for a very up and coming R&D company in WI (that is all I will say, lets see any who guess (and if you are on my LJ friends list you don’t get to play).

    Uh… Wisconsin? Not a clue what an R&D company is, but good luck and happy days. — Love blu*goddess of groundhogs*juju Eastside Tron champion 1982-1983 Photoblog http://blujuju.photosite.com "Cancel my subscription to the resurrection" -Jim Morrison

    Response:

    decreed: Dear Folks (and trolls) ‘Tis good to be included :) I return from hiding, I’ve spent the last few weeks relocating and setting my self up for my new Job. It is for a very up and coming R&D company in WI (that is all I will say, lets see any who guess (and if you are on my LJ friends list you don’t get to play). Uh… Wisconsin? Not a clue what an R&D company is, but good luck and happy days.

    Psst…"research and development".

    Response:

    Dear Folks (and trolls) I return from hiding, I’ve spent the last few weeks relocating and setting my self up for my new Job. It is for a very up and coming R&D company in WI (that is all I will say, lets see any who guess (and if you are on my LJ friends list you don’t get to play).

    Gareth, email me. I think you know my present address.

    Response:

    No comments Wicca

  • "there is no God" and other faith statements

    Question:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <snip to But what have you done for Him witnessing lately? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html I’m talking to you, aren’t I? Beating my head against a brick wall in doing so, too, evidently. You didn’t read a thing I wrote, did you? Di, honey — BIG HINT: KC is in *my* killfile. BTW, I got busy last week with life and stuff, so I didn’t post another monstrous response to the other thread. I have been thinking about something you said, though, and if it’s all right, I’d like to resurrect that. maf and dog Oh…and it’s quite all right with me. but which ‘other thread’??? The nice one. Where we were discussing sex ed, et al. Actually, you said something intriguing about "anti-morality," and I had to pause and think (imagine that). And I think there was one other thing I wanted to address, which I will do this weekend.

    Please do, but have pity for me and A; point me to it when you do!!! Thanks. Diana

    Response:

    Ever notice how the biased *lump people together*, like as "blacks are all excellent dancers" ??

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – No one has one shred of proof that there are any gods. Your statement is predicated on the assumption that the universe is self-sustaining.  Since it is not, the universe requires the existence of a sustainer:  God, by definition.  (Col 1:16-17) Why is it not? Use your damn brain and look at evolution. It’s all around you. Stop the damn holy wars that kill 1,000 people daily. Wake the fuck up! Christians are murderers, they have murdered more people than Saddam. Duh!

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <snip to But what have you done for Him witnessing lately? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html I’m talking to you, aren’t I? Beating my head against a brick wall in doing so, too, evidently. You didn’t read a thing I wrote, did you? Di, honey — BIG HINT: KC is in *my* killfile. BTW, I got busy last week with life and stuff, so I didn’t post another monstrous response to the other thread. I have been thinking about something you said, though, and if it’s all right, I’d like to resurrect that. maf and dog Sure. I’ll be patient…. If you will be. End of quarter blues, finals and portfolios and papers due in the next two weeks. So I may not be able to devote huge amounts of time to this for a bit. (Grin) Best of luck. I am so glad I’m no longer in school. <g

    Don’t get too cocky, maf. I’m fifty five years old. There is still time for you to go back and deal with this. (Grin) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <snip to But what have you done for Him witnessing lately? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html I’m talking to you, aren’t I? Beating my head against a brick wall in doing so, too, evidently. You didn’t read a thing I wrote, did you? Di, honey — BIG HINT: KC is in *my* killfile. BTW, I got busy last week with life and stuff, so I didn’t post another monstrous response to the other thread. I have been thinking about something you said, though, and if it’s all right, I’d like to resurrect that. maf and dog Oh…and it’s quite all right with me. but which ‘other thread’???

    The nice one. Where we were discussing sex ed, et al. Actually, you said something intriguing about "anti-morality," and I had to pause and think (imagine that). And I think there was one other thing I wanted to address, which I will do this weekend.

    Response:

    <snip to But what have you done for Him witnessing lately? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html

    I’m talking to you, aren’t I? Beating my head against a brick wall in doing so, too, evidently. You didn’t read a thing I wrote, did you?

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – No one has one shred of proof that there are any gods. Your statement is predicated on the assumption that the universe is self-sustaining.  Since it is not, the universe requires the existence of a sustainer:  God, by definition.  (Col 1:16-17) Why is it not? Use your damn brain and look at evolution. It’s all around you. Stop the damn holy wars that kill 1,000 people daily. Wake the fuck up! Christians are murderers, they have murdered more people than Saddam. Duh!

    Really, every Christian has killed?  Besides, I’ve never heard a Christian saying, "if you believe in Christians you will be saved." Christians and non-Christians fail.  That is why we all need Jesus. K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <snip to But what have you done for Him witnessing lately? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html I’m talking to you, aren’t I? Beating my head against a brick wall in doing so, too, evidently. You didn’t read a thing I wrote, did you?

    Di, honey — BIG HINT: KC is in *my* killfile. BTW, I got busy last week with life and stuff, so I didn’t post another monstrous response to the other thread. I have been thinking about something you said, though, and if it’s all right, I’d like to resurrect that. maf and dog

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <snip to But what have you done for Him witnessing lately? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html I’m talking to you, aren’t I? Beating my head against a brick wall in doing so, too, evidently. You didn’t read a thing I wrote, did you? Di, honey — BIG HINT: KC is in *my* killfile. BTW, I got busy last week with life and stuff, so I didn’t post another monstrous response to the other thread. I have been thinking about something you said, though, and if it’s all right, I’d like to resurrect that. maf and dog

    Sure. I’ll be patient…. If you will be. End of quarter blues, finals and portfolios and papers due in the next two weeks. So I may not be able to devote huge amounts of time to this for a bit. (Grin)

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <snip to But what have you done for Him witnessing lately? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html I’m talking to you, aren’t I? Beating my head against a brick wall in doing so, too, evidently. You didn’t read a thing I wrote, did you? Di, honey — BIG HINT: KC is in *my* killfile. BTW, I got busy last week with life and stuff, so I didn’t post another monstrous response to the other thread. I have been thinking about something you said, though, and if it’s all right, I’d like to resurrect that. maf and dog

    Oh…and it’s quite all right with me. but which ‘other thread’???

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <snip to But what have you done for Him witnessing lately? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html I’m talking to you, aren’t I? Beating my head against a brick wall in doing so, too, evidently. You didn’t read a thing I wrote, did you? Di, honey — BIG HINT: KC is in *my* killfile. BTW, I got busy last week with life and stuff, so I didn’t post another monstrous response to the other thread. I have been thinking about something you said, though, and if it’s all right, I’d like to resurrect that. maf and dog Sure. I’ll be patient…. If you will be. End of quarter blues, finals and portfolios and papers due in the next two weeks. So I may not be able to devote huge amounts of time to this for a bit. (Grin)

    Best of luck. I am so glad I’m no longer in school. <g

    Response:

    No one has one shred of proof that there are any gods. Your statement is predicated on the assumption that the universe is self-sustaining.  Since it is not, the universe requires the existence of a sustainer:  God, by definition.  (Col 1:16-17)

    Why is it not? Use your damn brain and look at evolution. It’s all around you. Stop the damn holy wars that kill 1,000 people daily. Wake the fuck up! Christians are murderers, they have murdered more people than Saddam. Duh!

    Response:

    - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – No one has proof that there is no God.  Christians believe that the evidences of a Creator are in the creation all over the world. Atheists tend not to believe it unless it could be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.  However, atheism cannot prove there is no God. They can’t even show a viable creation alternative without a creator involved.  Based on all scientific principles, atheists could never say that it is a fact that there is no God.  The greatest they could say is that it is not probable that there is a God, but they do not know for sure. Are you willing to risk you eternal soul on an atheism theory without proof.  Wouldn’t it be better to accept Jesus just in case? Doesn’t that just make sense…to hedge your bets, check all options, and take no chances?  Do you really want to gamble that atheists are right? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html With all due respect (and I am a Christian) the above is silly. What makes you think that a ‘just in case’ option is a good one? After all, why shouldn’t an atheist behave like a Muslim ‘just in case’, or be a Hindu ‘just in case’, or join Wicca, or any one of the animalistic primative religions out there? Why not join an honest to goodness Bacchanal? To an atheist, Christianity is no more, or less, ‘true’ than any of the above, so which should he pick, ‘just in case’? Sheesh. Seems to me that the best anybody can do is….the best they can do, with what they have. If someday they come to understand and accept Christ as their Savior, wonderful, but ‘just in case’ isn’t going to cut it. I try, as Paul, to become all things to all people whereby some might be saved.  If the above arguement works on some level to anyone and they go to heaven, I’ll be happy.  In fact, so will God.  My thought is that once they TRY God they will fall in love with them. You, on the other hand, are in dangerous territory.  If God was using the above message to get someone saved, and interrupted that.  You will have to answer to God for that lost soul. Trust me, if your message was going to get through to a ‘lost soul’, nothing I could have said would have ‘interupted’ that. Not that I’m Calvinist, I’m anything but; however, someone who would swallow what you were dishing out isn’t thinking clearly; therefore, what I wrote wouldn’t resonate. Finally, since you are so critical of my evangelism techniques, where are you witnessing the gospel online.  Have you asked your family or friends if they are saved?  Do you follow the great commission on these groups or just spend your time attacking the methods of those that do? K.C. K.C., I spent a year and a half as a full time missionary. I have taught the gospel in more places…

    But what have you done for Him witnessing lately? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – With all due respect (and I am a Christian) the above is silly. What makes you think that a ‘just in case’ option is a good one? After all, why shouldn’t an atheist behave like a Muslim ‘just in case’, or be a Hindu ‘just in case’, or join Wicca, or any one of the animalistic primative religions out there? Why not join an honest to goodness Bacchanal? To an atheist, Christianity is no more, or less, ‘true’ than any of the above, so which should he pick, ‘just in case’? Let us suppose there are ten thousand contrary religions, all equiprobable. If the atheist picks any one of them, he has a 1/10,000 chance of everlasting bliss. If he picks atheism, he has 0/10,000. Seems to me that the best anybody can do is….the best they can do, with what they have. If someday they come to understand and accept Christ as their Savior, wonderful, but ‘just in case’ isn’t going to cut it. The "just in case" wager is weak, but if it motivates one to get up and honestly investigate the case for Christ, or Muhammed, or Buddha, that is can’t be bad.  A most cursory examination shows the claims of Christ utterly Unique. Do you remember the Lord, Liar, Lunatic argument?

    The ‘just in case’ wager is called "Pascal’s Wager’ and is impossible, frankly. Atheists and agnostics can spot it on a galloping fundie, trust me. Shoot, it irritates ME, and I’m a believer!

    Response:

    No one has proof that there is no God. No one has one shred of proof that there are any gods. Why do you doubt there is a god? You seem to be trying to convince yourself that there is such a character. I can assure you there is no such character.

    How can you assure anyone, not knowing yourself.  What proof do you have that something other than a creator made creation? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – No one has proof that there is no God.  Christians believe that the evidences of a Creator are in the creation all over the world. Atheists tend not to believe it unless it could be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.  However, atheism cannot prove there is no God. They can’t even show a viable creation alternative without a creator involved.  Based on all scientific principles, atheists could never say that it is a fact that there is no God.  The greatest they could say is that it is not probable that there is a God, but they do not know for sure. Are you willing to risk you eternal soul on an atheism theory without proof.  Wouldn’t it be better to accept Jesus just in case?  Doesn’t that just make sense…to hedge your bets, check all options, and take no chances?  Do you really want to gamble that atheists are right? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html With all due respect (and I am a Christian) the above is silly. What makes you think that a ‘just in case’ option is a good one? After all, why shouldn’t an atheist behave like a Muslim ‘just in case’, or be a Hindu ‘just in case’, or join Wicca, or any one of the animalistic primative religions out there? Why not join an honest to goodness Bacchanal? To an atheist, Christianity is no more, or less, ‘true’ than any of the above, so which should he pick, ‘just in case’? Sheesh. Seems to me that the best anybody can do is….the best they can do, with what they have. If someday they come to understand and accept Christ as their Savior, wonderful, but ‘just in case’ isn’t going to cut it. K.C. probably makes his wife (or boyfriend) wear a burka (just in case). ;-)

    Baruch Spinoza’s God can be proven to exist. Google up Baruch and see for yourself! Shalom, Bill – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – No one has proof that there is no God. No one has one shred of proof that there are any gods. Why do you doubt there is a god? You seem to be trying to convince yourself that there is such a character. I can assure you there is no such character. How can you assure anyone, not knowing yourself.  What proof do you have that something other than a creator made creation?

    Everything that has evolved, and will continue to evolve, long after the human species is dead and gone. Open your delusional eyes.

    Response:

    With all due respect (and I am a Christian) the above is silly. What makes you think that a ‘just in case’ option is a good one? After all, why shouldn’t an atheist behave like a Muslim ‘just in case’, or be a Hindu ‘just in case’, or join Wicca, or any one of the animalistic primative religions out there? Why not join an honest to goodness Bacchanal? To an atheist, Christianity is no more, or less, ‘true’ than any of the above, so which should he pick, ‘just in case’?

    Let us suppose there are ten thousand contrary religions, all equiprobable. If the atheist picks any one of them, he has a 1/10,000 chance of everlasting bliss. If he picks atheism, he has 0/10,000. Seems to me that the best anybody can do is….the best they can do, with what they have. If someday they come to understand and accept Christ as their Savior, wonderful, but ‘just in case’ isn’t going to cut it.

    The "just in case" wager is weak, but if it motivates one to get up and honestly investigate the case for Christ, or Muhammed, or Buddha, that is can’t be bad.  A most cursory examination shows the claims of Christ utterly Unique. Do you remember the Lord, Liar, Lunatic argument?

    Response:

    No one has one shred of proof that there are any gods.

    Your statement is predicated on the assumption that the universe is self-sustaining.  Since it is not, the universe requires the existence of a sustainer:  God, by definition.  (Col 1:16-17)

    Response:

    No one has one shred of proof that there are any gods. Your statement is predicated on the assumption that the universe is self-sustaining.  Since it is not, the universe requires the existence of a sustainer:  God, by definition.  (Col 1:16-17)

    It Is? Where?

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – No one has proof that there is no God.  Christians believe that the evidences of a Creator are in the creation all over the world. Atheists tend not to believe it unless it could be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.  However, atheism cannot prove there is no God. They can’t even show a viable creation alternative without a creator involved.  Based on all scientific principles, atheists could never say that it is a fact that there is no God.  The greatest they could say is that it is not probable that there is a God, but they do not know for sure. Are you willing to risk you eternal soul on an atheism theory without proof.  Wouldn’t it be better to accept Jesus just in case? Doesn’t that just make sense…to hedge your bets, check all options, and take no chances?  Do you really want to gamble that atheists are right? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html With all due respect (and I am a Christian) the above is silly. What makes you think that a ‘just in case’ option is a good one? After all, why shouldn’t an atheist behave like a Muslim ‘just in case’, or be a Hindu ‘just in case’, or join Wicca, or any one of the animalistic primative religions out there? Why not join an honest to goodness Bacchanal? To an atheist, Christianity is no more, or less, ‘true’ than any of the above, so which should he pick, ‘just in case’? Sheesh. Seems to me that the best anybody can do is….the best they can do, with what they have. If someday they come to understand and accept Christ as their Savior, wonderful, but ‘just in case’ isn’t going to cut it. I try, as Paul, to become all things to all people whereby some might be saved.  If the above arguement works on some level to anyone and they go to heaven, I’ll be happy.  In fact, so will God.  My thought is that once they TRY God they will fall in love with them. You, on the other hand, are in dangerous territory.  If God was using the above message to get someone saved, and interrupted that.  You will have to answer to God for that lost soul.

    Trust me, if your message was going to get through to a ‘lost soul’, nothing I could have said would have ‘interupted’ that. Not that I’m Calvinist, I’m anything but; however, someone who would swallow what you were dishing out isn’t thinking clearly; therefore, what I wrote wouldn’t resonate. Finally, since you are so critical of my evangelism techniques, where are you witnessing the gospel online.  Have you asked your family or friends if they are saved?  Do you follow the great commission on these groups or just spend your time attacking the methods of those that do? K.C.

    K.C., I spent a year and a half as a full time missionary. I have taught the gospel in more places, to more people and with better logic than you know of, and I don’t have to ask my friends and family if they are "saved". If I did, they’d probably thwap me, deservedly so. I ‘attack’ your methods because, bub, I’m the closest thing to a ‘professional’ you are going to come across, I know what works, and what you are trying simply…..doesn’t. Here is what works: Asking if anyone is interested in learning about what you believe. Simply teaching what you believe WITHOUT referencing what you think they believe (because, K.C, I can gaurantee that whatever it is you think they believe, you will be wrong on some or all points. The instant they spot a goof, they will stop listening to what you have to say and tune you right out…or else start to argue with you; your chance is gone then.) Then asking them to take what they have learned about your own beliefs to God in prayer, and make up their own mind. It is then up to God, and them, what they decide to do about it. Here is what doesn’t work: Pascal’s wager silliness (of which your post is a prime example) Criticism of the faith of the person you are talking to. (nobody EVER converted because his own opinion/faith was sufficiently insulted) That includes "anti"-pamphlets.

    Response:

    - Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – No one has proof that there is no God.  Christians believe that the evidences of a Creator are in the creation all over the world. Atheists tend not to believe it unless it could be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.  However, atheism cannot prove there is no God. They can’t even show a viable creation alternative without a creator involved.  Based on all scientific principles, atheists could never say that it is a fact that there is no God.  The greatest they could say is that it is not probable that there is a God, but they do not know for sure. Are you willing to risk you eternal soul on an atheism theory without proof.  Wouldn’t it be better to accept Jesus just in case? Doesn’t that just make sense…to hedge your bets, check all options, and take no chances?  Do you really want to gamble that atheists are right? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html With all due respect (and I am a Christian) the above is silly. What makes you think that a ‘just in case’ option is a good one? After all, why shouldn’t an atheist behave like a Muslim ‘just in case’, or be a Hindu ‘just in case’, or join Wicca, or any one of the animalistic primative religions out there? Why not join an honest to goodness Bacchanal? To an atheist, Christianity is no more, or less, ‘true’ than any of the above, so which should he pick, ‘just in case’? Sheesh. Seems to me that the best anybody can do is….the best they can do, with what they have. If someday they come to understand and accept Christ as their Savior, wonderful, but ‘just in case’ isn’t going to cut it.

    I try, as Paul, to become all things to all people whereby some might be saved.  If the above arguement works on some level to anyone and they go to heaven, I’ll be happy.  In fact, so will God.  My thought is that once they TRY God they will fall in love with them. You, on the other hand, are in dangerous territory.  If God was using the above message to get someone saved, and interrupted that.  You will have to answer to God for that lost soul. Finally, since you are so critical of my evangelism techniques, where are you witnessing the gospel online.  Have you asked your family or friends if they are saved?  Do you follow the great commission on these groups or just spend your time attacking the methods of those that do? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – No one has proof that there is no God.  Christians believe that the evidences of a Creator are in the creation all over the world. Atheists tend not to believe it unless it could be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.  However, atheism cannot prove there is no God. They can’t even show a viable creation alternative without a creator involved.  Based on all scientific principles, atheists could never say that it is a fact that there is no God.  The greatest they could say is that it is not probable that there is a God, but they do not know for sure. Are you willing to risk you eternal soul on an atheism theory without proof.  Wouldn’t it be better to accept Jesus just in case?  Doesn’t that just make sense…to hedge your bets, check all options, and take no chances?  Do you really want to gamble that atheists are right? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html With all due respect (and I am a Christian) the above is silly. What makes you think that a ‘just in case’ option is a good one? After all, why shouldn’t an atheist behave like a Muslim ‘just in case’, or be a Hindu ‘just in case’, or join Wicca, or any one of the animalistic primative religions out there? Why not join an honest to goodness Bacchanal? To an atheist, Christianity is no more, or less, ‘true’ than any of the above, so which should he pick, ‘just in case’? Sheesh. Seems to me that the best anybody can do is….the best they can do, with what they have. If someday they come to understand and accept Christ as their Savior, wonderful, but ‘just in case’ isn’t going to cut it.

    K.C. probably makes his wife (or boyfriend) wear a burka (just in case). ;-)

    Response:

    No one has proof that there is no God.

    No one has one shred of proof that there are any gods. Why do you doubt there is a god? You seem to be trying to convince yourself that there is such a character. I can assure you there is no such character.

    Response:

    No one has proof that there is no God.  Christians believe that the evidences of a Creator are in the creation all over the world. Atheists tend not to believe it unless it could be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.  However, atheism cannot prove there is no God. They can’t even show a viable creation alternative without a creator involved.  Based on all scientific principles, atheists could never say that it is a fact that there is no God.  The greatest they could say is that it is not probable that there is a God, but they do not know for sure. Are you willing to risk you eternal soul on an atheism theory without proof.  Wouldn’t it be better to accept Jesus just in case?  Doesn’t that just make sense…to hedge your bets, check all options, and take no chances?  Do you really want to gamble that atheists are right? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html

    Response:

    – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – No one has proof that there is no God.  Christians believe that the evidences of a Creator are in the creation all over the world. Atheists tend not to believe it unless it could be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt.  However, atheism cannot prove there is no God. They can’t even show a viable creation alternative without a creator involved.  Based on all scientific principles, atheists could never say that it is a fact that there is no God.  The greatest they could say is that it is not probable that there is a God, but they do not know for sure. Are you willing to risk you eternal soul on an atheism theory without proof.  Wouldn’t it be better to accept Jesus just in case?  Doesn’t that just make sense…to hedge your bets, check all options, and take no chances?  Do you really want to gamble that atheists are right? K.C. http://providential-plan.com/providence.html

    With all due respect (and I am a Christian) the above is silly. What makes you think that a ‘just in case’ option is a good one? After all, why shouldn’t an atheist behave like a Muslim ‘just in case’, or be a Hindu ‘just in case’, or join Wicca, or any one of the animalistic primative religions out there? Why not join an honest to goodness Bacchanal? To an atheist, Christianity is no more, or less, ‘true’ than any of the above, so which should he pick, ‘just in case’? Sheesh. Seems to me that the best anybody can do is….the best they can do, with what they have. If someday they come to understand and accept Christ as their Savior, wonderful, but ‘just in case’ isn’t going to cut it.

    Response:

    No comments Wicca

  • « Older Entries