Religion

mr blur

(7,753 posts)

63. "It's the man who fulfills prophecies by declaring it"

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 01:07 PM

Feb 2013

Really, WTF does this even mean?

Sorry, but I think you're out of your depth here.

"Unless your thinking is tempered by your heart and soul,..."
The former pumps blood round your body, the latter has never been proven to exist. Wanting it doesn't make it so.

Interesting - it's always people who whine about others' "sense of superiority" who display their own rather inferior logic and intellect.

Still, bluster away - you'll find some fellow travellers in this Group.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

142 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Concepts of God and Religion [View all] SarahM32 Feb 2013 OP

Insulting and pathetic. trotsky Feb 2013 #1

I like most of this. Do you have some sources for the Einstein quotes? patrice Feb 2013 #2

Not for those, but I know a good one. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #7

I have tried to say the same thing WAAAAY less elegantly, and with way more words, here on DU. patrice Feb 2013 #9

You're welcome. And thank you! SarahM32 Feb 2013 #10

And what exactly do rationalists skepticscott Feb 2013 #13

I don't feel a need to prove anything to you. I'm tired & need to go look for work so here's a riff: patrice Feb 2013 #14

In other words skepticscott Feb 2013 #15

No, it's a general observation of the state of discourse on the topic, not an analysis, and words patrice Feb 2013 #16

Well said. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #32

Thank you, SarahM32, it's not easy sticking my head up like this and at least trying to do patrice Feb 2013 #35

When you get the OP skepticscott Feb 2013 #46

Agree about how one decides what's, more or less, true. But it's not my job to "get" OP or you patrice Feb 2013 #48

If it's not "your job" skepticscott Feb 2013 #49

CHOOSE that or don't. Let others do the same. None of that means anyone should not stand patrice Feb 2013 #51

I've posted many times here skepticscott Feb 2013 #52

Here's a source for, "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Jim__ Feb 2013 #11

Thank you very much for that, Jim, I especially like this: patrice Feb 2013 #12

interesting read madrchsod Feb 2013 #3

Thank you. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #8

Well, it would help if the site had the correct translation of the Tetragamaton intaglio Feb 2013 #4

Word Salad. mr blur Feb 2013 #5

It's "Joseph Adamson" - what can you expect? muriel_volestrangler Feb 2013 #6

Really? SarahM32 Feb 2013 #17

"the realization of the divine reality" trotsky Feb 2013 #18

No. That's your assumption, and it couldn't be more wrong. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #19

The author is a fundie. trotsky Feb 2013 #20

No, the author is not a fundamentalist. The message makes that abundantly clear. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #21

Yeah, he is. trotsky Feb 2013 #22

Again, I should correct you. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #23

So how is saying skepticscott Feb 2013 #24

Well you'd like to, but you can't, because the facts are on my side. trotsky Feb 2013 #25

i don't think he's a fundie. Phillip McCleod Feb 2013 #27

Not a fundie, nor a cult leader. Quite the opposite. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #29

Oh, like a...Pope? mr blur Feb 2013 #61

"...to empower them so that they may truly be free and independent." trotsky Feb 2013 #67

Do you subscribe to his "teachings"? cleanhippie Feb 2013 #78

Here's some questions for you. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #94

Allow me to try again, perhaps I wasn't clear. cleanhippie Feb 2013 #96

To answer your question ... SarahM32 Feb 2013 #99

Ok. Good luck. cleanhippie Feb 2013 #105

You mean skepticscott Feb 2013 #108

"not the god of Pat Robertson, Franklin Graham and other fundamentalists, but the real God..." mr blur Feb 2013 #60

God SarahM32 Feb 2013 #100

This is just even more feel-good, meaningless Woo-drivel! mr blur Feb 2013 #115

I hate posts like this that get basic facts wrong or make erroneous assumptions... Humanist_Activist Feb 2013 #26

yeah the guy seems like an other-ways-of-know-it-all Phillip McCleod Feb 2013 #28

Well, you're right a couple of things, but as for the rest ... SarahM32 Feb 2013 #30

You said... Meshuga Feb 2013 #38

Okay. I'll do that. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #40

Again, it's all about connecting the dots closely and not unlike... Meshuga Feb 2013 #56

It's easy. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #101

I am not sure how to respond Meshuga Feb 2013 #107

Considering the anachronistic nature of so many religious texts, to think prophecy... Humanist_Activist Feb 2013 #57

Not again ... intaglio Feb 2013 #31

Not again. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #33

OK, so what is "Truth"? intaglio Feb 2013 #34

Hmmm ... Well, okay. I'll answer that. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #36

Please read what you have written intaglio Feb 2013 #37

Bravo! cleanhippie Feb 2013 #39

Truth is in the eye of the beholder. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #41

What is truth? Now you pretend that truth is relative to the observer intaglio Feb 2013 #42

Oh my. I am amazed. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #43

Yeppers, now we're back to the skepticscott Feb 2013 #44

Yes you do have to define "a truth" if you are going to spout about it intaglio Feb 2013 #47

Now that's funny. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #54

Just curious skepticscott Feb 2013 #64

"It's the man who fulfills prophecies by declaring it" mr blur Feb 2013 #63

double that..+100 skepticscott Feb 2013 #45

Nice thread, All! Bookmarking & I promise to explore later. MUST get on the treadmill now & patrice Feb 2013 #50

In response to the critics and skeptics: SarahM32 Feb 2013 #53

Let's look at the evidence intaglio Feb 2013 #55

Well done skepticscott Feb 2013 #58

Brilliant post. trotsky Feb 2013 #66

That's not "evidence." Let's look at Intaglio's deception. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #69

The way you keep repeating the phrase skepticscott Feb 2013 #59

You could go on Oprah! mr blur Feb 2013 #62

In response to the critics and skeptics, part 2 SarahM32 Feb 2013 #65

I counted 11 uses skepticscott Feb 2013 #68

You don't understand my motivation. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #70

"How can an All Faiths Coalition be a cult?" How can a Unification Church be a cult? (nt) muriel_volestrangler Feb 2013 #76

Thanks, beat me to it skepticscott Feb 2013 #82

"As the messenger says, it's the message that's important, not the messenger." cleanhippie Feb 2013 #80

You deceiver, I do not even think you are a self deceiver intaglio Feb 2013 #71

Here we go again. Okay, if you insist on putting us both through this ... SarahM32 Feb 2013 #77

Sorry, the world does not revolve round you and your petty cult intaglio Feb 2013 #83

Just a couple of points ... SarahM32 Feb 2013 #85

Why not call your cult "The Redefinition Project"? intaglio Feb 2013 #89

To correct you (Intaglio) about Proverbs and Isaiah SarahM32 Feb 2013 #97

More deceit intaglio Feb 2013 #104

I'm not going to let you get away with that. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #109

Not one fragment of text or archaeloogy supports the existence of Solomon intaglio Feb 2013 #112

To answer your question ... SarahM32 Feb 2013 #116

I made no claims about the Messianic prophecies intaglio Feb 2013 #122

And I answered your question. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #128

You provided a content free generalisation intaglio Feb 2013 #132

I'm sorry your fundie cult isn't taking off like you had hoped. trotsky Feb 2013 #72

Very insightful, indeed nonoyes Feb 2013 #73

There you go again. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #74

Yup, there I go again... trotsky Feb 2013 #75

With absolutely nothing to back it up. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #79

Nothing but that, and of course your incessant referral to "the message." Yes, cultish, indeed. cleanhippie Feb 2013 #81

False assumptions and accusations were predicted, and are according to prophecies. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #84

Wow, I was wrong skepticscott Feb 2013 #86

So ,the dude you're following is the current Son of Man? Adsos Letter Feb 2013 #87

I follow no man, but the son of man is the author of the message I promote. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #88

Your prophet is a man intaglio Feb 2013 #90

You fail to understand the author's mission. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #91

You fail to understand the nature of cults intaglio Feb 2013 #92

You didn't answer my questions. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #93

They are his "suggestions" intaglio Feb 2013 #95

Here we go again. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #98

More lies intaglio Feb 2013 #111

Well, we'll see about that. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #117

Your errors are laughable intaglio Feb 2013 #123

You would think so, but it's not so. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #129

No, most people would call what you emit "sophistry" which defined is intaglio Feb 2013 #134

Perhaps this will help. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #136

And you call me blind? intaglio Feb 2013 #138

Jesus saw the internet coming? And you know this, how? mr blur Feb 2013 #124

Good grief. gcomeau Feb 2013 #102

That's an understandable reaction. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #103

Actually... gcomeau Feb 2013 #106

Whatever floats your boat. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #110

It's not experiences that people find themselves skepticscott Feb 2013 #114

Not even that, it's like the sort of stuff L Ron Hubbard manufactured intaglio Feb 2013 #113

No, it's not. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #118

How can something that calls itself a "Church" skepticscott Feb 2013 #119

No, that's not accurate. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #120

You mean like skepticscott Feb 2013 #121

The definition of a cult proves my case. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #125

Too funny skepticscott Feb 2013 #127

So, you just ignore the facts? Okay, but at least say you ignored them. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #130

Except that you offered no "facts" skepticscott Feb 2013 #135

The definition of cult proves our case intaglio Feb 2013 #139

Your goal (and Adamson's) is/was to post his message, everywhere, right? Blue4Texas Feb 2013 #126

No. SarahM32 Feb 2013 #131

Not to post his message but to spread the word about his message - ok Blue4Texas Feb 2013 #133

To answer your question ... SarahM32 Feb 2013 #137

You have had valid and legitimate criticism intaglio Feb 2013 #140

MY FINAL RESPONSE ADDRESSING CRITICISM AND SKEPTICISM SarahM32 Feb 2013 #141

Promises, promises skepticscott Feb 2013 #142