AuthorTopic: Church of England says No to Female Bishops  (Read 3464 times)

Offline g

  • Golden Oxen
  • Contrarian
  • Master Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 12280
    • View Profile
Re: Church of England says No to Female Bishops
« Reply #15 on: November 21, 2012, 04:58:12 AM »

It has become sport at the Diner. A real shame.


No way.  Watson makes himself a Target, not a shame at all.  It is purposeful.  It is rather tragic IMHO.

Your obsequiious posts are even MORE tragic. JMHO.

RE
Sorry I am so SELECTIVE in my praise dungeon master.

Offline Petty Tyrant

  • Cannot be Saved
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 4573
    • View Profile
Re: Church of England says No to Female Bishops
« Reply #16 on: November 21, 2012, 05:51:10 AM »


Glad to see you coming to appreciate Ashvin more Unc, he is a treasured poster, and true font of knowledge.
[/quote]

he needed to be tried and tested and refined of impurity in fire like, like, iron ore. :exp-angel:

or gold. So now:

he seeks
to become
a cup :coffee:
emptied of self
and filled
with oneness
ELEVATE YOUR GAME

Offline Ashvin

  • Troll
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3205
    • View Profile
Re: Church of England says No to Female Bishops
« Reply #17 on: November 21, 2012, 08:08:04 AM »
Just food for thought, but what if subconsciously what you really WANT is to alienate yourself from everyone?  You don't make any effort at ALL to come to agreement with anyone here, that is for sure.  You have staked out a dogmatic position that MOST people, even the CHRISTIANS here find insupportable in real terms.  You get HAMMERRED on by just about everyone, then HAMMER back at them that they don''t REALLY grasp the Meaning of the Gospel and Words of Jesus.

The field of Apologetics is SOOOO Deep, you can engage your legal brain in 1500 years of this stuff, and Google to Kingdom Come arguments from "Experts" that will support your take on the Bible.

As I see it Watson, you chose this path in order to STOP thinking about the rest of the problems we face by miring yourself in such existential questions.  I used to really ENJOY reading your analysis, now you just drone on and on about Jesus, and I am pretty much alienated from you as a result.    I keep trying to get you out of this box, with close to ZERO success, and I am sure the result is much the same inside your biological family as it is amongst the family of Doomers her on the Diner.

There IS a BALANCE to be found here Watson, you don't HAVE to be ALL FUNDY, ALL THE TIME.  You don't HAVE to alienate everybody.  You could make some attempt at being a MENSCH.

RE

Like I have said before, the online psychoanalysis doesn't really work...

The act of submission to God does require a certain level of worldly sacrifice and alienation from those who are on a completely different page, but that's about the extent to which you are correct about me wanting to alienate myself.

I pray every day that I will make spiritual progress with my family and close friends, and to a certain extent I have. My father especially has took an interest in learning about scripture and comparing it to his Hindu worldview, and that makes me glad. My closest friend has also opened up and asked me to send him apologetic literature. At the same time, I often slip up and find myself wasting opportunities with them, choosing to hang out and drink some beers instead of serve as a good Christian example to friends. I have chosen comfort, convenience and acceptance over evangelism and "alienation" in many ways... so I don't consider myself some shining beacon of Christ.

What I am is someone with legal training who thinks in terms of logical arguments and analysis. It just so happens that fits in great with my evangelical Christian worldview. I approached the scriptures the same way I approached economic/financial arguments, and I figured out which interpretations made the most sense to me. When I say "progressive" protestant Christianity isn't logically (or spiritually) coherent with the Bible or the early church, I mean it. The same thing goes for many aspects of Roman Catholicism (sorry, GO, but just being honest here... I know you understand that I mean no personal offense or disrespect).

I value truth above anything else, including fitting in with others or making people like me or keeping my writing interesting to you or anyone else online. I don't tailor my thoughts and writing to what I think people want to hear, and I would hope that you and Surly and everyone else here doesn't either. What I believe to be true happens to be different from what you believe to be true, that's all...

I only hope you realize, after all this, how silly it sounds for you to say I "make myself a target". The evidence on this thread alone is very clear - I made one comment that responded to the substance of GO's original post, and got 2 in response that made no attempt to provide a counter-argument from scripture or anything else, but simply attacked me personally. Plus your 1 psychoanalysis that I am responding to now. Apparently being logical, substantive and honest is how someone makes himself a target around here.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2012, 08:20:39 AM by Ashvin »

Offline Petty Tyrant

  • Cannot be Saved
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 4573
    • View Profile
Re: Church of England says No to Female Bishops
« Reply #18 on: November 21, 2012, 05:07:23 PM »
Ashvin

I Think you should be praying every day for your own progress not the progress of others.

In sins of particular pride and arrogance which is condemned throughout the bible and not as minor triviality "of all things I hate most is a proud look". I have shown you the verses and you say they are irrelevant.

Your haughty high horse which you could not help hopping back onto here does make you a target.

The legal training does you no favours to defer to. This is another thing Jesus specifically targeted in talking about judgement "woe unto you lawyers, for you deal in peoples misery but do not touch it".

When you say things like "I find it interesting that...." This is exactly what Jesus referred to. It is a slippery slithering lawyer device to sling mud and make a slur without actually putting your cards on the table, or providing any evidence or direct accusation. It is patently transparent and anything but honest when you do this sort of thing. Lawyers are hated for a reason, most of them should burn in hell for an eternity.

You can not claim LOGIC when you suggest that such evil people can repent accept Jesus then carry on the same way they always did and will go to heaven instead while the dalai lama or nicest person you know will not because they found it illogical.

The things which are simply a matter of FAITH you claim logic, science and history for. It is the arrogance and dishonesty of that claim which makes you a target.

Saying you approach questions of religion and faith in the same way as economics is self-delusion if you believe that. You are Jekyll and Hyde in that regard. An example would be declaring yourself as having made substantive arguments and others as not. Grand arrogance, and if it is wrong, also dishonest. Notice how you only do that in relation to faith based issues. You do not do that in economic and collapse arguments. You won the orkin man debate for my money without declaring yourself solely substantive, because that falsehood was not required for your own faith.

Were the comments in response really an attack? Roamer wanting to know if you have a personal opinion was a valid question. You can defer to faith as you did, nothing wrong with that. Surly thinking that makes the belief dogma is valid too, If you want to trust not in the wisdom of men and your code is dogma then ok. RE's suggestions and theories were not an attack either, just his opinion. Calling that psycho-analysis is incorrect strictly speaking. p-a is Freudian in framework and he did not approach from that perspective of  Id, ego, superego and frustrated sexual repression.









ELEVATE YOUR GAME

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 42050
    • View Profile
Re: Church of England says No to Female Bishops
« Reply #19 on: November 21, 2012, 05:42:54 PM »
Apparently being logical, substantive and honest is how someone makes himself a target around here.

No, droning on and on like a broken record is what makes you a target.  Perpetually pointing out that everybody else doesn't understand the TRUE meaning of Scripture while YOU DO makes you a target. Copy/Pasting endless Scripture Passages makes you a target. Having absolutely ZERO Sense of Humour makes you a target.  LOL.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Ashvin

  • Troll
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3205
    • View Profile
Re: Church of England says No to Female Bishops
« Reply #20 on: November 21, 2012, 05:45:56 PM »
Bob,

I can't help but think you do this type of baiting intentionally... maybe because it soothes your ego or your need for attention, or maybe its something else entirely... I won't pretend to know the why.  All I know is that you made a comment about how I was being burned at the stake, I made a comment in a similar vane, and then you started back into your typical belligerent and arrogant condescension of my beliefs, and you contradict your own earlier comment by saying this - "Were the comments in response really an attack? Roamer wanting to know if you have a personal opinion was a valid question."

Moving on from what I can only describe an epic display of intellectual and emotional forum schizophrenia...

As Ka told you before, just because you choose to call something dishonest or prideful, doesn't mean it is in reality. In this case, you are completely wrong. I am well aware of what the Bible teaches, including its repeated emphasis on using analytic reason, logic and testing when reflecting on spiritual truths. Guess you just missed all of those parts when you studied the scriptures, huh? Kind of like you missed all of the contemporary historians who wrote about Jesus, or the spiritual consequences of Solomon's polygamy, or the Old Earth creationist view supported by Biblical creation accounts, or the symbolic interpretations of Biblical prophecy, or countless other things related to historic Christian theology.

In light of your relapse outlined above, Bob, I am forced to once again ignore your comments to me.

Offline Ashvin

  • Troll
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3205
    • View Profile
Re: Church of England says No to Female Bishops
« Reply #21 on: November 21, 2012, 06:01:12 PM »
Apparently being logical, substantive and honest is how someone makes himself a target around here.

No, droning on and on like a broken record is what makes you a target.  Perpetually pointing out that everybody else doesn't understand the TRUE meaning of Scripture while YOU DO makes you a target. Copy/Pasting endless Scripture Passages makes you a target. Having absolutely ZERO Sense of Humour makes you a target.  LOL.

RE

RE, you can't even respond to any of the points I made. So you quote my last sentence, and then repeat the same nonsense you wrote earlier.

I never said other people don't understand the true meaning of scripture... I pointed out that they don't even offer any arguments for what scripture means. What don't you understand about this simple concept? I write one comment to GO, and then the DD religious bigots descend on me with nothing of substance and personal attacks.

I'm sorry if nothing else is happening on this forum, and you guys feel frustrated or jealous when Ka, GO and I talk about spiritual issues, but try having some self-restraint and civility. I know your M.O. is to squash every thread in which you don't have anything intelligent or kind to say, banishing it into some dark forum recess so you can disingenuously claim "free speech is sacrosanct at DD", or devolving it into a personal "napalm fight", which apparently is how you find "humor" in your life... BUT, I pray that even you, RE, can learn to live without such an ego in due time, God willing. 
« Last Edit: November 21, 2012, 06:03:57 PM by Ashvin »

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 42050
    • View Profile
Re: Church of England says No to Female Bishops
« Reply #22 on: November 21, 2012, 06:18:38 PM »

RE, you can't even respond to any of the points I made.

I didn't find anything except the last sentence worthy of a response.  I'll respond when you write something which is WORTHY:icon_mrgreen:

Quote
BUT, I pray that even you, RE, can learn to live without such an ego in due time, God willing.

You first.   :icon_mrgreen:



RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Petty Tyrant

  • Cannot be Saved
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 4573
    • View Profile
Re: Church of England says No to Female Bishops
« Reply #23 on: November 21, 2012, 07:26:55 PM »
Bob,

I can't help but think you do this type of baiting intentionally... maybe because it soothes your ego or your need for attention, or maybe its something else entirely... I won't pretend to know the why.  All I know is that you made a comment about how I was being burned at the stake, I made a comment in a similar vane, and then you started back into your typical belligerent and arrogant condescension of my beliefs, and you contradict your own earlier comment by saying this - "Were the comments in response really an attack? Roamer wanting to know if you have a personal opinion was a valid question."

Moving on from what I can only describe an epic display of intellectual and emotional forum schizophrenia...

As Ka told you before, just because you choose to call something dishonest or prideful, doesn't mean it is in reality. In this case, you are completely wrong. I am well aware of what the Bible teaches, including its repeated emphasis on using analytic reason, logic and testing when reflecting on spiritual truths. Guess you just missed all of those parts when you studied the scriptures, huh? Kind of like you missed all of the contemporary historians who wrote about Jesus, or the spiritual consequences of Solomon's polygamy, or the Old Earth creationist view supported by Biblical creation accounts, or the symbolic interpretations of Biblical prophecy, or countless other things related to historic Christian theology.

In light of your relapse outlined above, Bob, I am forced to once again ignore your comments to me.

Anyone but Ashvin,

any time he is presented with the idea that he is not yet perfected and subject to mortal sins he presents no defence to these, and claims that if his God sends him a test or an opportunity for betterment it is attention seeking or baiting. He argues that the best thing to do in that case is focus on using logic and analysis and reasoning. "you shall know them by their fruit" falls under that aegis. the fruit here certainly appears to be hubris and arrogance.

The poster purporting to a religion urging humility is the one who declares their arguments substantive and dismissive of others.

Who looks for "old earth creationism" that is akin to accepting female clergy by ignoring the bible. The creationists were laughed out of town when they claimed the earth is 5000 years old based on the bible.

I already admitted that I was hoping Ashvin did not know about Josephus, at that stage I did not know as RE points out he doesnt rely on his own reading but googles FAQ apologist answers. Had I known that, I would not have tried to pull that swifty. Other historians wrote about the christian movement in Rome, not necc Jesus life at the time 3BC to AD 33.

On King Solomon, For Petes Sake WW3 is centred on the need to rebuild King Solomons Temple in its original position in Jerewsalem currently occupied by the Golden Dome of the rock. He is held as the wisest man ever, nobody cautioned against giving my son the middle name Solomon because his polygamy had corrupted him.

I never missed that many people interpret prophesy scripture as symbolic. I am well aware that Breakaway sects splinter off all the time based on taking either a literal or symbolic interpretation of various verses. I never chose to renounce literal or best common fit interpretations in favour of fixed symbols, I am simply open to a complete interpretation based on symbolism, especially since there is a secondary book hidden beneath the plain text according to Barbara Theiring author of Jesus of the Apocalypse partly plagiarised by the Da Vinci Code.

I do not have a condescension of Christian beliefs at all, they are very valuable. I  just am unable to digest the forgiveness of sins and escape of karma as logical. Ashvin relapsed into his achilles of alienating arrogance again.




ELEVATE YOUR GAME

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
795 Views
Last post February 04, 2013, 04:10:57 AM
by RE
0 Replies
362 Views
Last post February 03, 2015, 01:45:24 PM
by Eddie
0 Replies
182 Views
Last post February 03, 2020, 06:19:55 AM
by knarf