My two most favorite quotes of all
Son of man
accomplished for us in the Son.
"A man content to go to heaven alone will never get to heaven."
-- Boethius
"A simple mind guided by love finds a path utilizing logic and truth."
-- SteeVan, author of Tales From Another Dimension
http://www.8-1.com
Kender
> -- SteeVan, author of Tales From Another Dimension
What happens when that simple mind, guided by love, dislikes the path logic
and truth shine for him and decides to redefine them?
Kender
Or her, not being sexist here
Son of man
news:bfmu8k$nlo$1...@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
It is impossible for the simple mind which is guided by love to dislike the
path to the eternal refuge, created utilizing logic and truth.
Such a mind which refutes the path to the eternal refuge which was created
utilizing logic and truth, is not a mind guided by love.
Kender
> utilizing logic and truth, is not a mind guided by love.
So would that be a litmus test, then? To wit, a mind which does not accept
either logic or truth (or both) cannot be a mind guided by love?
Son of man
news:2MCTa.14747$nL2....@fe05.atl2.webusenet.com...
And how could I forget? My good buddy Stingray played by Nick Mancuso when
asked by a stranger in need, "Why are you helping me?"
"Because all we have are each other." -- Stingray
The character of Stingray embodies the bodhisattva ideal and also what
Christ termed as the labourers of the Lord's harvest.
Matthew:9:37: Then saith he unto his disciples, The harvest truly is
plenteous, but the labourers are few;
38: Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he will send forth
labourers into his harvest.
And that verse is another reason why I don't adhere to a belief in an all
powerful God, because if there were such a capable being there would be no
need for him to send labourers into the Lord's harvest. God should be
capable of taking care of everything himself. But like Buddhism, Jesus
acknowledges the task at hand is large, especially relative to the number of
bodhisattvas who work for the salvation of all. Even the mission of Jesus
could not have succeeded were it not for the disciples whom he choose and
also sent into the world just as the Father sent him.
John:20:21: Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father
hath sent me, even so send I you.
Matthew:10:40: He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me
receiveth him that sent me.
Luke:10:16: He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you
despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.
John:6:38: For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the
will of him that sent me.
39: And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he
hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the
last day.
40: And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the
Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him
up at the last day.
John:6:57: As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father:
(Mark:11:23 and Luke:23:46) so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
Son of man
A mind that refutes the path to the eternal refuge created utilizing logic
and truth, cannot be a mind guided by love.
NeoLazarusx
a statement, and a bold one at that, that is both illogical and untruthful,
SOM.
-NL
XNA
Son of man
news:vhu4flc...@corp.supernews.com...
You have become a complusive liar in your fervor to discredit anything I
say, and since I speak the truth and your only agenda now is to make war
with anything I say, you are trying to wage war against the truth. And guess
what? That's your problem.
> -NL
> XNA
NeoLazarusx
Now you're just getting paranoid. You just need a hug and a good laxative.
It's ok Bernie, ya kooky bastard! We love you...
-NL
XNA
p.s. I stand by my first statement.
Son of man
Do you really think the Lion cares whether the ants in his way love him or
not? But if they were wise little ants, they would make sure to stay out of
his way unless without even being conscious of it, they put themselves in
danger and get crushed beneath his heel.
I am trying to tell you, I don't give a fuck about your "love". You can
stick it back up your ass where it came from, the piece of shit it really
is.
Kender
"Son of man" <bco...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:_6DTa.9310$3I1....@fe03.atl2.webusenet.com...
So, when I held up the cold, unemotional and unbiased mirror of logic on
some of your messages back when I bothered, and you refuted logic as lies,
do you think perhaps you weren't being guided by love as much as you should
have been?
P.S. BTW, Logic comes from the root word Logos, which is interestingly
enough another title for Jesus
Son of man
>
> "Son of man" <bco...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:_6DTa.9310$3I1....@fe03.atl2.webusenet.com...
> > "Kender" <dlph...@h.o.t.m.a.i.l.com> wrote in message
> > news:bfmusk$ns4$1...@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
> > > > Such a mind which refutes the path to the eternal refuge which was
> > created
> > > > utilizing logic and truth, is not a mind guided by love.
> > >
> > > So would that be a litmus test, then? To wit, a mind which does not
> accept
> > > either logic or truth (or both) cannot be a mind guided by love?
> >
> > A mind that refutes the path to the eternal refuge created utilizing
logic
> > and truth, cannot be a mind guided by love.
>
> So, when I held up the cold, unemotional and unbiased mirror of logic on
> some of your messages back when I bothered, and you refuted logic as lies,
> do you think perhaps you weren't being guided by love as much as you
should
> have been?
You cannot just make such a claim about something that I refuted which was
logic, without getting into the specifics. Tell me what was the unbiased
mirror of logic that you used which I refuted? Don't just make these empty
claims without supporting because allof what you said above amounts to
nothing without any evidence to support it.
Now as far as using logic which people refute as lies, I am the the greatest
victim of such shameful behaviour both on usenet and when I posted to the
reluctant messenger board where the best you could do was say to me,
"Beautifully put, now shut up!"
So what unbiased mirror of logic were you using there?
NeoLazarusx
What? God or Lion? Lion or God? Lying about God? God your a liar?
Same broken down old tune, Bern and I'm still dancing.
La la la la la la...
-NL
XNA
Son of man
Clearly, you are unfamiliar with the symbology of the Lion both in Buddhism
and Christianity.
Kender
Why not? You make such sweeping claims all the time (;-)), why should I hold
myself up to some higher standard?
Take your pick. All I really need to do is provide one example, so how about
the one about the Torah being blinding? why don't you cut and paste those
biblical references again so I can repeat why they in no way mean so
"clearly and obviously" what you so fervently say that they do.
But don't waste my time if all you're going to do is foam at the mouth at
how much I want to discredit you. I mean, seriously, if you can get over
yourself enough to realize that I have no stakes one way or another in your
dogmas, and you want to have a reasonable discussion, I'd be happy to
oblige.
If you have even the slightest delusional inkling that I'm doing this to lie
to you to try to keep the world from hearing your most excellent Gospel,
then do us both a favor and save me some time by not replying.
> Now as far as using logic which people refute as lies, I am the the
greatest
> victim of such shameful behaviour both on usenet and when I posted to the
> reluctant messenger board where the best you could do was say to me,
> "Beautifully put, now shut up!"
That was when I was pissed off because you refused to answer my serious
comments about your posts dismissing them as "all lies" without answering
any of my points (whether valid or not).
> So what unbiased mirror of logic were you using there?
The unbiased logic in that mirror was "fuck it, if he won't respond in kind
to reasonable dialog, respond to him in kind with impatience and
indifference". I think that should have been quite clear.
Son of man
I answered all of your questions and the best all of you could do was say,
"Ok that's enough now, it's tim for you to go." I did answer your points,
but it makes no sense for you to come here claiming all sorts of
unverifiable nonsense. If you have something to say, then say it. If you
have a point to make, then make it.
> > So what unbiased mirror of logic were you using there?
>
> The unbiased logic in that mirror was "fuck it, if he won't respond in
kind
> to reasonable dialog, respond to him in kind with impatience and
> indifference".
But I wasn't the one who was using unreasonable dialog. I referred to
scripture and all your dumb fucking asshole Chester could do was say, "Stop
bashing my God Yahweh!" when in truth it is the Bible and in particular the
gospel of the New Testament that bashes Yahweh and calls him a deceiver who
tries to enforce circumcision as an everlasting covenant.
> I think that should have been quite clear.
You haven't made anything clear. Like I said, if you think you have a valid
point to make then make and everyoen will see for themselves whether it
comes from the unbiased mirrior of logic or not. You are just claiming
nonsense that no one here was a witness too and not lending any evidence at
all to support your case. Make your points now if think you have some. Why
are you referring to things of the past that no one here has a clue about?
> > > P.S. BTW, Logic comes from the root word Logos, which is interestingly
> > > enough another title for Jesus
The real title of Jesus is the King of faith.
Kender
utilizing
> > > logic
> > > > > and truth, cannot be a mind guided by love.
> > > >
> > > > So, when I held up the cold, unemotional and unbiased mirror of
logic
> on
> > > > some of your messages back when I bothered, and you refuted logic as
> > lies,
> > > > do you think perhaps you weren't being guided by love as much as you
> > > should
> > > > have been?
> > >
> > > You cannot just make such a claim about something that I refuted which
> was
> > > logic, without getting into the specifics. Tell me what was the
unbiased
> > > mirror of logic that you used which I refuted? Don't just make these
> empty
> > > claims without supporting because allof what you said above amounts to
> > > nothing without any evidence to support it.
> >
> > Why not? You make such sweeping claims all the time (;-)), why should I
> hold
> > myself up to some higher standard?
Well, at least you don't argue what you can't argue with.
> > Take your pick. All I really need to do is provide one example, so how
> about
> > the one about the Torah being blinding? why don't you cut and paste
those
> > biblical references again so I can repeat why they in no way mean so
> > "clearly and obviously" what you so fervently say that they do.
> >
> > But don't waste my time if all you're going to do is foam at the mouth
at
> > how much I want to discredit you. I mean, seriously, if you can get over
> > yourself enough to realize that I have no stakes one way or another in
> your
> > dogmas, and you want to have a reasonable discussion, I'd be happy to
> > oblige.
> >
> > If you have even the slightest delusional inkling that I'm doing this to
> lie
> > to you to try to keep the world from hearing your most excellent Gospel,
> > then do us both a favor and save me some time by not replying.
Did you miss this rather large chunk of text intentionally? Well, I'll have
to repaste it where it applies.
> > > Now as far as using logic which people refute as lies, I am the the
> > greatest
> > > victim of such shameful behaviour both on usenet and when I posted to
> the
> > > reluctant messenger board where the best you could do was say to me,
> > > "Beautifully put, now shut up!"
> >
> > That was when I was pissed off because you refused to answer my serious
> > comments about your posts dismissing them as "all lies" without
answering
> > any of my points (whether valid or not).
>
> I answered all of your questions and the best all of you could do was say,
> "Ok that's enough now, it's tim for you to go." I did answer your
points,
> but it makes no sense for you to come here claiming all sorts of
> unverifiable nonsense. If you have something to say, then say it. If you
> have a point to make, then make it.
Bah, you ignored whatever you couldn't argue with (A perfect example above,
repasted below), and picked out some imaginary straw man to rip up. Then you
called me a liar and a cunt, and not worth your time...oh yeah, and a thorn
in your crown. There's no use in arguing it because I know what happened, I
was there, so why not just take it from here and answer the following?
<REPASTE>
> > Take your pick. All I really need to do is provide one example, so how
> about
> > the one about the Torah being blinding? why don't you cut and paste
those
> > biblical references again so I can repeat why they in no way mean so
> > "clearly and obviously" what you so fervently say that they do.
> >
> > But don't waste my time if all you're going to do is foam at the mouth
at
> > how much I want to discredit you. I mean, seriously, if you can get over
> > yourself enough to realize that I have no stakes one way or another in
> your
> > dogmas, and you want to have a reasonable discussion, I'd be happy to
> > oblige.
> >
> > If you have even the slightest delusional inkling that I'm doing this to
> lie
> > to you to try to keep the world from hearing your most excellent Gospel,
> > then do us both a favor and save me some time by not replying.
</REPASTE>
> > > So what unbiased mirror of logic were you using there?
> >
> > The unbiased logic in that mirror was "fuck it, if he won't respond in
> kind
> > to reasonable dialog, respond to him in kind with impatience and
> > indifference".
>
> But I wasn't the one who was using unreasonable dialog. I referred to
> scripture and all your dumb fucking asshole Chester could do was say,
"Stop
> bashing my God Yahweh!" when in truth it is the Bible and in particular
the
> gospel of the New Testament that bashes Yahweh and calls him a deceiver
who
> tries to enforce circumcision as an everlasting covenant.
He is not MY Chester, he is Chester. I am not Chester, I am Kender. You are
son of man. Now that we have that cleared up, I don't care what anyone else
said to you, since I am not them.
> > I think that should have been quite clear.
>
> You haven't made anything clear. Like I said, if you think you have a
valid
> point to make then make and everyoen will see for themselves whether it
> comes from the unbiased mirrior of logic or not. You are just claiming
> nonsense that no one here was a witness too and not lending any evidence
at
> all to support your case. Make your points now if think you have some.
Why
> are you referring to things of the past that no one here has a clue about?
Well, then you're not listening, let me repaste. And I am not talking to
people here, I am talking to you.
<REPASTE>
> > Take your pick. All I really need to do is provide one example, so how
> about
> > the one about the Torah being blinding? why don't you cut and paste
those
> > biblical references again so I can repeat why they in no way mean so
> > "clearly and obviously" what you so fervently say that they do.
> >
> > But don't waste my time if all you're going to do is foam at the mouth
at
> > how much I want to discredit you. I mean, seriously, if you can get over
> > yourself enough to realize that I have no stakes one way or another in
> your
> > dogmas, and you want to have a reasonable discussion, I'd be happy to
> > oblige.
> >
> > If you have even the slightest delusional inkling that I'm doing this to
> lie
> > to you to try to keep the world from hearing your most excellent Gospel,
> > then do us both a favor and save me some time by not replying.
</REPASTE>
> > > > P.S. BTW, Logic comes from the root word Logos, which is
interestingly
> > > > enough another title for Jesus
>
> The real title of Jesus is the King of faith.
The REAL title? Oh, so I'm just imagining the reference to John 1:1?
Whatever, man, if you just want to feel superior, ignore me and tell
yourself I'm just a thorn in your crown or whatever delusion you prefer,
cause I'm not impressed. Jesus Christ is the Word (LOGOS) of God, among many
other things. Why argue? just for the sake of arguing?
P.S. I'm serious, if this is going to degrade to the point where you're just
going to end up insulting and ignoring me anyways, you might as well do it
now.
Son of man
Like I told you before, you should be less concerned with what the disciples
had to say and pay close attention to what I'm telling you right now.
> Whatever, man, if you just want to feel superior, ignore me and tell
> yourself I'm just a thorn in your crown or whatever delusion you prefer,
> cause I'm not impressed. Jesus Christ is the Word (LOGOS) of God
Jesus isn't a word and there ain't no God. I don't care who said so. Jesus
is the son of the Blessed One, he himself confirmed it. All these little
aphorisms of yours is a bunch of brainwashing fucking baloney that
fundamentalists thrive upon. Oh yes, Jesus the the Word LOGOS of God. Wow!
> , among many
> other things. Why argue? just for the sake of arguing?
I argue because I want to dispel every delusion and myth that there is
regarding Jesus. He ain't the fucking LOGOS, the Word of God. He is the one
who was capable of fulfilling, and who also executed, the will of the
Father, the Highest. End of story. Any more than this and you're back in the
land of fantasy and myth and you do a disservice to all atheists who could
accept Jesus as just as man, a human being, who was working under the
authority of the unsurpassed wisdom, when you start with your Jesus is the
LOGOS Word of God bullshit.
> P.S. I'm serious, if this is going to degrade to the point where you're
just
> going to end up insulting and ignoring me anyways, you might as well do it
> now.
Sounds like a convenient excuse you hope to cash in on when the going gets
rough for you, you just want out of a discussion you know you have
absolutely no way of wining because you are wrong with all your amoral views
about a non-existent God to begin with.
So if Jesus is the LOGOS, the Word of God, then why couldnlt that title be
also given to Moses or Muhammad? What are their titles? Prophets? But don't
prophets also deliver the word of God? So what's the difference between the
prophets and Jesus that Jesus is given the title the LOGOS, the Word of God?
Kender
> > > > > > P.S. BTW, Logic comes from the root word Logos, which is
> > interestingly
> > > > > > enough another title for Jesus
> > >
> > > The real title of Jesus is the King of faith.
> >
> > The REAL title? Oh, so I'm just imagining the reference to John 1:1?
>
> Like I told you before, you should be less concerned with what the
disciples
> had to say and pay close attention to what I'm telling you right now.
You should be less concerned with a postscript than you are with the main
body of a message if you are going to claim that you are in reasonable
dialog. I'm not arguing here, it's just you and the wall.
I'm listening to YOU, RIGHT NOW and it is, yet again, you're marvelously
subtle tactic of ignoring the point of my discussion to rant about something
totally unrelated.
I'm not bound by your dogmas. It does not matter to me what you call Jesus.
Some people call him the logos, and if that makes you sad then go cry me a
river. But it really doesn't change a thing.
I wonder what other brilliant escape tactic you would have come up with to
ignore the point if I'd not put on that postcript as a *random, unrelated
afterthought*?
> > Whatever, man, if you just want to feel superior, ignore me and tell
> > yourself I'm just a thorn in your crown or whatever delusion you prefer,
> > cause I'm not impressed. Jesus Christ is the Word (LOGOS) of God
>
> Jesus isn't a word and there ain't no God. I don't care who said so. Jesus
> is the son of the Blessed One, he himself confirmed it. All these little
> aphorisms of yours is a bunch of brainwashing fucking baloney that
> fundamentalists thrive upon. Oh yes, Jesus the the Word LOGOS of God.
Wow!
*yawn* anyone got a pillow?...
> > , among many
> > other things. Why argue? just for the sake of arguing?
>
> I argue because I want to dispel every delusion and myth that there is
> regarding Jesus. He ain't the fucking LOGOS, the Word of God. He is the
one
> who was capable of fulfilling, and who also executed, the will of the
> Father, the Highest. End of story. Any more than this and you're back in
the
> land of fantasy and myth and you do a disservice to all atheists who could
> accept Jesus as just as man, a human being, who was working under the
> authority of the unsurpassed wisdom, when you start with your Jesus is the
> LOGOS Word of God bullshit.
*yawn* Wake me up when this is over...
> > P.S. I'm serious, if this is going to degrade to the point where you're
> just
> > going to end up insulting and ignoring me anyways, you might as well do
it
> > now.
>
> Sounds like a convenient excuse you hope to cash in on when the going gets
> rough for you, you just want out of a discussion you know you have
> absolutely no way of wining because you are wrong with all your amoral
views
> about a non-existent God to begin with.
*snore* *choke* Oh, what? He's talking to me? Huh?
...yeah, perhaps it would, if you didn't just ignore the entire discussion
to go off on a rant aimed at an unconnected postcript. If you were so damned
confident in yourself, why wouldn't you just answer directly? My "amoral"
views have nothing to do with this discussion, and your mentioning them as a
reason for me to want to not be in a discussion that you have completely
ignored is simply more smoke-blowing ad hominem to divert attention from
your own hesitance to discuss.
I mean, not only did I ask you once in a message, but when you ignored it, I
went ahead and repasted it 3 times in my reply. Once again you ignore it,
and make the delusional claim (Projection) that I don't want to be in the
very discussion you're avoiding.
If I'm not going to 'win', that's just fine with me, Bernie. Logic & Truth,
remember? The point was to make sure they won out, so Love would be the
guiding force. If you can't even face Logic, then by your own declarations,
how can you say you're guided by Love?
How can I know if I have no way of 'winning' if you won't 'compete'?
Have a nice life, Bernie.
> So if Jesus is the LOGOS, the Word of God, then why couldnlt that title be
> also given to Moses or Muhammad? What are their titles? Prophets? But
don't
> prophets also deliver the word of God? So what's the difference between
the
> prophets and Jesus that Jesus is given the title the LOGOS, the Word of
God?
*yawn* You know, you were doing so well at simply answering the point when I
kept it to one paragraph per post...
Son of man
> *SnIp* Original Message Completely Ignored
>
> > > > > > > P.S. BTW, Logic comes from the root word Logos, which is
> > > interestingly
> > > > > > > enough another title for Jesus
> > > >
> > > > The real title of Jesus is the King of faith.
> > >
> > > The REAL title? Oh, so I'm just imagining the reference to John 1:1?
> >
> > Like I told you before, you should be less concerned with what the
> disciples
> > had to say and pay close attention to what I'm telling you right now.
>
> You should be less concerned with a postscript than you are with the main
> body of a message if you are going to claim that you are in reasonable
> dialog. I'm not arguing here, it's just you and the wall.
I see, so this is the unbaised mirror of logic you were referring to?
>
> I'm listening to YOU, RIGHT NOW and it is, yet again, you're marvelously
> subtle tactic of ignoring the point of my discussion to rant about
something
> totally unrelated.
>
> I'm not bound by your dogmas. It does not matter to me what you call
Jesus.
> Some people call him the logos, and if that makes you sad then go cry me a
> river. But it really doesn't change a thing.
>
> I wonder what other brilliant escape tactic you would have come up with to
> ignore the point if I'd not put on that postcript as a *random, unrelated
> afterthought*?
>
> > > Whatever, man, if you just want to feel superior, ignore me and tell
> > > yourself I'm just a thorn in your crown or whatever delusion you
prefer,
> > > cause I'm not impressed. Jesus Christ is the Word (LOGOS) of God
> >
> > Jesus isn't a word and there ain't no God. I don't care who said so.
Jesus
> > is the son of the Blessed One, he himself confirmed it. All these little
> > aphorisms of yours is a bunch of brainwashing fucking baloney that
> > fundamentalists thrive upon. Oh yes, Jesus the the Word LOGOS of God.
> Wow!
>
> *yawn* anyone got a pillow?...
I see, so this is the unbaised mirror of logic you were referring to?
> > > , among many
> > > other things. Why argue? just for the sake of arguing?
> >
> > I argue because I want to dispel every delusion and myth that there is
> > regarding Jesus. He ain't the fucking LOGOS, the Word of God. He is the
> one
> > who was capable of fulfilling, and who also executed, the will of the
> > Father, the Highest. End of story. Any more than this and you're back in
> the
> > land of fantasy and myth and you do a disservice to all atheists who
could
> > accept Jesus as just as man, a human being, who was working under the
> > authority of the unsurpassed wisdom, when you start with your Jesus is
the
> > LOGOS Word of God bullshit.
>
> *yawn* Wake me up when this is over...
I see, so this is the unbaised mirror of logic you were referring to?
> > > P.S. I'm serious, if this is going to degrade to the point where
you're
> > just
> > > going to end up insulting and ignoring me anyways, you might as well
do
> it
> > > now.
> >
> > Sounds like a convenient excuse you hope to cash in on when the going
gets
> > rough for you, you just want out of a discussion you know you have
> > absolutely no way of wining because you are wrong with all your amoral
> views
> > about a non-existent God to begin with.
>
> *snore* *choke* Oh, what? He's talking to me? Huh?
I see, so this is the unbaised mirror of logic you were referring to?
> > So if Jesus is the LOGOS, the Word of God, then why couldnlt that title
be
> > also given to Moses or Muhammad? What are their titles? Prophets? But
> don't
> > prophets also deliver the word of God? So what's the difference between
> the
> > prophets and Jesus that Jesus is given the title the LOGOS, the Word of
> God?
>
> *yawn* You know, you were doing so well at simply answering the point when
I
> kept it to one paragraph per post...
I see, so this is the unbaised mirror of logic you were referring to?
You stupid cunt.
Kender
> I see, so this is the unbaised mirror of logic you were referring to?
> I see, so this is the unbaised mirror of logic you were referring to?
> I see, so this is the unbaised mirror of logic you were referring to?
>
> You stupid cunt.
Bah, I'm through with this shit. You can't even answer a direct fucking
request.
It sure is a mirror you insecure, pretentious, illiterate asshole.
And that's the Gospel Truth.
*burrrp* Excuse me, I have more worthwhile ways to waste time.
~ Back to the shadows he walks ~
NeoLazarusx
No. I am unfamiliar with the convoluted logic you use to justify your verbal
abuse of 'others'...
-NL
NAX
Son of man
Of course, you completely missed the verbal abuse that these very same
others were FIRST guilty of.
You pretentious cunt.
NeoLazarusx
Or you could just quit lying to yourself and call him by his given Hebrew
name: Yeshua ben-Joseph.
-NL
NAX
Son of man
> > I see, so this is the unbaised mirror of logic you were referring to?
> > I see, so this is the unbaised mirror of logic you were referring to?
> > I see, so this is the unbaised mirror of logic you were referring to?
> > I see, so this is the unbaised mirror of logic you were referring to?
> > I see, so this is the unbaised mirror of logic you were referring to?
> >
> > You stupid cunt.
>
> Bah, I'm through with this shit.
You were the one who failed to answer the questions I put to you and again
you want everyone to believe that you were using the unbiased mirror of
logic when the best you could do was resort to "YAWN, get me a pillow" etc.
etc.? You are like a petulant little 2 year old and just as you
demonstrated on the reluctant messenger discussionboard where you thought
you could get away with saying anything because the moron owners of the
website were on your side, you won't find yourself so comfortable here so I
suggest you stick to trying to socialize and stay way from any real
discussion about the real nature of Jesus. LOGOS, Word of God, my ass.
Son of man
No that's not his name either. That *was* his name. His present name is
Bernard Cozier.
Kender
Fuck off, bitch, you are as horse fly. I don't give a fuck about Logos, it
wasn't the issue, it was a postscript for a reason. You couldn't answer me
so you picked an irrelevant straw man (WOW! WHAT A FUCKING SHOCK!) It's not
my fucking dogma to defend you little bitch, if you really wanna argue about
it go find someone who cares enough to.
The issue is I asked you several times to present your position on the Torah
being blinding, and your little cowardly bitch ass couldn't even do it. Too
fucking afraid of logic and truth, even after talking bout how they were
necessary.
So, kindly :) fuck off.
NeoLazarusx
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, Bernie.
-NL
XNA
NeoLazarusx
Hmmm... funny. There are at least 7 other guys at the state psychiatric ward
that claim the they are him, too! Will the real Jesus please stand up,
please stand up?
-NL
NAX
Son of man
Yes, if I am ever a pretenious cunt like you I'd like to be told so.
You are a hypocrite who accuses me of verbally abusing others after bot they
and you started the whole mess you maggots.
Son of man
Is this more of the unbiased mirror of logic you were referring to?
heheh
Son of man
He doesn't have to stand up. You'll know the real Jesus when there are many
angry jealous little maggots attacking him with all manner of lies and
trying to discredit the truth which only he reveals.
Luke:10:22: All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth
who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he
to whom the Son will reveal him.
So let's hear from you now. Who was it that ever revealed to you that the
Buddha is the Father? I'd just love to hear everyone say, "Yes, but we
always knew that!"
I'd just love to hear everyone say that. I really mean it. Do you think I
could give a fuck about who gets the credit for revealing the who the Father
is? By all means, take all the credit for yourselves. Just so long as that
knowledge becomes very well established in the world. Then Judaism and Islam
will be the next religions to go the way of the dinosaur because they both
do not believe in the son of the Blessed One and advocate violence and fear
instead of understanding as a means to controlling the deceived.
Son of man
that's "both"
> they and you started the whole mess you pretentious little maggots.
NeoLazarusx
read three lines up from your response... you wrote that. read one line up
from your response... you wrote that. it's like we're the little guys on the
playground and we're finally sticking up for ourselves against the big bully
Bernie and now that you're getting your hat handed to you, you wanna cry to
the playground monitor. you're truly pathetic.
go cry to your mommy
-NL
XNA
NeoLazarusx
so end it, Bernie...
-NL
NAX
Son of man
The big bully eh? Well the big bully never verbally abused anyone is his
entire life nor did he attack anyone who didn't first try to kick shit in
his face to begin with, you stupid pretentious little fuck.
You are a moron who tries his best to provoke someone to anger and when he
suddenly realizes he fucked with the wrong person to begin with then you
start calling him a bully.
You are a lying hypocrite!
NeoLazarusx
Buddha is NOT the father of Jesus, he was NOT the father of the historical
Yeshua ben-Joseph, NOR is he YOUR FATHER. Physically, spiritually or in any
other conceivable manner.
and with that, I release my attachment to being rational with a totally
irrational person. thanks Bernie!
*PLONK*
-NL
NAX
Son of man
Now you just proved yourself a liar.
The Buddha: "He whose faith in the Tathagata is steady, established and
firm, a faith not to be destroyed by any recluse or brahman, by any heavenly
being, or Mara or Brahma, or anyone in the world, can say : 'I am a true son
of the Blessed One, born from his mouth, born of the Dhamma, created by the
Dhamma, heir of the Dhamma.'
-- Excerpt from the Agganna Sutta, Digha Nikaya 16
What you say and what the Buddha says are not in agreement. So guess who's
the liar?
The correct response on your part should have been "I don't believe Buddha
is the Father of Jesus." But now you, a blind pretentious jealous maggot,
now claim that you can see clearly and you know for a fact that the Buddha
is not the Father of Jesus physically (which I never said), spiritually or
in any concievable manner.
But guess what? Jesus can speak for himself and you certainly do a
disservice to the truth, not to mention yourself when you claim things as
fact which you do not and cannot possibly know.
Mark:14:61: But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high
priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the
Blessed One?
62: And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the
right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
But I don't even care what Mark:14:61-62 says. It's for others' benefit I
sought out the truth in scripture because it is the officially accepted
cannon and I have shown many seekers what was often overlooked. Son of God
is a myth. Albeit maybe a necessary one at that, or I'll wager that
Christianity would never have been as successful as it is today.
Nevertheless Jesus made sure to tell the truth when he was directly asked
whether he is the Son of God.
Matthew:26:63: But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and
said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether
thou be the Christ, the Son of God.
64: Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you,
Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power,
and coming in the clouds of heaven.
Luke:22:70: Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said
unto them, Ye say that I am.
> and with that, I release my attachment to being rational with a totally
> irrational person. thanks Bernie!
>
> *PLONK*
What's that the sound of? Your final descent into hell?
> -NL
> NAX
lee rodgers
> and with that, I release my attachment
I guess at least your flame war only lasted 3 days, but musta been 1,000's
of messages between the 3 of you, makes absfg look like a total mess
/lee
Son of man
news:4s0Ua.98358$hV.75...@twister.austin.rr.com...
>
> > and with that, I release my attachment
>
> I guess at least your flame war only lasted 3 days, but musta been 1,000's
> of messages between the 3 of you, makes absfg look like a total mess
Now take a good look at who started the "total mess."
>
> /lee
NeoLazarusx
[snip!]
NeoLazarusx
[snip!]
lee rodgers
> and with that, I release my attachment
I guess at least your flame war only lasted 3 days, but musta been 1,000's
of messages between the 3 of you, and it made absfg look like a total mess.
Not that there's anything particularly *wrong* with that, just that somebody
might get the wrong idea.
/leebert
Son of man
No, they'll get the right idea.
>
> /leebert
>
>