@Divegeester

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
'My truth is my truth' is about as meaningless as saying my name is my name. Duh.

Not at all. He's simply reminding you that you believe something and he believes something different - and that the two of you do not agree about what 'the truth' is.

That can hardly be described as "meaningless" because the myopia [that you exhibit and] that it touches upon forms the very crux of your conversational dysfunction.

That you seek to dismiss such a simple and germane "truth" about what it means to have different opinions than someone else, goes a long way to explain your bizarre intellectual behaviour.

Originally posted by FMF
It's not that I don't want you to, as such. It's just that it's unimpressive and rather odd too. You ignore people studiously, reveal nothing about yourself for pages and pages (just repeating yourself over and over and over again), and then suddenly, your contribution culminates every now and then in a sometimes lengthy copy paste of words that you didn't write.

Of course it's unimpressive if I quote something that you cannot refute. I totally get that. 😵

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Of course it's unimpressive if I quote something that you cannot refute. I totally get that. 😵

But why would I attempt to "refute" what some stranger -[who's not here to argue his or her corner] has said somewhere on the internet, when I have no problem whatsoever sharing my own opinions and dealing as I see fit with yours? On a message board like this it would never occur to me to copy paste text written by someone else to explain or illustrate the personal ideas and thoughts that I espouse. I find it peculiar that you do. I get a whiff of lazy contempt from it that sometimes makes it seem like your entire objective is to simply take the mickey.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
If what you believed today changes tomorrow it means what you believed today was false, not true.

If what I believe today changes tomorrow, it merely demonstrates I am open to development and improvement. Do you really think it is better to always believe tomorrow what you believed today, even if new knowledge comes to light.

Please think about that. (Escape the cult mentality).

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
It really isn't.

It's elementary. On examination a no answer counts as a wrong answer. Test failed. 😉

Originally posted by FMF
I can't see how the supposedly divine message you seek to pass on will persuade anyone or gain anyone's approval as long as you seem to be content to merely channel Dasa the way you do. Have you ever converted anyone to your faith by speaking about it in the way you do in cyberspace?

How long have you been under the delusion that you make the rules about cyberspace conduct?

Reveal Hidden Content

Originally posted by josephw
This must be about the fourth time you've mentioned Dasa in as many months. I'll continue ignoring it in case you haven't noticed.

Do you at least understand [even if you disagree with it] what you are being criticized for when you are compared to Dasa?

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
If what I believe today changes tomorrow, it merely demonstrates I am open to development and improvement. Do you really think it is better to always believe tomorrow what you believed today, even if new knowledge comes to light.

Please think about that. (Escape the cult mentality).

If your moral standard is evolving and can contradict itself, can that system of moral determination be true since it can produce self-contradiction?

Originally posted by josephw
How long have you been under the delusion that you make the rules about cyberspace conduct?

This is rather dodging the point I was making to you. Do you believe that every post you contribute to this Spirituality Forum is you working on behalf of Jesus and acting as an ambassador for your Christian beliefs? In other words, can people evaluate the worth and traction of your religious beliefs through the prism of your intellectual and interpersonal behaviour on this forum? For example, if the nature of your advocacy [not the content] seems so often to be indistinguishable from the nature of Dasa's advocacy, is that just a case of so be it.....?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
If your moral standard is evolving and can contradict itself, can that system of moral determination be true since it can produce self-contradiction?

Gibberish.

Originally posted by josephw
It's elementary. On examination a [b]no answer counts as a wrong answer. Test failed. 😉[/b]

Which is better, a child who doesn't know what 65 divided by 13 is (and freely admits it) or a child who is absolute and unyielding in his belief that the answer is 6000?

Originally posted by FMF
Do you at least understand [even if you disagree with it] what you are being criticized for when you are compared to Dasa?

Do you at least understand that you continuously deflect away from the topic?

Originally posted by josephw
Do you at least understand that you continuously deflect away from the topic?

I don't. You may disagree with my views, but trying to dismiss them as "deflecting away from the topic" when I am one of the most stick-to-the-topic posters here is just plain untrue, josephw. This post - by you - the one I am responding to - is an example of deflection. The question you didn't want to answer was:

Do you at least understand [even if you disagree with it] what you are being criticized for when you are compared to Dasa? You either do understand it or do you do understand it.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Which is better, a child who doesn't know what 65 divided by 13 is (and freely admits it) or a child who is absolute and unyielding in his belief that the answer is 6000?

Neither is better. Both fail.

By the way, is this an admission that you don't know for certain whether an absolute universal standard of morality exists or not, and that because you don't that that's better than believing one does?

Originally posted by FMF
I don't. You may disagree with my views, but trying to dismiss them as "deflecting away from the topic" when I am one of the most stick-to-the-topic posters here is just plain untrue, josephw. This post - by you - the one I am responding to - is an example of deflection. The question you didn't want to answer was:

Do you at least understand [even if you disag ...[text shortened]... cized for when you are compared to Dasa? You either do understand it or do you do understand it.

"You either do understand it or do you do understand it."

What?