ajmrowland wrote:well, sorry for being open-minded.
and i think you mistook me for some religious nut. im just philosophical. i dont believe anything without proof, but i do speculate.
and nobody's the same so no test *can* be 100% fair to everyone. common sense.
There's not nothing wrong with open-mindedness; however, there is something wrong with a lack of logic and sense.
It doesn't matter to me whether you're a 'religious nut' or not.
I know that no test can be 100% fair. In fact, thanks for pointing that out; just another point for my side.
ajmrowland wrote:1. everybody must be open or willing to listen to and consider others views, even if they initially disagree.
2. no sentences or partial-sentences IN ALL CAPS or with more than one exclaimation point.
3. no personal attacks.
Could I add one more?
4. If a member is proven to be unequivocally wrong on one point or another, they have to admit it.
Anyway, when it comes to 1, even if I try to be open, I can still point out the flaws in the arguments, right?
As for 2, I'll go along with it, but I might forget and put something in capitals LIKE THIS (!!!!), and if somebody points that out I'll happily edit my inadvertent rule-breaking.
I agree with 3 and have no qualms about it at all.
One more thing: sarcasm is okay, right?
Semaj wrote:Disney Duster wrote:Semaj, please do not use His name like that. I suppose we can't stop you elsewhere, but to be respectful of other's religions and feelings here, so that we will respect you back.
Excuse me, but
you're the main reason why threads keep getting closed.
Knock it off.
Right you are, Semaj, right you are.
I'll now repost my previous points from the original 'What is Normal?' thread, because these points weren't replied to due to the locking by CJ.
Disney Duster wrote:Dr Frankenollie, the tests for everyone isn't supposed to be the same. We all lead different lives.
I know we all lead different lives. What I'm saying is that if 'God' really wanted to test us, then he would do it in a way that would be fair and equal. Yes, I know people end up having all sorts of different ambitions, careers, families and lives, but a more equal way to test us would be to not have evil or misery on Earth whatsoever other than one bad thing that is the same for everyone that happens at least one point in every single human being's life.
For example, everyone on the planet could be knocked over by a car but live and receive the exact same injuries, and their reactions could be used as the results which 'God' could weigh up. Thus, if one person renounced religion after being hit by a car, and another person who was also hit by a car and received the exact same types and number of injuries instead remained loyal to religion, then it would be obvious that the first person was bad and the second person was good.
Obviously, if there is a God, then we've got the crappy and lazy God to hail and praise. A fair God would do something like I did (and I'm not even an adult and yet I could think of a better method for testing), but an unfair God would let a talentless and self-obsessed ass like Paris Hilton become wealthy, while letting a brilliant writer like Oscar Wilde be hated for his sexuality. Wait a minute. Oh, the unfair God is our 'God', right, Duster?
Disney Duster wrote:And yes I can ignore a scientific principle if I don't agree with it or if I just don't think it applies to this subject.
...
...
...
...You've got to be kidding me.
Hey Duster, guess what? Some meanies are saying that Lunos isn't real because Nicompoop, his elephant son sent to Earth to save us all, wrote in the sand of his zoo pen that 2+2=5! Yes, I know that 2+2-4 is a mathematic principle, but hey, so what? I can ignore a mathematical principle if I agree with it or if I just don't think it applies to this subject.
Disney Duster wrote:As for the rest of what you said, haha. But I meant what I said earnestly.
How could you have truly meant what you said? It was nonsensical!
But the thing that really, really, really just maddens me is that you didn't get the point I was making. I was saying that the meaningless stuff that you said could fit anything! You could change every instance of God and Christianity with instances of Lunos and Lunacy, and yet no other alterations would be necessary (well, perhaps besides any other references to Christianity)! You could replace God and Christianity with instances of Cheese and Cheesecake and it would flow just as it flowed originally!
Disney Duster wrote:I really hope you will just relax, let go of perhaps too logical ponderings, and believe. You and I and everyone all know Christianity is different from what you just spat out to reply to me mockingly, even if we couldn't put our finger on or describe the difference and you wouldn't want to find a difference anyway because you don't feel like believing. It's all up to you man, but I wish you would believe in at least the spiritual and good things in Christianity.
Duster, I really hope that you will just relax, let go of perhaps too logical ponderings, and believe in Lunos. You and I and everyone all know that Lunacy (the religion of Lunos) is different from the 'Christianity' stuff that you just spat out to reply to me mockingly, even if we couldn't put our finger on or describe the difference and you wouldn't want to find a difference anyway because you don't feel like believing. It's all up to you man, but I wish you would believe in at least the spiritual and good things in Lunacy.
...You see, Duster? Your words are meaningless. You have no arguments. You just have words that are interchangeable with every other deity and religion on the planet.