...not sure it is a 'different stroke'...
On Oct 29, 3:12 pm, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi y'all - Bliss is that which makes me happy - different strokes for
> different folks.
>
> On Oct 29, 4:52 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > “If a godthing were proved to me I would immediately question it's
> > motives in regards to my self-preservation. Any god-thing proven to
> > me, and I am going to assume this is not a christian god or other
> > human created god, would be an alien, and therefore a completely
> > uncomprehensible being until studied, if allowed. You would have to
> > define bliss as well….” – CB
>
> > While late to the conversation, looking at the above, it appears that
> > you assume all ‘human created god[s]’ as being anthropomorphic, right?
> > And, even your hypothetical incomprehensible alien is labeled as a
> > ‘being’ and one that can be studied at that. (if allowed, strange
> > after thought)
> > All of this seems to ignore negative theology entirely.
> > As to ‘bliss’, I’m not sure how serious clog was in bringing it up,
> > but the state is found in numerous cultures and their associated
> > philosophy/theology. It is no accident that in Tibetan Buddhism for
> > example, this particular level/result/state is represented as physical
> > union among the other associated visual analogies.
> > See:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/78/Guhyasamaja_...
>
> > On Oct 29, 9:49 am, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > If a godthing were proved to me I would immediately question it's motives
> > > in
> > > regards to my self-preservation. Any god-thing proven to me, and I am
> > > going
> > > to assume this is not a christian god or other human created god, would be
> > > an alien, and therefore a completely uncomprehensible being until studied,
> > > if allowed. You would have to define bliss as well. Eternal bliss for me
> > > would be science fiction to many:) If the god of christians were proven to
> > > me, thusly affecting my daughter.. whatever it takes to protect her would
> > > be
> > > the path.
>
> > > sorry, mention licking and my brain short circuits :)
>
> > > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 11:39 AM, Clogtowner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > Hi y'all - if a god were proved to you, would you lick just one toe
> > > > without a sexual connotation in exchange for eternal bliss? I would,
> > > > if the bliss started now and I was aware of the bliss (assuming he/she/
> > > > it doesn't have nail fungus.)
>
> > > > On Oct 29, 11:18 am, CrossBow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > I think you think like me and we thusly agree....
>
> > > > > Though always open to new provable evidence..I would go so far as to
> > > > > say
> > > > I
> > > > > will never lick someone elses feet or bow my knee, except of course,
> > > > > for
> > > > > sexual intertainment purposes. I believe in standing still
> > > > somewhere...and
> > > > > that place does not want a god nor need one specifically as created by
> > > > > humanity. If that appears to close my mind..then until Carl Sagan
> > > > > appears
> > > > > from the dead and opens it, the way is shut.
>
> > > > > En finis
>
> > > > > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 10:41 AM, ornamentalmind
> > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> > > > > > "... What do you all think?" - J
>
> > > > > > I think you have come to a wonderful insight!
>
> > > > > > On Oct 29, 8:23 am, Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > <<What do you all think? >>
>
> > > > > > > Close-minded is appropriate in some circumstances. Einstein, when
> > > > > > > confronted with early evidence that the special theory of
> > > > > > > relativity
> > > > > > > was wrong, said that the experiment was incorrect. He turned out
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > be correct.
>
> > > > > > > Many people didn't believe the most recent reports of bigfoot
> > > > > > > being
> > > > > > > found, because so many earlier reports were either incorrect or
> > > > > > > fraudulent. They turned out to be correct.
>
> > > > > > > The list could go on and on. When you have a huge amount of
> > > > > > > evidence
> > > > > > > that one thing is true, it's not reasonable to give that up with
> > > > > > > one
> > > > > > > new piece of (seemingly) contrary evidence, particularly when
> > > > > > > those
> > > > > > > touting it have a history of poor thinking processes or outright
> > > > lies.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Memphis Freethought Alliance" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
