Jump to content

A section where God can be discussed and debunked.


201ajgrant
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 16
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Ain't gonna happen. This is not a God forum, it is a time travel forum (primarily, with some other fringey topics mixed in). If you want to invoke God as part of your discussion of any of the topical forums we have here, go right ahead. But God has all the real estate (real AND virtual) S/He needs, S/He does not need more of that here. ;)

 

RMT

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to see this ... with an ultimate aim of creating a dialogue that divorces god from time travel, and bitterly divorces god from spirituality.

On every TT site that I've been on (including this one and the now defunct Anomalies.net forum) where there was a religious discussion forum it very quickly devolved to uncontrolled rancor, people being banned, attracting even more Fruitbats than normal, unchecked flame wars, etc.

 

Another part of my objection is how you worded the above. If the aim of a discussion forum is to assume a very narrowly defined specific position, such as having the "ultimate aim of creating a dialogue that divorces god from time travel, and bitterly divorces god from spirituality", it has no intention of allowing a dialogue. It is by self definition a monologue. That alone would be the gasoline fuelling the fire that would quickly end up as described in the previous paragraph.

 

So I have to go with Ray on this. Not a good idea.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On every TT site that I've been on (including this one and the now defunct Anomalies.net forum) where there was a religious discussion forum it very quickly devolved to uncontrolled rancor, people being banned, attracting even more Fruitbats than normal, unchecked flame wars, etc.

Another part of my objection is how you worded the above. If the aim of a discussion forum is to assume a very narrowly defined specific position, such as having the "ultimate aim of creating a dialogue that divorces god from time travel, and bitterly divorces god from spirituality", it has no intention of allowing a dialogue. It is by self definition a monologue. That alone would be the gasoline fuelling the fire that would quickly end up as described in the previous paragraph.

 

So I have to go with Ray on this. Not a good idea.

Since when has ANY discussion not had narrow aims? A contrary idea is folly.

 

The monologue is clearly there - it needed no emphasis as it was its' own emphath.

 

Since this idea is being rejected (somewhat) ... then I propose an outright banning of anyone whom suggests god is behind time travel ... since a thread negatively discussing such is against accepted protocol.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

In deed. It is my experience that persons who would rid me of God want to play Him.

 

And, while I do not presume to tell others what they should or shouldn't believe,

 

my deference is to the Holy Spirit alone. Thankful, I recognize Him in people everywhere

 

for, otherwise, devoid of virtue, man is but reptilian beast.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

This thread is a prime example of why we don't have such a "God debunking" section of this site. Again, I restate my earlier opinion that this site should stick to time travel and conspiracy theories. It's the same reason why I attempted to send Syzygy and 201ajgrant to debate.org to continue their arguments in another thread.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Consider this for a moment if you will: What is thought ? How does conscious thought evoke physical manipulations? Not only within the brain of the host vehicle, but also at the macro-scale? Such occurrences of physical manipulations, transfer of information, etc., can certainly appear to be proven, but the question which remains unsolvable, is how? My presence here is a good example. I am disproved, and recognized as a fraud, or some type of hoax, yet, I "know" that I exist here. So how can this be? It can be argued that I am constructing the reality within my own perception of reality. This argument would be correct; however, it may also be incorrect, as it could be possible that independent observers could also be conscious entities, separate from my experience. I have no proof this is the case, but I also have no proof to the contrary condition.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This argument would be correct; however, it may also be incorrect, as it could be possible that independent observers could also be conscious entities, separate from my experience. I have no proof this is the case, but I also have no proof to the contrary condition.

So in other words, you are engaged in mental (and as far as posting here, verbal) masturbation? I always get a kick out of people who post "such and such could be true, or not..." In covering all the possible bases, you have basically added nothing of value to a point of discovery, and not even much of an opinion. But I guess some people just like to hear themselves talk (or read themselves type).

 

RMT

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, Rainman Time, you are correct. I was being far too vague in order to not appear too odd. So, I will give you a more concise explanation. 1. People here have labeled me as a hoax item. That is ok, because I know that I exist and what we have experience is real. 2. I have seen it, and been there, and so have the people I work with. We know what it is like; the entire sensory experience is as real as we can possibly expect it to be, being so identical to what we already know to be reality, as to therefore make it reality. 3. Label me a hoax, I do not care. 4. Contact me, and meet with us, and then make your judgements.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. People here have labeled me as a hoax item.

Um. You have admitted that you are a hoax.

 

3. Label me a hoax, I do not care.

Glad to hear it. I'll make you a deal: I will label you a hoax, as you request, if you just stop trying to convince people you are a time traveler. Deal? I mean, if you are as secure in your realness as you say you are, then there should be no need for you to even mention it or try to convince anyone else that you are. Right? You are satisfied that you are experiencing time travel and you don't care if others believe you or not. So just pretend you are a "normal" person of this time interacting on this website.

 

Problem solved. I am engineer. Hear me roar.

 

RMT

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...