Trolls and Attention Whores

[Nick_A]

Oh Little Nicky, you are so out of your league!
bybee

Christianity as opposed to christendom, requires becoming capable of freedom from the self deception New Age critical thinking supports. That is why I support those capable of impartial reason rather than back patters.

Wht is more logical? TH's "education" likes to put down those like Simone Weil yet Albert Camus wrote:

"Simone Weil, I still know this now, is the only great mind of our times and I hope that those who realize this have enough modesty to not try to appropriate her overwhelming witnessing."

T.S. Eliot wrote:

A woman of genius, of a kind of genius akin to that of the saints


Malcolm Muggeridge wrote:

In my opinion, the most luminous intelligence of the twentieth century

So the "educated" pat each other on the back and share put downs, while those that truly understand something are not so quick to condemn.

I am out of my league because I prefer those that are capable of impartial reason rather than back patters. You've made your choice and I've made mine.

 

[Nick_A]

And, at times, Webster is left scratching his head in bewilderment. And so the language grows!
bybee

Have you considered auditioning to appear on the View as an alternate? If Whoopi gets sick, bybee's here to save the day.

 

[bybee]

Very Interesting!

Very Interesting!

Christianity as opposed to chrisendom, requires becoming capable of freedom from the self deception New Age critical thinking supports. That is why I support those capable of impartial reason rather than back patters.

Wht is more logical? TH's "education" likes to put down those like Simone Weil yet Albert Camus wrote:

"Simone Weil, I still know this now, is the only great mind of our times and I hope that those who realize this have enough modesty to not try to appropriate her overwhelming witnessing."

T.S. Eliot wrote:

A woman of genius, of a kind of genius akin to that of the saints


Malcolm Muggeridge wrote:

In my opinion, the most luminous intelligence of the twentieth century

So the "educated" pat each other on the back and share put downs, while those that truly understand something are not so quick to condemn.

I am out of my league because I prefer those that are capable of impartial reason rather than back patters. You've made your choice and I've made mine.

I've received a few pejorative labels, but, never have I been called a "Back Patter"! I feel so common, so at one with the crowd!
But, as you get to know me better, you will find that "Lambaster" is more in keeping with my character!
A question: By labeling me a "Back Patter", are you, in fact, condemning me?
peace, bybee

 

[Nick_A]

I've received a few pejorative labels, but, never have I been called a "Back Patter"! I feel so common, so at one with the crowd!
But, as you get to know me better, you will find that "Lambaster" is more in keeping with my character!
A question: By labeling me a "Back Patter", are you, in fact, condemning me?
peace, bybee

I'm not condemning but merely recognizing the dynamics of a situation. Your posts directed at me that lack substance suggest you prefer back patting to impartial reason. When you refer to being out of ones league without any attempt at explanation, you are back patting these people.

 

[Ps82]

Hi rainee,
So busy lately - so have only a few minutes to write at them time.
You wrote:

Don't you understand?
If we stay together we will figure out scripture mysteries.

You know I tried to confess this thing about mysteries to you years ago when you put something up about your study on what the temple floor and porch was made of in Jesus day. Do you remember? I never cared about that. I never heard of anyone who cared about that. And yet? If you were right - then when the Lord knelt down and began writing in the dirt He was [actually] writing on top of stone. His finger was tracing in dirt on stone. Do you remember me trying to warn you about that? I tried to tell you - you would be giving your stuff away. You may have found the visual imagery of Jesus writing with His finger on stone just as once it was done by The LORD in the OT.

I remember that conversation and your warning, but discovering these truths and hoping that other believers can see the same thing as me is what is rewarding. What good would it do for me to discover a mystery and not share it? I can't share some of these ideas with good church friends because they hold me accountable to teach Bible study (without any speculation and/or doing my own commentaries) on Sunday. I love teaching God's word and would not want to jeopardize this blessing by going on a limb to try to get them to see what I see. I hope this is not being two-faced, but some people just don't want to hear new ideas.

I love sharing here ... and many still don't want to hear my ideas ... but at least I get to express them and argue the case of why I believe these things to be Biblical.

You wondered:

Wouldn't it be better if you went to politics and I did whatever?
Forget about those who insult me - what about those who would steal from me - or you? Who would write their book or whatever.

I thought about this. Once I began a book of my own ... but the idea kept coming to me that I do not know Hebrew or any other ancient languages ... I have no degrees in theology ... and have no other clout than I teach an adult Sunday School Class and read my KJV Bible. Any thing I write might just become a detriment to the cause of Christ ... so I put all this in the LORD's hands. If there are like minded people, who see what I am seeing, and think it is worthwhile and provable, then I am trusting the LORD to lead them to contact me and give me some of the credit. Of course, I'd love to become wealthy!!! But, one who is 'an idea thief ' can face God if the are dishonest about how they use my original ideas.

I get great pleasure when people occasionally remark that they see what I am seeing.

You wrote:

I came looking for you because I really missed you. And I really enjoyed seeing how you worked with scripture - but already I gave something away here. I told you abut it.

That's why I don't want to see you go. Are you planning to write a book? We could write privately ... about ideas you are not ready to share.

You asked:

Do you think that is right? Will you always get more? Or are we all only given a certain amount. What if it is up to us what we do with it? Does that sound totally un-Calvinist of me to say that?

This is a good question. I seem to have been given one big reality ... and this has helped me understand other scripture... but the book of Revelation is still some what of a mystery to me. What ideas I do have are so different from anything I've heard out of anyoneelse's mouth that even I have trouble accepting them.

I have had the same thought - What if it is up to me to do something with it.

Well, I could hide it like the fellow with the few talents and find that God was not satisfied.

I guess, though I feel unworthy, I could invest in writing a book and hope that it would be greatly accepted... rather than being mocked for my lack of worldly credentials.

Or ... I could multiply my gift in another way... like sharing on TOL. You know I have been other places too. I think of it like planting seeds ... and where God waters them ... they will grow. Every once in a while I hear one of my ideas expressed (very closely to my words) by ministers on TV. Whether God has personally shown them the idea or they have actually come to TOL to lurk - I don't know ... but it is satisfying to hear my theories verified by those with clout.

You asked:

But a parable teaches that, doesn't it? We are given what we are given. Shouldn't we value that?

It is special ... and I just love sharing it ... and am compelled to tell it over and over. People at TOL, at the moment, are the lucky, yet sometimes hesitant:think:, recipients of my golden nuggets.

 

[Town Heretic]

Christianity as opposed to christendom, requires becoming capable of freedom from the self deception New Age critical thinking supports.

If you have a real and sustainable point in any of that it's lost in the nonsensical attempt to redefine critical thinking skills you neither evidence the possession of nor seem to grasp the fundamental methodology regarding.

That is why I support those capable of impartial reason rather than back patters.

Wht is more logical? TH's "education" likes to put down those like Simone Weil

No. My education and the application of it may take me down a road in opposition to any number of intelligent and interesting people, but that's another thing entirely...or do you only honor those with whom you agree completely? Weil hastened her own death with a needless and melodramatic bit of personal theater that lessened my respect for her and gave context to my criticism regarding your adoration of her.

Albert Camus wrote:

And? He also said that abstract art was "A product of the untalented, sold by the unprincipled to the utterly bewildered." Want the short list of artistic geniuses who take issue? Which is my way of saying: so? He was entitled to an opinion. That entitlement doesn't carry authority outside of his noggin or beyond those inclined to pat him on the back.

T.S. Eliot wrote:

He also said that April is the cruelest month...but it isn't, really.

Malcolm Muggeridge wrote:

And who also penned this ditty: "The orgasm has replaced the cross as the focus of longing and fulfillment."

So there's that for his opinion. lain:

Nice bit of Bartlett's Tourette's though. oly:

So the "educated" pat each other on the back

He said, using the quotes of the well educated to pat his own.

...while those that truly understand something are not so quick to condemn.

And then you pat your own. :chuckle: Well, someone has to, I suppose.

I am out of my league because I prefer those that are capable of impartial reason rather than back patters.

No, I think it's mostly a matter of ability and a want of focused, academic discipline, but that's just an educated guess. lain:

You've made your choice and I've made mine.

It suits you.

:e4e:

 

[Ps82]

Hi Rainee,
Yes, it is fun! or else I would not have been writing for almost 10 (?) years now.

May not be able to write after today for a week or two. I'll try to catch up later.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

it is your thread
you can lock it at anytime
go ahead
do it
it is fun
but
it will upset some

Error!

Blue members cannot lock threads.

Please review:
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19318

AMR

 

[Nick_A]

Town Heretic

No. My education and the application of it may take me down a road in opposition to any number of intelligent and interesting people, but that's another thing entirely...or do you only honor those with whom you agree completely? Weil hastened her own death with a needless and melodramatic bit of personal theater that lessened my respect for her and gave context to my criticism regarding your adoration of her.

All this means is that your version of New Age critical thinking only serves to justify your narrow-mindedness. People with the need to leave the cave are odd to you because you are only concerned with justifying your subjective conceptions of cave life.

Most are like you. Yet I will post this classic observation for the benefit of those that have the scent of something more to human existence than acclimating to cave life.

"Pity them my children, they are far from home and no one knows them. Let those in quest of God be careful lest appearances deceive them in these people who are peculiar and hard to place; no one rightly knows them but those in whom the same light shines" Meister Eckhart

And? He also said that abstract art was "A product of the untalented, sold by the unprincipled to the utterly bewildered." Want the short list of artistic geniuses who take issue? Which is my way of saying: so? He was entitled to an opinion. That entitlement doesn't carry authority outside of his noggin or beyond those inclined to pat him on the back.

Albert Camus is right since he appreciates a quality necessary for art as distinct from human expression and providing its objective worth. As usual Simone gets it.

"A work of art has an author and yet, when it is perfect, it has something which is anonymous about it." Simone Weil

And who also penned this ditty: "The orgasm has replaced the cross as the focus of longing and fulfillment."

It is true.

How many are still capable of the need for understanding to dominate the desire for pleasure. Simone was one.

No, I think it's mostly a matter of ability and a want of focused, academic discipline, but that's just an educated guess.

This focused narrow-mindedness is good for going around in circles normal for cave life or samsara. Yet some realize it for what it really is:

"The difference between more or less intelligent men is like the difference between criminals condemned to life imprisonment in smaller or larger cells. The intelligent man who is proud of his intelligence is like a condemned man who is proud of his large cell." Simone Weil

You wish to glorify inner slavery and I respect those having come to admit the human condition for what it is and begin striving to become themselves.

 

[PlastikBuddha]

You wish to glorify inner slavery and I respect those having come to admit the human condition for what it is and begin striving to become themselves.

It must be such a burden to be so enlightened in a world of such dullards.
Why not follow Simone's shining example and disappear into your behind in a malodorous poof of reverse flatulence?
Or you could get over yourself and step away from the philoso-mystical babble and have a real conversation that doesn't involve quite so much self-congratulations and try a little genuine humility.
Either way.

 

[Nick_A]

It must be such a burden to be so enlightened in a world of such dullards.
Why not follow Simone's shining example and disappear into your behind in a malodorous poof of reverse flatulence?
Or you could get over yourself and step away from the philoso-mystical babble and have a real conversation that doesn't involve quite so much self-congratulations and try a little genuine humility.
Either way.

Not at all. It's like chess. I'm basically a 1900 player. I can feel important beating 1200 players or get slaughtered by 2100 players. I prefer being slaughtered. I don't worry about 1200 players but seek out 2100 players to lose to when I want to increase my skills.

Casual conversation is one thing. I can comment on the female behind as well as the next man. However, when dealing with the questions of the heart that attracts human "being" to its objective meaning and purpose, it requires more than casual comments on the female behind.

 

[PlastikBuddha]

Not at all. It's like chess. I'm basically a 1900 player. I can feel important beating 1200 players or get slaughtered by 2100 players. I prefer being slaughtered. I don't worry about 1200 players but seek out 2100 players to lose to when I want to increase my skills.

Casual conversation is one thing. I can comment on the female behind as well as the next man. However, when dealing with the questions of the heart that attracts human "being" to its objective meaning and purpose, it requires more than casual comments on the female behind.

It also requires more than buzzwords and mindless repetition. That's you right out of the running.

 

[Town Heretic]

All this means is that your version of New Age critical thinking

There's no such thing. Only critical thinking and, well, that thing you do. :guitar:

Most are like you. Yet I will post this classic observation for the benefit of those that have the scent of something more to human existence than acclimating to cave life.

If indirect self celebration was an Olympic event you'd be a national hero. And everyone knows you have a well thumbed Bartlett's.

"Pity them my children, they are far from home and no one knows them. Let those in quest of God be careful lest appearances deceive them in these people who are peculiar and hard to place; no one rightly knows them but those in whom the same light shines" Meister Eckhart

So you're more enlightened AND morally superior. And he takes the gold. Cue the anthem.

Is there an idea you have that is either your own or that you're capable of voicing for yourself? When someone leans this much on quotations the question arises.

This focused narrow-mindedness is good for going around in circles normal for cave life or samsara. Yet some realize it for what it really is:

Completely at odds with what an academic education is and what someone without it is far more likely to be blinkered by absent the means to recognize or escape it.

You wish to glorify inner slavery

Rather, I'm pointing out the difference between thinking you're free and being able to say why. lain:

 

[Nick_A]

It also requires more than buzzwords and mindless repetition. That's you right out of the running.

Mindless repetition?? I'd be willing to bet that a thread discussing differing opinions as to the ideal female behind from an esthetic perspective would be a first on TOL.

 

[PlastikBuddha]

Mindless repetition?? I'd be willing to bet that a thread discussing differing opinions as to the ideal female behind from an esthetic perspective would be a first on TOL.

It would certainly be a welcome change from your usual "great beast" and "neo-critical thinking" nonsense...
:thumb:

 

[Arthur Brain]

Mindless repetition?? I'd be willing to bet that a thread discussing differing opinions as to the ideal female behind from an esthetic perspective would be a first on TOL.

That would be 'aesthetic' perspective, and a reversed abbreviation of your user name would fit in quite nicely within the term for how some of your posts are not exactly the most stimulating....

Or in other words: 'Anaesthetic'....lain:

 

[Nick_A]

That would be 'aesthetic' perspective, and a reversed abbreviation of your user name would fit in quite nicely within the term for how some of your posts are not exactly the most stimulating....

Or in other words: 'Anaesthetic'....lain:

You dug deep for that one liner. He thinks I lack a stimulating post. Well we all have our good days and bad days. Such is life.

 

[Arthur Brain]

You dug deep for that one liner. He thinks I lack a stimulating post. Well we all have our good days and bad days. Such is life.

Indeed. It took me 48 minutes to come up with it. On a good day it takes me 6 hours to develop the concept, run with it, and finally decide it's not worth inflicting on the general forum. This has not been one of those good days. *sigh*

So anyway, what's your excuse?

 

[Nick_A]

Indeed. It took me 48 minutes to come up with it. On a good day it takes me 6 hours to develop the concept, run with it, and finally decide it's not worth inflicting on the general forum. This has not been one of those good days. *sigh*

So anyway, what's your excuse?

Probably misguided envy. I've read about how great minds of the past like Jesus and Socrates have always been hated. It seems that the more a person begins to understand in the real meaning of the word, the more they must be hated.

Simone Weil had this ability:

The Director of Career Placement, Ecole Normale Supérieure wrote:

"We shall send the Red Virgin as far away as possible so that we shall never hear of her again"

Now that is real hatred and a normal response from those types to her "lucid madness for truth." I was never that brave or talented in the cause of common sense to earn such a remark.

I'm still just an annoyance. Naturally this is not so easy to accept so at times I become careless and let real opportunties for understanding pass me by.

But, as they say, "nothing ventured, nothing gained" so I just try to remain impartially open to "understanding."

 

[Lovejoy]

I'm still just an annoyance. Naturally this is not so easy to accept...

I think that is the most we can aspire to in this contemporary society. People do not seem to take greatness very seriously (Socrates, I think, would be virtually unknown), and reserve most of their bile for fallen sports figures and reality television stars. At best, you may find yourself hated by one or two truly interesting people, and count yourself blessed. (not sure if any of that was ironic or not, might have been)