Cobie Posted June 30 (edited) 15 minutes ago, NaturaNaturans said: It is. Is that not allowed? No, politics is only allowed in a subforum. On 22/03/2024 at 8:05 PM, steve said: … All political discussion is limited to that area … You can request access, here https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/52830-current-events-discussion/?do=findComment&comment=1034434 Edited June 30 by Cobie 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cobie Posted June 30 31 minutes ago, NaturaNaturans said: … I just think ive given our Friend the benefit of the doubt a few to many times by now. Maybe he confused you with Salvijus Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NaturaNaturans Posted June 30 He didnt. It is just the mode he goes into when he dont know what to say. A certain type act like that. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
doc benway Posted June 30 59 minutes ago, NaturaNaturans said: It is. Is that not allowed? I just think ive given our Friend the benefit of the doubt a few to many times by now. It is not allowed. Political discussion is limited to Current Events. Thanks for your cooperation. 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cobie Posted June 30 @NaturaNaturans I use the ignore list a lot. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted June 30 3 hours ago, Daniel said: ...is bogus. Academics. The problem there is no one has the balls to stand up to their teacher and say: "That's wrong and here's why." They want their diploma. They want to join the ivory tower club. It's a game. Accuracy is not actually valued as much as people ( outsiders ) tend to assign to them. Errors are permitted because their peer-review process is deemed to be inerrant. I'm exaggerating regarding that inerrancy, but, once something is published in academics, people think it MUST be correct. Then they site it, and site it, and site it... pretty soon the error has inertia and nothing can challenge it. If you need examples, recall what happens anytime I try to correct someone false conceptions which they "heard somewhere was Academic". The truth is, most of this stuff comes from YouTube videos which are "reporting" that an Academic said, X,Y,Z. And even if they did actually find something written by an Academic, Academics do not live, eat, and breathe Judaism. They enjoy making discoveries. And the more novel and/or scandalous the discovery the more they enjoy it. "Hey, Jew, did you know you're practicing Zoroastrianism... hahaha". The Academic expert most cite is Doyle, if I recall. Mary Doyle? Anyway. I've read large sections of her book. She makes so many mistakes regarding Judaism, it's ridiculous. People, Academics, don't know our religion. But they think they're experts. Load of rubbish Daniel . Why create such divisions within your imagined Jewishness being separate from everything else . There are plenty of Jewish academics, highly acclaimed and intelligent ... or are you 'not counting' Jewish academia' in your little anti-semtic tirade here ? I have heard Rabbi's talk on and show evidence about what YOU deny here (without evidence at all ! ) ... I suppose some Jewish academics and Rabbis are valid and others are not .... Hmmmmmm ?????? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted June 30 (edited) On 7/1/2024 at 5:37 AM, NaturaNaturans said: You are being dishonest again Daniel, and objectively misrepresnting me. But yes, I preger terms as «messed up,» and «disgusting and disturbing,» to evil. Like this passage: Thats how he works ..... HE brings rape into it ! The OT is full of rape accounts and men who turn a blind eye to it ... 'good men in the eyes of God' . But let's not forget God is also the Devil and not evil Quote Samuel 18:25-27 New International Version 25 Saul replied, “Say to David, ‘The king wants no other price for the bride than a hundred Philistine foreskins, to take revenge on his enemies.’” Saul’s plan was to have David fall by the hands of the Philistines. 26 When the attendants told David these things, he was pleased to become the king’s son-in-law. So before the allotted time elapsed, 27 David took his men with him and went out and killed two hundred Philistines and brought back their foreskins. They counted out the full number to the king so that David might become the king’s son-in-law. Then Saul gave him his daughter Michal in marriage. Disgusting and disturbing for sure. Evil? Not to you I assume, so not objectively so. ... And then they put the foreskins on their fingers like wedding rings and danced down the streets singing . Evil? Devil Bad ? To many the OT is FULL of weird psychotic behavior ; Fathers about to sacrifice their sons to some patriarchal deity ( to be stopped by an angel ... 'we just wanted to see if you where going to do it .') fathers throwing 'their' women out the house into the street to be gang raped by a mob of men ( then chopping their dead body up into bits and posting it to their relatives - hey ... its 'symbolic' ! ) 200 foreskins for a dowry , 1000s killed , by their own people in religious / ethnic 'cleansing' ( way to get a 'monotheistic government ; do what you are told ... God says so ! ) .... just kill anyone not in your political/religious clan , then you can claim origins going back before Zoroastrianism . All just following 'the will of God' . Its just so weird .... I have Jewish friends and they are NOTHING like this , they acknowledge it for what it actually is ... and there is no problem between us (one has difficulty understanding some of our cultural concepts I am as brutally honest about my own culture as well ...... when it is based on brutality ) Edited July 1 by Nungali Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted June 30 2 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said: It is. Is that not allowed? I just think ive given our Friend the benefit of the doubt a few to many times by now. Its a tactic to try and shut you down . It was a passing reference and brief comment NOT a political discussion . I often wonder 'what's up with Cobie ... DUDES didnt you see the rape stuff NaturaNaturans just got dumped with . The 'passive aggressive' 'masked avenger' strikes again ! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Posted June 30 3 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said: Is that not allowed? It's not allowed on this forum. @zerostao stated it rather clearly in one of your threads, maybe, 3 months ago? Maybe less. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Posted June 30 51 minutes ago, Nungali said: Its a tactic to try and shut you down It's the rules of the forum. This is not a place for political discourse. It's toxic and threatens the TheDaoBums.com. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Posted June 30 53 minutes ago, Nungali said: DUDES didnt you see the rape stuff NaturaNaturans just got dumped with . That's not political. The man said he cannot see any objective difference between good and evil. I have used the same Rape example to prove there is an objective difference between good and evil to @NaturaNaturans in the past. This time it's different because, Natura has clarified his point of view. It's great that this cleared that up. In order for Natura and I to have a real discussion, a meeting of the minds, so to speak on this topic, "Who/what is Satan", we need to understand each other. We need to be relating, accurately, to each other ideas. Otherwise we are not communicating and this is futile. This issue of "non-objectivity" could be a serious road-block in this discussion. It either needs to be avoided or resolved. That's precisely what I did. It doesn't need to be an issue. Unless, it does. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Posted June 30 3 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said: You are being dishonest again Daniel It's not dishonest. To the contrary. If there is a fault, of mine, I am being too honest. Words have meanings. You said what you said. 3 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said: I preger terms as «messed up,» and «disgusting and disturbing,» to evil No problem. It don't understand your objection, but I don't need to understand it. Have you had time to digest what I wrote? The 2 foundational concepts: 1) Satan is not inherently disgusting, disturbing, or messed-up? 2) Anything occurring in the the immaterial realms is an event which is happening, not an object? How do you feel about these two ideas? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Posted July 1 (edited) @Maddie Sorry, it's not Doyle... it's Boyce. Edited July 1 by Daniel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted July 1 22 hours ago, Daniel said: That's not political. The man said he cannot see any objective difference between good and evil. I have used the same Rape example to prove there is an objective difference between good and evil to @NaturaNaturans in the past. This time it's different because, Natura has clarified his point of view. It's great that this cleared that up. In order for Natura and I to have a real discussion, a meeting of the minds, so to speak on this topic, "Who/what is Satan", we need to understand each other. We need to be relating, accurately, to each other ideas. Otherwise we are not communicating and this is futile. This issue of "non-objectivity" could be a serious road-block in this discussion. It either needs to be avoided or resolved. That's precisely what I did. It doesn't need to be an issue. Unless, it does. But why use the rape example ? There are many crimes one could use to show the difference between objective and subjective 'good and evil' . Many a person here ascribes to the view point that evil is a human subjective value and there is no 'objective good or evil ' . We might care if someone steals a small amount of money from us .... not many other people will nor will 'the Universe' or any thing else 'not human ' . Upscale the crime (say, to murder ) and that is harder to understand . To ' force your view' ( on some crime being objective ) by using a bad, oppressive and emotive crime , to garner sympathy for your cause ... whatever that is ! - is an old trick in the objective / subjective good and evil debate . Its a BAD crime, it should not be done but beyond human perceptions ( real objectivity ) it is not good or bad - those judgements exist in our minds and cultures ... and they vary from culture to culture and time and place within each culture . Its been debated many times here . There ! Now you can point the tainted 'what about rape' finger at me ! The weird thing is , you yourself claim this non subjectivity for all sorts of evil that their 'God' wanted the Jews to do ! - according to your 'God is everything and all, even Satan, no evil' philosophy . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Posted July 1 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Nungali said: But why use the rape example ? Because it is undeniably and objectively evil. Very few things are pure evil. Rape is one of them. When someone denies that evil objectively exists, it's the easiest way to prove that it does. Edited July 1 by Daniel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Posted July 1 16 minutes ago, Nungali said: according to your 'God is everything and all, even Satan, no evil' philosophy . Did I say this or imply it? No evil? I argued that evil absolutely and objectively exists in at least one form: Rape. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Posted July 1 (edited) On 6/30/2024 at 3:13 PM, Nungali said: Why create such divisions Differences and distinctions inherently exist. Diversity is the spice of life. Forcing everything to be equal is ... boring. Edited July 1 by Daniel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted July 1 And Jehovah condones it ! In more than one example . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nungali Posted July 1 Just now, Daniel said: Differences and disticntions inherently exist. Diveristy is the spice of life. Forcing everything to equal is ... boring. And selectively exclduing and insluding snippets for response is rather telling .... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Posted July 1 (edited) 41 minutes ago, Nungali said: And selectively exclduing and insluding snippets for response is rather telling .... The remainder of your reply was distracting and unnecessary to quote. Edited July 1 by Daniel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Posted July 1 @NaturaNaturans, I still intend to fully answer the question posed at the beginning of this thread. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
old3bob Posted July 2 On 6/30/2024 at 12:37 PM, Daniel said: ... which is inherently inaccurate. which is bullshit 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
old3bob Posted July 2 if or when evil bites one on the ass speculative talk becomes more or less meaningless. For example but on a whole different scale, it's not unlike when one is healthy and well while speculating from a safe distance on a sickness that someone else has, but if they then get sick most fiddling around with speculations, textual or otherwise goes out the window for then the only or main emotion and thought is how to get well again or least recognize such with a clear as possible mind about it. (for fear and panic is the mind killer, to paraphrase a line from Dune) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Posted July 2 1 hour ago, old3bob said: which is bullshit nice come-back Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Posted July 2 51 minutes ago, old3bob said: if or when evil bites Evil is not the topic Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
