; Converting the dying - Page 28 - Georgia Outdoor News Forum
 


GON Magazine | GON Classifieds

Go Back   Georgia Outdoor News Forum > Spiritual Help and Religion Discussions > Atheists/Agnostics/Apologetics


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #676  
Old 12-31-2017, 08:43 AM
Israel's Avatar
Israel Israel is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Guyton, Ga
iTrader: (0) Check/Add Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bullethead View Post
Israel, after your usual 6am-ish 3 flusher you again miss the bowl, err...point entirely.

When you ask me something I take the time to read it through(usually 5 times) and answer it honestly. You get an answer that is on topic and to the point.

If and when you reply, you answer with a lengthy(see above) reply where you turn it into a self question and answer session to somehow lead the conversation into a thought that you had overnight but that has nothing to do with what was initially asked. You are the only one in the conversation at that point. More specifically when the question is directed at you and puts you in a position that an honest answer is required, you literally ignore it instead of being honest. After 2nd and 3rd direct requests to answer the questions you suddenly gets writers cramp.

Do us all a favor and nock off this two similar peas in a pod shtick. Yet again your assertions and claims to not match your actions.
How soft is soft?

Rightly, perhaps I stand accused. But in this you would be I think very misled; that I do not take our conversation seriously. But do you see, even there, that presumption? For I am not sure that you do.

Do you believe I take you...less than seriously?

Do you think (will I have to soon ask you to forgive this analogy?) I am frivolous skater on ice, dashing off to twirl freely unhindered when any particular one may think my greater need is to be captured still...in conversation?

You say I am dishonest, and I know it would be a lie for me to resist in any form by seeking to prove I am not. But, that does not make me honest. I have simply learned the tell of the liar...and even liars may learn how to subdue their more outward signs (for their own advantage at the gaming table) that have previously given themselves away to a loss when being "called". So, what then?

I wondered recently if this was all mere game. Is it as it may appear? But, then, I hear things. See things. The conversation around the table is to be paid attention. I can't say I am taking this more seriously than any other, because in the conversations another seriousness is plainly presented. Maybe I am indeed the gamer, but you can see where it would be fruitless to ask any other at the table, for we all sit...at the same table.

You don't like the shtick. You claim to see through it. To see through...me. What are the odds...that is true? If it is a game, that would be very important where loss and win are all that matters. How many cards did he take on the draw? Does he stand pat because he really has something...or is it all bluff? If he drew three, what does that mean? One...is is to a flush, a straight? What will be shown when all are finally...called? Who has folded? Did they indeed have nothing? Or will they be the one who, at end sees his lone pair of deuces would have swept the table against all the other poseurs?

And for now, it appears only you and I are at it, but we would be silly to think, to assume, there are "no other witnesses". That we are always and only...locked up to ourselves. For I have heard at the table...oft mention of an "us". Who represents the "house" here where we know labels are so easily forged and worn to a duplicity?
Or, do we not yet know this? Whose house is this...truly? And, if there be any...what are the house rules?

Are any free to wander the halls, search the rooms for clue? Or, is the house so structured, and rules so structured that all are prevented from seeing anything other than what may be visible to them from their seat at the table? Then, I am indeed...cheat. For on my rest breaks I looked other places and no one I found then, forbad me. So, am I cheat?

Indeed, one said "why not talk like we are just two guys in a boat?" This seems counter to two peas in a pod shtick. One seems to say "be more like me when we are together, (as though being so) more plain spoken that some substance of understanding can accrue to it." While another seems to say "make no assumption that we are at all, alike". Who bends in such a case...and to what? How much bending is being asked, in either direction toward, or away from a commonality? Be more "this way" or that? Is understanding really the end? Or just manipulation?

I confess, one of the doors I opened on my breaks was all of complete void. Empty of anything I could see. As far as I could see. No one forbad me opening it. Is this a house rule though? No opening of doors? Did I miss the memo?

I came away from that door. I know what I saw in all my not seeing, anything. What was the terror of it remained for some time. The experience "told" me something. The vastness of it can only mean one thing, it is far greater than the house I see in walls, and doors and rooms...it must encompass it. The things in which my eye finds a stop...an end...in perception. The reflection back of things...did not happen there. No form perceived, nothing upon which my eye could fix and say "this is...there". No answer, no echo. And the thing I learned there, even in the midst of its terror was this: the things I seem to know are always in contrast of exclusion to what is unknown, so that even things seemingly known owe their shape against this. But the unknown is infinite. It is not dependent upon the known, for its shape. For, it has none. Yet, it contains all the shapes. By which a man might navigate...even to that "room". And in that, I was comforted. Even in terror. There is an allowance for shapes of things. Even out from that infinite unknowable. This is what I believe I would call, as I believe have many, many others...grace. "Allowance for"...shapes of things given to shapes of things, till in some form of understanding "shapes" are not perceived as the all and only, and what was formerly of mere shape...may become as "real" as that infinite.

So, when at this table in which shape of game seems to take place I hear a man say a thing like (for I will not peruse the posts, or search to find verbatim, but trust instead my memory may be reliable to an end of understanding) this:

"The God I can believe in is the God I am not able in any way to comprehend" (would it be right to say "capture with my understanding?")

I must ask...do I remember correctly? Have I been paying attention? Do I take this speaker...seriously? Are his accusations of my frivolity sound? Or has he too, opened a door in his wanderings...and at least come away...even a little bit...like me?
__________________
I ain't the most self aware man, Bobby, but if I met myself in a dark alley, ain't both of us gunna walk out." Jimmy "Packrat" Soos, "Partners at the Divide"

Last edited by Israel; 12-31-2017 at 09:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #677  
Old 12-31-2017, 05:22 PM
atlashunter's Avatar
atlashunter atlashunter is online now
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Harris county
iTrader: (3) Check/Add Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Israel View Post
How soft is soft?

Rightly, perhaps I stand accused. But in this you would be I think very misled; that I do not take our conversation seriously. But do you see, even there, that presumption? For I am not sure that you do.

Do you believe I take you...less than seriously?

Do you think (will I have to soon ask you to forgive this analogy?) I am frivolous skater on ice, dashing off to twirl freely unhindered when any particular one may think my greater need is to be captured still...in conversation?

You say I am dishonest, and I know it would be a lie for me to resist in any form by seeking to prove I am not. But, that does not make me honest. I have simply learned the tell of the liar...and even liars may learn how to subdue their more outward signs (for their own advantage at the gaming table) that have previously given themselves away to a loss when being "called". So, what then?

I wondered recently if this was all mere game. Is it as it may appear? But, then, I hear things. See things. The conversation around the table is to be paid attention. I can't say I am taking this more seriously than any other, because in the conversations another seriousness is plainly presented. Maybe I am indeed the gamer, but you can see where it would be fruitless to ask any other at the table, for we all sit...at the same table.

You don't like the shtick. You claim to see through it. To see through...me. What are the odds...that is true? If it is a game, that would be very important where loss and win are all that matters. How many cards did he take on the draw? Does he stand pat because he really has something...or is it all bluff? If he drew three, what does that mean? One...is is to a flush, a straight? What will be shown when all are finally...called? Who has folded? Did they indeed have nothing? Or will they be the one who, at end sees his lone pair of deuces would have swept the table against all the other poseurs?

And for now, it appears only you and I are at it, but we would be silly to think, to assume, there are "no other witnesses". That we are always and only...locked up to ourselves. For I have heard at the table...oft mention of an "us". Who represents the "house" here where we know labels are so easily forged and worn to a duplicity?
Or, do we not yet know this? Whose house is this...truly? And, if there be any...what are the house rules?

Are any free to wander the halls, search the rooms for clue? Or, is the house so structured, and rules so structured that all are prevented from seeing anything other than what may be visible to them from their seat at the table? Then, I am indeed...cheat. For on my rest breaks I looked other places and no one I found then, forbad me. So, am I cheat?

Indeed, one said "why not talk like we are just two guys in a boat?" This seems counter to two peas in a pod shtick. One seems to say "be more like me when we are together, (as though being so) more plain spoken that some substance of understanding can accrue to it." While another seems to say "make no assumption that we are at all, alike". Who bends in such a case...and to what? How much bending is being asked, in either direction toward, or away from a commonality? Be more "this way" or that? Is understanding really the end? Or just manipulation?

I confess, one of the doors I opened on my breaks was all of complete void. Empty of anything I could see. As far as I could see. No one forbad me opening it. Is this a house rule though? No opening of doors? Did I miss the memo?

I came away from that door. I know what I saw in all my not seeing, anything. What was the terror of it remained for some time. The experience "told" me something. The vastness of it can only mean one thing, it is far greater than the house I see in walls, and doors and rooms...it must encompass it. The things in which my eye finds a stop...an end...in perception. The reflection back of things...did not happen there. No form perceived, nothing upon which my eye could fix and say "this is...there". No answer, no echo. And the thing I learned there, even in the midst of its terror was this: the things I seem to know are always in contrast of exclusion to what is unknown, so that even things seemingly known owe their shape against this. But the unknown is infinite. It is not dependent upon the known, for its shape. For, it has none. Yet, it contains all the shapes. By which a man might navigate...even to that "room". And in that, I was comforted. Even in terror. There is an allowance for shapes of things. Even out from that infinite unknowable. This is what I believe I would call, as I believe have many, many others...grace. "Allowance for"...shapes of things given to shapes of things, till in some form of understanding "shapes" are not perceived as the all and only, and what was formerly of mere shape...may become as "real" as that infinite.

So, when at this table in which shape of game seems to take place I hear a man say a thing like (for I will not peruse the posts, or search to find verbatim, but trust instead my memory may be reliable to an end of understanding) this:

"The God I can believe in is the God I am not able in any way to comprehend" (would it be right to say "capture with my understanding?")

I must ask...do I remember correctly? Have I been paying attention? Do I take this speaker...seriously? Are his accusations of my frivolity sound? Or has he too, opened a door in his wanderings...and at least come away...even a little bit...like me?
__________________
"The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits." ~Plutarch
Reply With Quote
  #678  
Old 12-31-2017, 07:23 PM
bullethead bullethead is online now
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pa.
iTrader: (0) Check/Add Feedback
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by atlashunter View Post
__________________
Life on Earth is an expression of the available chemistry set.
Only what can happen does happen.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004 Georgia Outdoor News, Inc.Ad Management by RedTyger