For

The

Spider

We all express that which lives within us...

Whether we like it or not...

Whether we are aware of it or not...

Wheteher we practice it or not...

One can only speak of that to which one has been exposed...

I do not believe the notion that spider expressed is accurate... at all...

The peacefulness that Di intends on attempting to keep has been more than evident throughout her words...

Let us all respect one another...

This is a marvelous idea... let us keep the intention alive...

my doctrine of hedonism is now up

Well, for starters, don't EVER email me again with your open-palms humility act. Your putting words in my mouth is about as dishonest and arrogant a trick as there is. I was willing to let your calling me a 'jackass' to go by without apology and give you the benefit of the doubt-- now I know your true colors.

'Thall shalt not bear witness against your neighbor'?

Apparently that part of Chrisian doctrine goes into the dumper anytime your Ann Coulter-loving righteous indignation makes you forget those high-minded principles you're trying to sell to we unwashed hordes of unbelievers.

Or, as Ambrose Bierce said:

"Christian, n., One who believes that the New Testament is a divinely inspired book admirably suited to the spiritual needs of his neighbor. One who follows the teachings of Christ in so far as they are not inconsistent with a life of sin. "

As to what *I* believe? I believe I'll stay a cynic-- you can always count on people treating those outside their pack with a degree of contempt cloaked in smarm. It's one of the Sure Things on which one can count.

The only logical way to deal with certain people is an iterated series of Prisoner's Dilemmas-- "Fool me once, shame on you-- fool me twice, shame on me." And that, dear militant Christians, is why I ran FAR & FAST away from the faith years ago.

-Kerry O.

Actually my post was re-routed as it was meant to be and as Redy wished it.

KerryO

of course sweets your entitled to believe whatever it is you wish. But just ease up on me a little...and give me the same courtesy.

And of course you're free to expound at length on hellfire and damnation. It's been my experience that that's all you really have to bend unbelievers to genuflect to your religious sensibilities. Trouble is, we're not buying it anymore, so don't expect that doing so endlessly will give anyone the warm and fuzzies.

It's really no more than Ayn Rand's famous Argument from Intimidation.

-Kerry O.

KerryO,
Part of the reason for the new doctrines is so that no one need be where they 'choose' not to be.
So if one doctrine vexes your soul, bring it on over to another doctrine.
We have a doctrine of beer, of love and also the doctrine of All That Is.
Beware though, it may be that only one of these doctrines is correct, so choose wisely. Or visit them all, you are always welcome in the doctrine of All That Is, as well as the doctrine of Love, but the doctrine of Love (brothers) seem to becoming a bit 'full of themselves', but I will continue to accept each as they are simply a part of the All That Is.

Kerry, I didn't place any words into your mouth. I was satirizing the situation. This thread calls for open discussion of everyone's beliefs and you jumped onto Feral for posting her's. If you could step back for a second, you would see the irony. I'm sarcastic, that's how I roll. So I sarcastically pointed out the irony of your post. Feral didn't once say "Believe this way or you are going to hell heathen!". She stated what she believes and stated it as the truth (to her, if nobody else, it is the truth). So I think you need to lighten up, stop trying to be the victim and see that Feral was doing what everyone else in this forum does.

No amount of reasoning, logical arguments, rules, laws, or sophisitic justifications will ever cure cases of 'bad faith'.
A person chooses to act in good faith, or chooses not to!

While I'll be the first to agree that from a technical standpoint, 'catlady' might have addressed 'Red's' thread requirements, her use of the infamous 'choke the chicken' technique, posting a mile long 'list' as a starter for a multi-doctrine dialogue, can be seen by some as rather 'gauche' at best, while others are justified to perceive it as bad faith.

When invited to partake in a open-minded, multi-faceted 'exchange' with work collegues or friends (or on a friendly forum such as this one), coming in with a '... well, let me tell you about this ... and that's it for me!...' attitude, is hardly the spirit behind an invitation to 'EXCHANGE' views!

That, in my humble opinion is what 'Kerry'O' rightly critiqued in the 'catlady's' 'choke the chicken' opener.

While I would give the 'catlady' benefit of the doubt, and opt for a 'gauche' reflex of overflowing 'churchianity' on her part, rather than bad faith, I certainly wouldn't extend such benefit of doubt in the case of your 'false prince' defensive intervention. Blatant 'bad faith' if there is such thing.

Do not change anything about you faith, beliefs or convictions, 'spider'. But do envision a change of attitude, and seriously consider starting to act in 'good faith' when addressing posters with opposing views. Such a change would install crually missing civility, trust and respect between you and a large number of posters on these forums.

A new year, and a new day is upon us 'spider'! For 2008, I wish for the spirit to visit you with endless reserves of 'good faith' towards others, ... 'all others' !!!

Okay, first of all, "choke the chicken" is a euphemism for male masturbation. I think the term you are looking for is "scatter-shot".

But even that is incorrect. You see, Feral didn't post that for debate, she was posting Christian doctrine as she believed Redy wanted (and later realized that Redy wanted individual threads and made that correction). This wasn't a chance to debate, it was a chance to learn. When learning about another's faith, more information is good, right? Christian doctrine is very simple, but also there is a lot to it. So Feral was perfectly within her rights to offer as much detail as possible. I mean, this is a forum, where you can choose to read or ignore any post, so the length of her post shouldn't be a consideration. So I disagree with your assessment of what she posted. Your reasoning is flawed, because you prepose that she commited a logical fallacy (scatter-shot argument), while that couldn't possibly be the case because there was no debate. Is it Feral's fault that Chrisitian doctrine cannot be summed up into one paragraph without doing Christianity a disservice? I think not.



Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but it's in extremely bad taste to criticize someone for sharing her beliefs in a thread which is intended for that purpose.

Well, before your 'first of all', you must be instructed on the meaning and use of the 'metaphoric' form.
It is a figure of speech in which a term, phrase, expression or euphemism is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable. It is used to suggest an effective ressemblance to convey a message.

The bible, for examples, is filled with metaphores. Learning this lessons, and standing corrected, will serve you well in a more lucid interpretation of the metaphoric messages of the bible.

In the case of this metaphore, since you didn't understand the concept, let me explain the pertinence of the image in this particular case.

Since a metaphore doesn't apply literally, it is more on the side of the images we need to turn to. 'Choking a chicken' evokes the following in different degrees: ill directed intensity, purposeless compulsiveness, and obsessinevess.

While one might desperately want the chicken to lay an egg, choking the chicken to force eggs out, is definitly not the indicated approach.

To make sure you understand this time around 'spider', let me contextualize the metaphore as it relates to 'catlady's original post.

Feeding loads of dogmatic information down its hatch, without any concern for the chicken, with the obsessive and compulsive intent of 'laying' a 'convert', might provide the 'choker' with a high, but it is an outright abuse of the chicken, and will never get it to lay an 'egg'!!!

I trust that with these helpful intructions, you might stand corrected, and will start discovering all those biblical messages that have obviously escaped your metaphoric ignorance.


Again, I trust with the intructions I provided, helps you realize how silly, misplaced and inappropriate this comment ends-up being.

And might I add 'spider', lay off those violent 'attack mode' computer games. They obviously thwart your view of the world.

"scatter-shots" might be effective 'counter-attack' tactics to 'blow' "spell castings" out of the way in the virtual world of video games, but you need to shake yourself back to 'reality' when you interract with us here 'spider'.

WE ARE NOT AT WAR HERE, AND WE ARE NOT YOUR "SCATTER-SHOT" OR OTHERWISE "suppress at all cost" ENNEMY TARGETS!!!



Even tha 'catlady' acknowledged her oversight, and moved her doctrine to the appropriate thread, where I might add, no derogatory comments have been posted.

Again 'spider', I trust that the great spirit of Christmas will visit you, and that you will receive his gift of 'good faith' between all humans!!!

voileazur,

"Scatter-shot" is a type of logical argument that attempts to drown the opponent in so many arguments that the opponent is overwhelmed. What you called "choke the chicken" is traditionally called a scatter-shot argument. I'm really not sure why you needed to post so much to attack me for offering you the correct term. Have you ever thought that my supposed ill-will is all in your head?

Voile:
"Even tha 'catlady' acknowledged her oversight, and moved her doctrine to the appropriate thread, where I might add, no derogatory comments have been posted."

Spider wrote:



Voileazur previously quoted:


I always welcome people's contributions whom bear a clear heart and come in good faith.

I play no head games, and I don't have any preconceived ideas '... in my head...' about you 'spider'. I just deal with exactly what you offer us, post by post, and discuss it with you directly.

Now take my word for it 'spider' when I say and mean that the great spirit of Christmas will visit you, and that you could very well receive the gift of 'good faith' between all humans!!!

Britty,

voileazur,

I obviously can't change your preconceived notions of how I am. You used a term that means masturbation. I corrected you. I don't see how that is so terribly offensive to you, but to each his own. Some like being the victim, so consider that my Christmas present to you. You have been attacked by the evil and sadistic SpiderCMB! I attacked with my vicious offering of the correct terminology. I know you are wounded to the core, but please try to carry on and have a nice Christmas.

This post contains Sarcasm™. Sarcasm™ has been shown to irritate those who are prone to victim-hood mentality. Men who cannot see the irony in their own statements should avoid Sarcasm™, as it may induce paranoia. Sarcasm™ should not be used by women who are pregnant or nursing or women who may become pregnant.

Sarcasm™, it's not just for non-Christians anymore.

Don't give up the 'mirror work therapy' 'spider'!!!

I know you don't see much now, but keep at it. Even you will eventually get the 'meta irony' (tm).

By the way, this last post you wrote, was a near perfect 'auto-portrait' !!! Remember the simple guideline with mirror work, 'reverse the direction of the message back to the messenger'. Difficult but so revealing when mastered!!!

As for your special 'gifts' 'spider', please distribute them to those really in need.

I have been blessed by life, and would feel most selfish to accept your offers, knowing that I would be depriving those less fortunate than I, of the 'special gift of 'YOU'!!!

After all, there is only so much of you to give. Might as well ensure it is not wasted!

Just for everyones info....I posted Christian Doctrine where I thought it should be posted. I was wrong and I reposted and apologized to the only person I felt I should have and that was Redy. Voile and Kerry can spew as usual no problem, no effect.

And spider I love you even more for coming to my defence, if that is possible. Redy wanted this thread and the related threads to be kind, and debated in the individual threads...please keep it civil for Redy. Thank you.

I strongly suggest that you lay off the Sarcasm™. You seem to be addicted to Sarcasm™, but you fly into a rage when anyone else uses Sarcasm™. Might I suggest that you try chill-out™?

Chill-Out™ has been show to reduce or eliminate episodes of victim-hood. Chill-out™ should not be used by everyone who trolls forums looking for fights. Chill-out™ is not a substitute for open-mindedness™ or Fairness™ and should not be used as such. WARNING: Chill-out™ may make you unable to troll forums, consult your doctor before using.

Chill-out™, apply it directly to the head.

Yeah, I'm done. Thanks for the thread Redy, sorry for the clutter.