Printable View
Maybe it's just me, but I don't really care what Nietzsche, Russell, Sartre and Heideggar have to say about God. I just don't need their opinions. Either believe or don't believe. No one's opinion will change what I believe in my heart. But, I do believe that there are other things to be learned by reading them.
Also, I can't see where humans have evolved to the point where they don't need a god any longer. In this world, I think we probably need God even more. But, that is just my opinion.
:Quote:
Originally Posted by Granny5
:
On the other hand, I am betting you got your own concept of God taught to you by your family and your society. So actually what you believe in your heart comes from the opinions of others about there being a God. As for needing a God now even more, I'd say we need more solidarity and human understanding.
I think you are making my argument. Religion is taught to us. We have this need for a higher being simply because we can't explain our universe and ourselves. As for reading Nietzche more carefully, I have. He thought that the notion of a higher being was an insult to human intelligence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendragon
"What if you found out with absolute certainty, that there was no god? No god, and no heaven or hell. (really think about this!) Would the knowledge that there was nothing after this life awaiting us, change the way you lived your life?"
I'd drink to that.
But honestly I don't think any proof of any kind could convince those who really want to believe.
After the life i don't know about it.But in life i believe in god.About hell or heaven i think hell and heaven is in the life itself.
No, I am not making your argument for you. As I said, I still think Nietzsche gets plenty of bad press and quotations taken out of context. But it is certain that he said "God is dead."Quote:
Originally Posted by liberal viewer
Well, consider this: If you do not believe something even exists, to you it never lived anyway. To those of us who believe in God in all His Power, He cannot die.
However, Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche was born on October 15, 1844 and on August 25, 1900, God said "Nietzsche is dead." And so it has been. His statement of God being dead failed to destroy God. And I am well aware that with Nietzsche, whom by the way you have failed to spell right even once (I corrected your spelling here), people pick and choose what they put forward as his statements, and claim his illness (which finally claimed him) was against him if they disagree.
Let someone else suggest anything about that illness, and they have insulted a brilliant thinker. Know your opponent to play the game.
God Bless
Pen
If there wasn't a God there could be no Nietzsche or we discussing about Him or him !
Who, afterall, looks after this whole play if it isn't God?? Who makes our plans go wrong (or right) ?? If there was no god ,Science would have proved where man goes after death but it cant because God is there and holding them back to get at that mystery!
here is a link for Nietzsche ::
http://www.newstatesman.com/200711080054
Nietzsche and nihilism, by Keith Pearson: The whole idealism of humanity…is on the point of tipping into nihilism -- into the belief in absolute valuelessness, that is, meaninglessness… The annihilation of ideals, the new wasteland, the new arts of enduring it, we amphibians.
Ok, so what does it matter if the previous posters in this thread havn't read all that much (if at all) into the subject. Those authors, however genius, had no more leads then we have.Quote:
Originally Posted by liberal viewer
All I see is you inferring that the debaters here are uneducated on the subject, and then not offering up your own theories. Of course I'll be coming off as a little hypocritical here (and rightfully so), seeing as how I am not posting my own theory, but at least I'm not infering that the previous posts are uneducated when the topic at hand is so abstract that no human can possibly claim to know anything for certain about it. Thus EVERYONE is uneducated about it, and EVERYONE'S opinion is just as valid as anyone else's.
Unlike somewhere else, I happen to agree with Ape here. ;) Very good response to someone who thinks that the writers he agrees with have the final say on the subject. Well, there are others who disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by APEist
here are some quotes about God by Baruch Spinoza who is famed as the Modern Rational Philosopher.Quote:
The will of God [is] the sanctuary of ignorance.
Everyone judges of things according to the state of his brain, or rather mistakes for things the forms of his imagination.
Truth is its own standard. We must remember, besides, that our mind, insofar as it truly perceives things, is a part of the infinite intellect of God, and therefore it must be that the clear and distinct ideas of the mind are as true as those of God.
The more we understand individual objects, the more we understand God.
God and all the attributes of God are eternal.
Nature is but a name for an effect whose cause is God.
God is the free cause of all things.
You can't be serious. Nietzsche was discussing the belief in such a being. It does NOT have to be there for people to believe in it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mazHur
Or do you mean that we wouldn't be alive at all if God wasn't there? Either way its a superfluous assumption about life or beliefs.
It could be Odin, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Zeus, the great gobblygook on the mountain; any number of deities could be inserted in the place of 'God' here. Furthermore, you seem to have made some claim that there is something that 'looks after this whole play' and 'makes our plans go wrong (or right)' without providing a reason why such a thing is necessary, or even any evidence that it happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by mazHur
...What? The latter does not follow from the former and this is a very poor God of the Gaps argument (READ: logical fallacy). That we have not developed scientifically far enough to explain what happens to a person's consciousness when they died does not mean God is there holding us back from it (unless, of course you mean the centuries of forward progression in science the Church did their damnedest to hold us back by).Quote:
Originally Posted by mazHur
Or do you believe you won't be DEAD if God wasn't there?? Doesn't your argument make it conversely superfluous and illogical?Quote:
do you mean that we wouldn't be alive at all if God wasn't there? Either way its a superfluous assumption about life or beliefs.
IThis is what is called conjecturing and surmising. Couldn't you provide some concrete evidence to refute existence of God??Quote:
t could be Odin, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Zeus, the great gobblygook on the mountain; any number of deities could be inserted in the place of 'God' here.
Well, let science 'make' a pinch of dust then I will believe science is not just digging in what God has made and which already exists there. Science is just like chroming a piece of iron, not iron in itself !!Quote:
The latter does not follow from the former and this is a very poor God of the Gaps argument
Until you give me evidence that God is necessary for life to exist, you are simply making a superfluous argument. Attempting to turn my argument around on me like that is a bad idea and doesn't work. God being necessary for life to exist is NOT the default, until evidence is given to support it. My conclusion is not superfluous or illogical and Occam's Razor supports it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mazHur
How is listing other deities any more of a form of conjecture than your listing of God? And now, you're trying to shift the burden of proof. It is not my job to prove a negative (the non-existence of this being), your job is to provide some concrete evidence of the existence of God. At that time it would be necessary for me to refute it or to accept it as true. You have not yet done this.Quote:
Originally Posted by mazHur
What? What exactly are you talking about when you say "'make' a pinch of dust"? Are you speaking of creating life? If so, its already been done: Miller-Urey.Quote:
Originally Posted by mazHur
This response might not directly apply to the original question of this thread, but I'd like to address something that nags me.
I myself am not religious (I'm agnostic), but when non-religious folk make statements along the lines of "religion is just a crutch for people, a coping mechanism for those of us who can't handle reality," it bothers me greatly. For one, assessing your own beliefs on such a topic as indisputable is pure ignorance, and for obvious reasons.
Two, isn't everyone just trying to find comfort in their own beliefs? It's just that people find comfort in different things. For example, a Christian finds comfort "knowing" that someone is guiding them and that Jesus died on the cross for their sins and that if they accept him as their saviour they will be granted access to heaven, while at the same time an atheist finds comfort "knowing" that there is no over-arching being controlling and/or observing their life, ready to pass judgement on them at the end. As an agnostic I find comfort "knowing" that all this speculation is pointless since we are discussing the unknowable, and so I just relax and go with the flow.
We all find comfort in different beliefs, and in the end that is the belief we are going to lean towards.
Honestly the people who have it the hardest in this world (concerning this topic) are people who are unsure of their beliefs. For instance, imagine how hard it must be for someone struggling to be a Christian because that was the way they were raised, but they constantly question the existence of Jesus or even God, and their faith is unsteady at best. How hard must it be sometimes to believe in something you've never seen, never heard, never felt.
I was once in that situation, and I used my past as an example because I know how fear of the unknown can breed in the heart of someone unsure of their beliefs.
Anyways, before you accuse someone for using their beliefs as a crutch, look in the mirror. Because you do to.
This is not correct. You do see, hear and feel God in His manifestations, in your hearts. Just check it out!Quote:
How hard must it be sometimes to believe in something you've never seen, never heard, never felt.
I'm guessing you're implying that if a person is truly saved they are open to various forms of communication with God and whatnot. That's cool if that's what you believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by mazHur
For a second, when I first read it, I thought you were trying to tell me what I felt in the past. If somehow my first assumption was correct, I'll advise you to stop now before you discredit yourself any further.
mazHur,
I guess we could say there's two opposing views here. Polar opposites. Extremes. A paradox. They cannot both be true. You agree with me, but you're about to stop.
Extremes meet. Paradoxes are solvable.
Two different sides or polar extremes come from a center. On a coin, on one side is heads and on the other is tails, and they are connected by the center.
It's like yin and yang.
Anyway, saying God is the cause of things is rather ridiculous.
Incipit me, into the world, a new observer. I learn about various things. I learn how to distinguish truth, and I learn the greatest metaphysical understandings of our day. Then I learn about language and ontology. Then you come and give me this arbitrary, non-intelligent statement that God is the cause of things, the un-moved mover, and furthermore, with all the arrogance of knowing you're right, when actually you're equally wrong as right.
I don't think there's a God.
Now, getting all angry with me for this, getting all contorted, isn't going to make me think there is anymore.
Can you even consider the other side? In Zen there is a saying "set it down and the truth will be before you," or something like that. In Buddhism it's taught to even let go of your own beliefs!!!!!!!!
I'm sorry. I don't mean to get all weird. Carry on.
Niko, you are caught and bold !
the following quote is by Spinoza and not ME as erroneously transposed but taken by you to be by me !
Have a round with Spinoza to get your answer.Quote:
God is the free cause of all things.
Spinoza
I rest my argument here ,,,,,,,,
No, YOU said that, HERE. After the Spinoza quotes.Quote:
Originally Posted by mazHur
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazHur
Have a round with Spinoza to get your answer.
I rest my argument here ,,,,,,,,[/QUOTE]
Niko, although the quote was a transpositional error, it confirms your wrong judgment, argument and knowledge in the subject. It's now no use arguing further as you havnt read Spinoza or other philosophers for that sake. Bye
Reproaching God
By Anon
An orphan girl wearing tattered and dirty clothes stood on a street
corner begging for food. Or money to enable her to buy some.
A man noticed her and passed without giving her a second look. On
returning to his expensive home, his happy and comfortable family and
generously laden dinner table, his thoughts returned to her. He became
angry with God for allowing such destitute children to exist without
helping them.
He reproached God, saying,
"How can you let this happen ? Why don't you do something to help the
girl ?"
In the depths of his being a voice spoke, saying,
"I have, I created you."
this largely depends on the individual's definition of God. For example, many people follow a set of virtues or beliefs that they themselves have formed. This type of belief set is much like a religion, it follows certain rules and practises, much like a religion, albeit without a defining name and/or subject. In this sense, no God would simply mean no directive for these virtues, though a person can still live with the beliefs and practises of religion. Besides, isn't religion formed largely on the basis that the existence of God can be neither proven nor disproven... this is a difficult concept for me to get my head around. Personally, even as an agnostic, I believe concrete proof of a lack of God would be potentially less ground-breaking than concrete proof of the existence of a God.
You are delusional, in that you think you have knowledge of things of which you have no information, made more pronounced by the fact that you are wrong. I have read Spinoza, as well as Descartes, Pascal, Leibnitz, Fichte, and others..Quote:
Originally Posted by mazHur
There is not a God. No God exists. We as humans on this ball of rock created religion, metaphysics, but we are here naturally, not at the cause of supernatural. I can see clearly that we are here naturally, and so I don't put stock in people's theories about God; of whom there is no evidence in this world at all.
We exist. Reality exists. God does not exist inside reality. We created him. Is it not telling that we say he created us in his image, in other words, that he is in our image?
The base of all metaphysics is friendship. If we can't discuss God in a way that brings us together, (c.f. how exclusionists resort to guerilla tactics and ad hominem) then it is counter productive, to say the least. You kill God when you insult someone, just like, in the words of great theologians, "every time you drop the bomb you kill the God your child has born." Don't presume to say what's in my heart, because you are infinitely far away from that.
You equate God with spirituality, and since I say there is no God you put me in the category of infidel. Yet we are all sinners and God chooses who goes to heaven.
Douglas Adams: isn't it enough to say the garden is beautiful without saying there are faeries at the bottom?
The garden is beautiful.
Ape, you are someone I'd love to shake hands with. Ignoring all the bells and whistles, you go straight to the core. The ones that usually have it hardest are the ones, unsure of what they themselves believe and yet unable to remain silent. Sooner or later they begin to throw stones, such as questioning the intelligence of other posters to outright insults, cementing the fact that they themselves find they are on shaky ground. If you can't be right, be loud!Quote:
Originally Posted by APEist
One who knows where he stands does not back up when he takes a broadside. This is going to happen from time to time. Perhaps he will be prepared for this particular one. Perhaps he may have to regroup before answering. But he will answer and it will make sense if you choose to see it his way. If not, you may find it absolute nonsense. But you'll get an answer, not an "un-oh."
A person who knows where he stands isn't afraid to say he doesn't know everything. Those who claim to know everything often know nothing. I have always used a quote by a famous minister: "When you think you've got it all figured out, you're wrong." That is the way I see things.
God Bless
Pen
It has always surprised me a great deal that people could say with as much certainty that God does not exist. How could you know that? This sounds crazy to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by NikolaiI
Personally, I cannot affirm that God exists, or that he doesn't! How could I know? All I can say for sure is that I just ignore the truth. It is so strange that you blame someone who is acting in the exact same way as you, that is who claims to be SURE of something he cannot objectively know.
Is it really a problem to recognize that no one knows and that maybe no one will ever know? Then, everyone is free to have their own opinion, but you should accept that what you say is only one opinion among others. Then, there are chances that your opinion could be the truth, but you can never be sure of that. Maybe Mazhur's opinion is the truth, after all. No one knows. And perhaps the truth is something that no one has ever thought about yet. That's all. I don't see why it would be more intelligent to believe in science than to believe in the Bible. You can say that the Bible has been created by human beings, but science has been created by them as well. Human beings understand and interpret things according to some basis, but what if those bases were just one way of thinking among others?
Anyway, this is my way of seeing things. This is only my own way, though, now perhaps I'm totally wrong and one of you is right, but all that we can have is hypothesis.
I totally agree with Sweet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweets America
However, as a gnostic I may say that there is no reason for not believing in God or whatever you call Him,,,,,,,,for us being here and all the things around we owe the credit to our Creator who IS definitely there and running the 'show'.
Well, there certainly is no reason not to believe in God, but there is no reason to believe in him either. :) It's not necessarily a question of reason, more of a question of belief or faith. How can you be sure that the Creator is definitely there? This is my question. Maybe the creator is definitely there, of course, but how do you know it for a fact? I know it's a difficult question, and I am not asking for proof because this would be reducing things to what human beings CAN understand. And maybe this just cannot be proven, which is not a problem to me. But, I am interested in knowing how you are sure of yourself. Do you have this strong faith, this strong feeling that tells you that he is actually there?Quote:
Originally Posted by mazHur
Sweet, can't you see we are 'talking' to each other at this moment is an ample proof that Bill Gates is sleeping at home and God is taking care of us?
Okay, tell me apart from this joke who the heck is ''transferring feelings from her to there and vice versa'' without us even knowing each other ?
Who controls the mind? who built our brains? who controls our hearts and all the abstract things such as love , hate, loyalty, friendship, pain, joy, etc about which science could yet give us no concrete answer?? Could someone say that matter came into existence on its own?? Why do you love your parents and friends as much as you dont do for others???
Doesnt this all prove that there is something, something superior, which controls us and that is God, Allah, Parmatama , Krishna, Raam, or whatever.But HE is there and watches you all the time!
Big Father is watching me? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by mazHur
I am not sure I really understand what you mean, though I understand some parts of it. So...you think it is God who controls the minds and built our brains? And that he controls our hearts? It is always a possibility, but does that mean you think human beings don't have any freedom? It is a sweet idea to think that God created the abstract concepts, I had never thought of that. But, it does not appeal to me. (which of course has nothing to do with the fact that the statement is true or not)
What is the problem with the fact that matter got created on its own? I mean, why not? If you believe that someone as mysterious as a God has created everything, it is not more unbelievable to think that everything could have been created on its own.
I am not sure I see what you mean about 'why do you love your parents...'. But anyway, I don't see how what you said constitutes any proof. Those are not proofs, only ideas. Of course these ideas might be right, but you cannot be sure of it. You just cannot. You have to remember that perhaps there are a lot of things we do not perceive or are not aware of. I mean, if you place yourself at a human being place or at the place of an ant, you won't see the world the same way.
Anyway, I hope you understand that I am not asking for any proof, I am not against you in any way, I am just in favor of open-mindedness. And, I am not sure I need to know the truth.
Sweet, I'm engaging Mazhur this way because he said some horrible things to someone who's very dear to me. In his fundamentalist rants about how you should obey God when he tells you to kill, all that comes to mind are terrorists who do this. So why not engage him on this?
The other thing that bothered me was that he called me ignorant or basically mindless, and told me how I hadn't read Spinoza. How can you communicate with such a person? This and the reason mentioned above are why I posted this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweets America
It gets so vulgar, and it gets so personal with people like Mazhur, that you can't discuss it.
My goal, the fundamental and most important thing, is for me and everyone else to be happy, to aleve their suffering. Sometimes I meet someone who is so special, that they actually change my outlook on life. Last night I realized this, and I realized that's what I want to do, is to dedicate my life to the eradication of suffering of everyone.
Communication is difficult. Yet, when I see someone who is so fundamental about things like God--- how can I describe the coldness I feel with such a person, whose mindset closes out everyone, chastises, excludes, excommunicates, anyone who doesn't believe in God, in their God- and furthermore, calls them ignorant--- I can't describe how cold this makes me feel.
This is a communication breakdown, and in all honesty that is what I was trying to bridge; although I don't know if what I said was correct or not. The issue is mundane, pointless; but there are underlying ideas that I cannot leave unchallenged. They're not stated explicitly but hostilities towards anyone I feel in a strange way.
I don't think such a person can really feel that they are right. If you believe in God, and you wish to share the love you feel; then one thing that's basic is that you think you have a certain view of life that is correct, and there are reasons for this view, and you want to share it. Well, isn't it supposed to be a good life? Or a bad one? There's something I'd like to bring into this called sense of life. Things that make us happy such as love, and the alleviation of suffering can make our sense of life change slightly. Of course, insults and people putting us down, being rude to us, or worse; when people trample on our feelings it brings our sense of life down. Long-term abusive relationships, for example, can destroy a person psychologically. Now, if you want to share the goodness of your God, you will not do it by insulting people. I have to speak up in this instance.
I loved Descartes. When I read him, actually, I was a believer. Reading Descartes is a great exercise of learning, and pouring over the words you can get a sense for metaphysics and philosophy. Descartes, Pascal and Leibniz were my introduction to philosophy. I learned a lot about God from them--- I guess, I'm just going back to the original reason why I got into this. That and the horrible things he said to my friend. That ever so slightly dampens my spirits. So I retaliate.
Understand, that while I don't equate a person's feelings with value of their life, I value a person's feelings very, very highly. I understand this is one definition of romantic. Mazhur, don't you think there was ever anyone who killed themselves after being insulted by a stranger? Be more careful with others' feelings.
Oh, my God, never seen a heart as grudgeful as that and yet bragging about his dedicating his
I never saidQuote:
life to the eradication of suffering of everyone.
,,,,I say I believe in God, by whatever name you call him. Let you not twist things to gain undue favor ofQuote:
''my God..
friends! And, let us talk about the topic, about our own thoughts rather than be obsessed by the idea of unreasonably advocating for others. If that goes on I am sure the thread will crash !Quote:
''my'
You surely have'nt read Spinoza properly other wise how could you defy his erroneously transposed fundamental thoughts???
It's like someone posing to be an authority on Bible or Shakespeare and unable to recognize their words or fundamentals.
Quote:
don't you think there was ever anyone who killed themselves after being insulted by a stranger?
yes, it is a common feature of those who lose face and commit harakari. In modern psychology that could be termed as some mental disorder or least tolerance or endurance.
When I say we have to obey God, I mean it in the legal and divine sense only, presuming that God soes speak up and tell you personally to kill ,,,,,,,,,like a general personally ordering his soldier to kill. And to kill in self defense ,,,,,I think that's pretty fine rather than killing yourself and the one who can kill himself can hardly be thought to have good feelings toward other innocent people,,,,,,,,and that depression or frustration which is abominable goes in the making of a terrorist. A soldier is NOT a terrorist. I state from a soldiers perspective not that of a suicidal sadist.
W a r n i n g
Further personal comments and inflammatory posts will lead to thread closure.
Mazzo, I think you have overstepped the bounds of logic here.
share with me,,,,,,,,,
Mouseolatry,,,,
An intersting story by Idries Shah, a Master Story Teller of all times
A mouse one day found his way to the Fountain of Knowledge. Whoever
drinks from it may have his heart's desire--and one extra wish.
The mouse drank, and he wished that he could understand the
speech of men, if men had speech. When he spent some time listening
to what men said, he used his extra wish to banish the power.
The other mice said to him: "What was so horrible about the
speech of men?"
At first he could not bring himself even to think of it again,
but they pressed him so much that he said: "I do not think that you
will believe me, but what I have to say is true. Men actually
imagine that God is like them, with human, not mouselike, attributes!"
The mouse audience was shocked to the core. When some
intellectuals among them had recovered from their indignation, they
said: "But are there none who think otherwise?"
"There are some, but their theories are as abominable as the
rest."
"Tell us, just the same," clamoured the thinkers, "so that we
may have the fullest information on this amazing matter."
"Well, then; for instance there are those who imagine that
religious terms are in reality derived from states of mind."
"Enough!" cried some of the asembled mice, "such insanity could
cause an epidemic of madness. Even the Mouse-god might not be able
to protect us from it."
"Enough!" exclaimed the others, "for this might give
mouseolaters a chance to revive that nonsense called religion,
pretending that it has a functional origin."
"I told you all at the beginning that it was horrible," said the
mounse who had found his way to the Fountain of Knowledge.
by Idries Shah
I meant saying I surely haven't read Spinoza or I couldn't disagree with him--- or defy his wrongly transposed comments.
First, I didn't wrongly transpose any comments of his- I was replying to something you wrote after some of his quotes- that god is the free cause.
And second is the statement above- I could not have read him if I defy him..
-------
This isn't logical or fair- I can't retaliate with, "Well you haven't read Nietzsche properly, obviously, or you wouldn't or couldn't defy him!"
I again repeat and reiterate that the above quote is by Spinoza and was inadvertently transposed outside the block. However, I believe those who have read Spinoza would have caught the error and responded accordinglyQuote:
that god is the free cause.
You haven't explained that before now.Quote:
Originally Posted by mazHur
Just please refrain from telling me what I've read and what I haven't, alright?
Here is an interesting treatise on the philosophy of Sir M. Iqbal (the Poet Of the East) and Spinoza
Those interested may
click on this link:: http://www.allamaiqbal.com/publicati...w/apr04/03.htm
OK people, lets calm down. Everyone has different beliefs, why can't we just respect that? How many wars have been started over people with opposing opinions? Until we learn we are all equal, regardless of our differences, this problem will never be solved.
Laff, and in this case, what our opinions differ mainly about is whether or not I have read Spinoza:
just bringing that up although it will not be faced by mazhur probably.Quote:
(Mazhur: ) Niko, although the quote was a transpositional error, it confirms your wrong judgment, argument and knowledge in the subject. It's now no use arguing further as you havnt read Spinoza or other philosophers for that sake. Bye
goodness.Quote:
or other philosophers for that sake.
May Scher indulge me a second please?
Nic you are a dear friend whom I have received again as one from the dead.
maZhur, you and I share poetry space quite often.
I am certain we three know the ways of monkeys and fruit.
Now Monkey N has decidied that he will eat his fruit in peace, and no longer argue with monkey M. But as he gets towards the rind of the fruit, feeling that to be worthless enough, he heaves it in Monkey M's dirrection. Monkey M growls, but Monkey N just shrugs and points to the uneaten fruit as if to say, "I did no wrong."
Monkey M also decides to stop the food fight, but he cannot abide the seeds. So using his mouth like a bean shooter, he fires the seeds at Monkey N's face. Monkey N protests, but Monkey M holds up both hands showing them clean. "I did nothing!"
Well, it doesn't take a genius to see that the two are going to look as bad as if they had had a knock-down, drag-out, smash-the-tray, food fight. It isn't how you word what you say, it's what you say. If you are sorry, apologize and mean it. No harm is done in being wrong, it's in staying wrong. Sometimes the bigger man is the one who can turn the other cheek, and refuse to be drawn into a pointless argument.
I care for both of you.
God Bless
Pendragon
Do you really believe that purely speculative, metaphysical debate over the internet will spark war?Quote:
Originally Posted by Metanoia