They Told Me to Kneel, I Stood Up

[nutrichuckles93]

 

And you are asking it from a guy who can't even remember what he said a few posts ago.  Seriously, this whole "I questioned" story sounds made up to me.

It clearly is made up. Why am I still surprised at Stranger's dishonesty when he answers questions?

[Stranger]

 

It clearly is made up. Why am I still surprised at Stranger's dishonesty when he answers questions?

 

I haven't been dishonest.  You asked and I answered.   You just don't like the answers.   

 

Stranger

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

 

I always asked if God is dead, what killed Him?    No one knew.   

 

Stranger

If you had really questioned the "god is dead" philosophy back in the 60s, as you claimed, you would have known that WE killed god.  Nietzsche made that point abundantly clear in outlining his philosophy.  You, sir, are a liar.  You did not question that philosophy in the 60s.  You made the entire story up and the truth is not in you at all.  There is no further point in any of us interacting with you.  Nothing you say, from this point on, can be trusted.  Nothing you say can be taken at face value.  Everything you have done, said, and thought, in these threads now falls under suspicion because you are a liar.  We're done here.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

“God is dead! God remains dead! And we have killed him! How can we console ourselves, the murderers of all murderers! The holiest and the mightiest thing the world has ever possessed has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood from us? With what water could we clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what holy games will we have to invent for ourselves? Is the magnitude of this deed not too great for us? Do we not ourselves have to become gods merely to appear worthy of it? There was never a greater deed - and whoever is horn after us will on account of this deed belong to a higher history than all history up to now!' Here the madman fell silent and looked again at his listeners; they too were silent and looked at him disconcertedly. Finally he threw his lantern on the ground so that it broke into pieces and went out. 'I come too early', he then said; 'my time is not yet. This tremendous event is still on its way, wandering; it has not yet reached the ears of men. Lightning and thunder need time; the light of the stars needs time; deeds need time, even after they are done, in order to be seen and heard. This deed is still more remote to them than the remotest stars - and yet they have done it themselves!'”

Read more at: http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/blog/what-did-nietzsche-mean-god-dead © IntellectualTakeout.org

[nutrichuckles93]

 

 

I haven't been dishonest.  You asked and I answered.   You just don't like the answers.   

 

Stranger

To pull from TRP's new post, when did you ever actually ask someone if god is dead? Have you ever actually done so? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt even though you have proven it undeserved.

[Stranger]

 

If you had really questioned the "god is dead" philosophy back in the 60s, as you claimed, you would have known that WE killed god.  Nietzsche made that point abundantly clear in outlining his philosophy.  You, sir, are a liar.  You did not question that philosophy in the 60s.  You made the entire story up and the truth is not in you at all.  There is no further point in any of us interacting with you.  Nothing you say, from this point on, can be trusted.  Nothing you say can be taken at face value.  Everything you have done, said, and thought, in these threads now falls under suspicion because you are a liar.  We're done here.

 

Sorry, no one said 'we killed God'.    If that is your answer, how did you kill Him?   And, if you killed Him, then He was alive.  How did you know He was alive?    And how did you know He died?

 

I don't think we're done yet.    Maybe for this evening.

 

Stranger

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

Sorry, no one said 'we killed God'.   

 

Stranger

Nietzsche said it, dumbass.  And yes, we are done.

[Stranger]

 

To pull from TRP's new post, when did you ever actually ask someone if god is dead? Have you ever actually done so? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt even though you have proven it undeserved.

 

Back then when the philosophy was rampant I did.  

 

It doesn't matter to me what benefit you give me. 

 

Stranger

 

 

[Stranger]

 

Nietzsche said it, dumbass.  And yes, we are done.

 

No one I asked said it.   Yeah, I've heard that before.

 

Stranger

[nutrichuckles93]

 

 

Back then when the philosophy was rampant I did.  

 

It doesn't matter to me what benefit you give me. 

 

Stranger

 

 

Fine. I guess I can't prove that you didn't. But given your rampant unwillingness to elaborate in any meaningful way in the other threads on this site, I'd be willing to gamble that you didn't.

 

Oh wait, except you don't give half a shit what any of us here think. Dishonesty doesn't just mean one is lying. It also means one who willfully refuses to engage in actual conversation; rather they just put up their wall of "truth" and refuse to give their opposition's position adequate consideration. I won't say I'm done with you yet (I likely have before), as it is kind of fun making you reveal over and over again how intellectually dishonest you are. But I am done in this thread today as I think it has revealed plenty for now. Good day.

 

And apologies to Fweetheart for hijacking the thread.

[disillusioned]

I think it's clear to everyone at this point that Stranger does not "question". He simply declares that he knows The Answer. I'm beginning to find his arrogance tiresome.

[Stranger]

 

Fine. I guess I can't prove that you didn't. But given your rampant unwillingness to elaborate in any meaningful way in the other threads on this site, I'd be willing to gamble that you didn't.

 

Oh wait, except you don't give half a shit what any of us here think. Dishonesty doesn't just mean one is lying. It also means one who willfully refuses to engage in actual conversation; rather they just put up their wall of "truth" and refuse to give their opposition's position adequate consideration. I won't say I'm done with you yet (I likely have before), as it is kind of fun making you reveal over and over again how intellectually dishonest you are. But I am done in this thread today as I think it has revealed plenty for now. Good day.

 

And apologies to Fweetheart for hijacking the thread.

 

That's fine.  Gamble as you want.

 

Well, of course I don't consider your position as possibly true.   I know the Truth.   Why would I ever consider your position, unless I didn't know. 

 

Stanger

[nutrichuckles93]

 

 

That's fine.  Gamble as you want.

 

Well, of course I don't consider your position as possibly true.   I know the Truth.   Why would I ever consider your position, unless I didn't know. 

 

Stanger

You think you know what is true, but you won't elaborate why when asked. You just put up: "Because I don't answer to you people."

 

And you don't need to believe what I say is true in order to engage in honest conversation. I truly hope you are young (I'm 23), because it's really sad if you aren't.

[Fweethawt]

 

And apologies to Fweetheart for hijacking the thread.

Not necessary. I'm enjoying this thread for the same reasons you are -- the intellectual dishonesty.

 

It's the single most thing that separates the Believers and honest human beings.

 

Feel free to continue.

[bornagainathiest]

 

 

That's fine.  Gamble as you want.

 

Well, of course I don't consider your position as possibly true.   I know the Truth.   Why would I ever consider your position, unless I didn't know. 

 

Stanger

 

You came to know your Truth without the use of reason, Stranger.

 

You came to know your Truth by unreasonable means.

 

It therefore reasonably follows that we cannot know your Truth by reason either.

 

We can only come to know your Truth by the same unreasonable means you did.

 

So, if we want to know your unreasonable Truth we would have to abandon reason.

 

Which is something we will not do.

 

Similarly, if you did choose to consider our position, then you would have to put your unreasonable Truth aside.

 

Which is something you will not do.

 

Impasse.

 

(Again.)

 

(Or... as usual.)

 

 

 

 

[♦ ficino ♦]

One of the ironies is that Stranger's version of Christianity, to the extent it is intelligible, is at variance with all the historic creeds.

[bornagainathiest]

 

One of the ironies is that Stranger's version of Christianity, to the extent it is intelligible, is at variance with all the historic creeds.

 

Then they cannot have know the Truth, F.

 

 

 

 

[Stranger]

 

You think you know what is true, but you won't elaborate why when asked. You just put up: "Because I don't answer to you people."

 

And you don't need to believe what I say is true in order to engage in honest conversation. I truly hope you are young (I'm 23), because it's really sad if you aren't.

 

I do elaborate.  But you and others reject God's Word.   So, you reject any elaboration.   

 

Stranger

[Stranger]

 

Not necessary. I'm enjoying this thread for the same reasons you are -- the intellectual dishonesty.

 

It's the single most thing that separates the Believers and honest human beings.

 

Feel free to continue.

 

Thanks, I will.

 

Stranger

[nutrichuckles93]

 

 

I do elaborate.  But you and others reject God's Word.   So, you reject any elaboration.   

 

Stranger

You don't elaborate, you just post the same information you've been brainwashed with over and over again. Somehow thinking the more you say it, the more it makes it true.

[nutrichuckles93]

 

 

Thanks, I will.

 

Stranger

It is hilarious that you actually responded to that in this way.

[Stranger]

 

 

You came to know your Truth without the use of reason, Stranger.

 

You came to know your Truth by unreasonable means.

 

It therefore reasonably follows that we cannot know your Truth by reason either.

 

We can only come to know your Truth by the same unreasonable means you did.

 

So, if we want to know your unreasonable Truth we would have to abandon reason.

 

Which is something we will not do.

 

Similarly, if you did choose to consider our position, then you would have to put your unreasonable Truth aside.

 

Which is something you will not do.

 

Impasse.

 

(Again.)

 

(Or... as usual.)

 

 

 

 

 

Indeed I did.  I cam to know by faith.

 

My faith is not against God.  It is His reason I am concerned with.   But it is by faith 

 

Indeed again.  You cannot know God or Truth by your reason. 

 

Yes, you would have to come to God by faith.

 

OK.  You won't do it.

 

Impasse?  Of course.

 

Stranger

 

 

 

 

[Stranger]

 

You don't elaborate, you just post the same information you've been brainwashed with over and over again. Somehow thinking the more you say it, the more it makes it true.

 

Not so.  I am willing to elaborate what I know of God from the Bible.   

 

I say things over and over again usually because the same argument is presented to me over and over again.   

 

Stranger

[Stranger]

 

It is hilarious that you actually responded to that in this way.

 

I know, it was.  I couldn't help it.  My apologies if anyone is offended.
 

Stranger

 

 

[Ellinas]

 

 

Not so.  I am willing to elaborate what I know of God from the Bible.   

 

I say things over and over again usually because the same argument is presented to me over and over again.   

 

Stranger

 

If you are indeed prepared to "elaborate" - which, by the way, is a different concept to "assert" - why from the Bible?  Why not the Qur'an, the Bhagavad Gita and the Vedas, the Tripitaka or the various pagan myths?  Is it just your faith that tells where to find your texts?  Does it not occur to you that your faith, exercised on the basis of other texts inconsistent with the Bible, may - and to a good many people does - provide just as much certainty as you now assert, thereby undermining the exclusive claims and hence the "truth" of the faith you espouse?