Peanut Gallery for JoshPantera vs. Endgarcito3

[WalterP]

7 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

All you're really suggesting here is that they follow the original rule laid down in the opening post of the debate thread.  Granted, you've added a couple of extra stipulations, as is your bent; but, even having done so, such a suggestion required neither my permission nor the hoopla of a build-up.

 

Why are you so weird, dude?

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sorry, but I cannot answer your question, Prof.

 

But the wording of the original rules are couched in competitive terms and from the outset that's what Josh and Ed have been doing - competing with each other by trying to pull each others model of spirituality apart.  I submit that is why things aren't getting anywhere.

 

But my suggestion is quite different.  So far they have been unable to agree on a common definition of spirituality.  But that would not be needed in my proposal.

 

Instead, the factors determining victory or loss are not defined by anyone's model of spirituality.

They are defined by  (1)  internal logic, coherence and self-consistency and  (2)  supporting empirical evidence.

Therefore, there is no need for either party to invoke their own model of spirituality to attack the others.

 

Instead, Josh and Ed must look for contradictions and inconsistencies in each other's models.  And then they must demonstrate these problems for all to see.  Simply saying, 'You're wrong because (insert something from their own spirituality)' will not suffice.  They must show HOW and WHERE and WHY the other person's model is flawed, using only what that person has claimed, cited or stated.

 

Just as I like to do when playing Devils Advocate.

 

When I do this I am not required to believe what another person believes, but I assume their beliefs to be true and then work through the logical consequences of that to see if their beliefs are self-consistent.

 

Professor, do you now see how my proposal solves the need for a commonly-agreed model of spirituality?

 

I hope so.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

 

[WalterP]

Posted 9 hours ago

Here's Edgarcito's parting shot.

 

 

Truthfully Josh, uncertain how old you are, but feel like you have absolutely no original thoughts on spirituality yourself... which means you aren’t spiritual.  I’m not going to joust with all your references.  Bottom line is a void, an emptiness, is what you have chosen as life vs. a human that has taken on iniquity, that we might have hope of doing better, becoming more aware tomorrow... bringing hope and life to someone through communion... not just a profession of physics.  I don’t want to be tied to people through the void between us but by the shared experiences of life that get us to the end... an potentially farther.
 

I enjoyed the exercise.  Thanks for the discussion.  If something worth sharing comes to mind, I’ll holler.  Thx again.   Adios.

 

 

Anyone else see his spiritual blind spot?

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

No?

 

Ok then.

 

Edgarcito's spiritual blind spot is this.

 

Christian spirituality requires that followers of Christ do not take on iniquity in any way.

 

Instead they must put such iniquitous behaviour to death in their own lives so that they become more Christ-like.

 

Using insults and dirty words is not putting such behaviour to death.

 

But somehow Edgarcito can't seem to see this.

 

He seems to be blind to the spirituality that the Jesus and the Apostles went to such trouble to define.

 

'Love your neighbour as yourself.'

 

Christian spirituality isn't a deep mystery that must be puzzled out through connection and concepts.

 

It's how you treat others.

 

That simple.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

Ed said,

"My introductory statement about a counselor and woo expert was an attempt at levity, not a real request from these men......although I do believe them more than qualified.  If I catch one whiff of Walter's bullshit influence in your words, I'm done.  "

 

I have to call BS on this. The request was made by Ed and the request accepted by the moderator and the debate began. For days nothing was said about it not "being a real request". Until now...... ? .... ?.... really Ed? Or is it just that your phone a friend can't help you? 

 

10 hours ago, WalterP said:

Bottom line is a void, an emptiness, is what you have chosen as life vs. a human that has taken on iniquity, that we might have hope of doing better, becoming more aware tomorrow... bringing hope and life to someone through communion... not just a profession of physics.  I don’t want to be tied to people through the void between us but by the shared experiences of life that get us to the end... an potentially farther.

 

This statement is ultimately the border line of Christian spirituality. Basically Ed will not accept the notion of any form of spirituality that doesn't first start with a "Holy Ghost" form of Conviction and acceptance of a "Born in sin" theology. 

 

However, Josh has been promoting a "General" definition of world wide spirituality that could be applied to any religion. Which really is the only definition in which this debate can be made.

 

This train of thought accepts Ed's form of spirituality or that of any other faith for that matter. 

 

This seems to be outside of Ed's ability to accept because it then makes all faiths legitimate from a spiritual standpoint and this just can't be true. Ed's Bible says that all other faiths, especially those of a more "mystic" nature, are false. And not only that, if he entertains the notion that those other faiths can be legitimately spiritual (without the one and only true "Holy spirit"), then he is in danger of Hell Fire himself. 

 

In a way he is caught in a double jeopardy situation. He is damned in the debate one way, or damned to hell another. 

 

As I said before. This shows the limit of Christian spirituality. A "true believer" can never grow past the bibles narrow and limited spiritual mind set. Which truly makes the religions that Josh has mentioned far more spiritually superior than that of Christianity. 

 

This would make Josh the winner of this debate on a world wide platform such as this World Wide Web. In light of that I feel @Joshpantera won the debate here on ExC. However in @Edgarcito  mind he will be the winner. As he has only accepted his bibles form of spirituality that he says gives shared experiences of life that get us to the end... an potentially farther. Not accepting that if you are in those other religions they  GIVE SHARED EXPERIENCES OF LIFE THAT GET US TO THE END OF LIFE ....... AND POTENTIALLY FARTHER.  

 

Aswell

 

As always, The Christian only wins in his or her own mind. But the Bible promotes that type of Superior Elitist "better than you" point of view that is so popular with the young people now a days. LMAO!!! 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

23 minutes ago, WalterP said:

I'm sorry

Indeed you are, as are a great many of us.  But being sorry doesn't address the actual point of my post, which is that there was no need for your suggestion to be presented as though it were some ground-breaking, earth shattering stroke of genius which required the permission of the very gods themselves to be shared with the mortals of The Den. 

 

In reality, I stated the rule in the OP in the hopes that both parties would focus on building their cases rather than tearing the other's down.  Josh seems to have done a slightly less bad job of it than Edgarcito, which is disappointing as I would really enjoy seeing Ed build a case for what he believes in.  So, no, your suggestion doesn't really convey anything different, not even obviating the need for a common definition.  It simply spells out the original intent in greater detail.

 

That's plenty enough to be proud about, in itself, though, I reckon.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

6 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

Ed said,

"My introductory statement about a counselor and woo expert was an attempt at levity, not a real request from these men......although I do believe them more than qualified.  If I catch one whiff of Walter's bullshit influence in your words, I'm done.  "

 

I have to call BS on this. The request was made by Ed and the request accepted by the moderator and the debate began. For days nothing was said about it not "being a real request". Until now...... ? .... ?.... really Ed? Or is it just that your phone a friend can't help you? 

Based on what I know about Endgarcito3 and his weird sense of humor, I believe he really was joking.  I "accepted" his request and established the phone-a-friend policy, partially to play along with his joke, and partially to make things more interesting.  On this indictment of BS, he's not guilty. 

[WalterP]

4 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Indeed you are, as are a great many of us.  But being sorry doesn't address the actual point of my post, which is that there was no need for your suggestion to be presented as though it were some ground-breaking, earth shattering stroke of genius which required the permission of the very gods themselves to be shared with the mortals of The Den. 

 

In reality, I stated the rule in the OP in the hopes that both parties would focus on building their cases rather than tearing the other's down.  Josh seems to have done a slightly less bad job of it than Edgarcito, which is disappointing as I would really enjoy seeing Ed build a case for what he believes in.  So, no, your suggestion doesn't really convey anything different, not even obviating the need for a common definition.  It simply spells out the original intent in greater detail.

 

That's plenty enough to be proud about, in itself, though, I reckon.

 

Then I suppose its up to Josh and Ed to see if they can work with this more detailed version.

 

I hope they can.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

2 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Based on what I know about Endgarcito3 and his weird sense of humor, I believe he really was joking.  I "accepted" his request and established the phone-a-friend policy, partially to play along with his joke, and partially to make things more interesting.  On this indictment of BS, he's not guilty. 

 

10/4 guess I just didn't "get it" lol. Oh well. 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

15 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

 

10/4 guess I just didn't "get it" lol. Oh well. 

Not everybody understands Ed.  Himself, least of all.

[midniterider]

2 hours ago, DarkBishop said:

 

This statement is ultimately the border line of Christian spirituality. Basically Ed will not accept the notion of any form of spirituality that doesn't first start with a "Holy Ghost" form of Conviction and acceptance of a "Born in sin" theology. 

 

 

You have to say Jesus Christ Quantum Mechanics before a Christian will take an interest in it.

[WalterP]

Another example of Edgarcito's inability to see that he doesn't practice what he preaches.

 

Lol, well good deal... we might be in an ocean of quantum amplitude.  I still want to know what bang for my buck do I get for my sunburn.  Does a fat gal have more spiritual than thin?  Obviously, she has places that overlap!!!  I’ll be here all week!

 

He regularly refers to the need for grace in spiritual matters and in our dealings with others, but where's HIS grace in this?

 

 

Josh's claim about the interconnectedness of all things has been supported with evidence.

 

Do we see a grace-filled, gracious and graceful acceptance of that from Edgarcito?

 

No.  Just inane comments and off-colour humour.

 

Where's the grace?

 

Colossians 4:6

 

Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.

 

That's always.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[LogicalFallacy]

2 hours ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Not everybody understands Ed.  Himself, least of all.

 

This is so true. I've always struggled to comprehend his religious musings. Not sure if it was him or me.  (Sorry Ed, maybe the spiritual is beyond my ability to comprehend) 

[WalterP]

Well, Josh has satisfied one of the two criteria I've suggested.

 

Namely, that his model of spirituality is well supported with empirical evidence.

 

Would that Edgarcito could...

 

A)  Define his model of spirituality in a coherent way

 

and...

 

B )  Support his model with empirical evidence.

 

 

 

But hey, even if he does nothing at all, he's still going to win the debate.

 

Why?

 

Because he just knows by faith that he's right and faith always trumps evidence, self-consistency, internal logic and anything else that might smack of reason and rationality.

 

[midniterider]

Ed: Christianity specifically provides a standard and mechanism to know the greater, "God", through the human condition, through Christ. 

 

.......

 

Advaita Vedanta specifically provides a standard and mechanism to know the greater "God" of one's Self through the human condition: Self Inquiry.

 

Zen specifically provides a standard and mechanism to know the greater "God" of one's universal Self through the human condition: Meditation, mindfulness, the koan.

 

Paganism specifically provides a standard and mechanism to know the greater 'deity' through the human condition: Ritual.

 

 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

2 hours ago, WalterP said:

Well, Josh has satisfied one of the two criteria I've suggested.

 

Namely, that his model of spirituality is well supported with empirical evidence.

 

Would that Edgarcito could...

 

A)  Define his model of spirituality in a coherent way

 

and...

 

B )  Support his model with empirical evidence.

 

 

 

But hey, even if he does nothing at all, he's still going to win the debate.

 

Why?

 

Because he just knows by faith that he's right and faith always trumps evidence, self-consistency, internal logic and anything else that might smack of reason and rationality.

 

 

I think this is a good time to point out that End/Ed is an older gentleman. It seems from what I've read anyway. I say gentleman very loosely considering the sexist remarks and language. 

 

I know that we have some older deconverts but I think it would be especially hard for an older person to give up core beliefs late in life in general. Thats the time when a person's mortality is in the forefront of reality.  So whats the benefit in changing ones views that late?  

 

You would think he would be taking more care to present himself as more christ like than what we have seen, considering a late life scenario. Try to rack up some brownie points before ya stand before the all mighty n such. 

 

Maybe the definition of spiritual should have been set before the debate started. I hope the subject of quantum duality and double slit in this debate is a joke. I think I had enough of that headache with Joe. 

 

[Joshpantera]

10 hours ago, midniterider said:

What irritates me is the general Christian indoctrination that makes good people like Ed fear or loathe things that dont mention Jesus. Ed is a good guy but his totalitarian religion has done a disservice to him.

 

This is true. Not a bad guy but loathes no mention of jesus. The totalitarian religion has done a disservice to everyone. 

[midniterider]

Communing and fellowshipping with atheists and pagans. That should score some kinda points.

[Joshpantera]

4 hours ago, WalterP said:

Josh's claim about the interconnectedness of all things has been supported with evidence.

 

Do we see a grace-filled, gracious and graceful acceptance of that from Edgarcito?

 

No.  Just inane comments and off-colour humour.

 

He wanted "proof," we gave him "evidence." 

 

Where's his evidence? That's a tough question because his interaction with other human beings is the biblical or christian evidence of one's spiritual status. Or else he's off into something other than the bible and christianity and labeling that other thing, the bible and christianity. 

 

Whatever the case, the evidence for his spiritual beliefs is strongly lacking. 

 

What could he present, evidence of the existence of jesus? We know where that's going. Scant to entirely missing. 

 

Evidence that the bible true, wrong again. 

 

How about evidence of being led by the holy spirit somehow, despite the lack of the former evidences? 

 

He has a tough show to put on......

[WalterP]

5 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

 

This is true. Not a bad guy but loathes no mention of jesus. The totalitarian religion has done a disservice to everyone. 

 

But can you see Ed's similarity to the Pharisees, Josh?

 

They did nothing but talk about god and Mosaic Law.

 

But the way they lived their lives was anathema to Jesus.

 

In much the same way Ed talks a great deal about Jesus and grace.

 

But the way he lives...?

 

The way he treats others...?

 

?

[Joshpantera]

3 hours ago, WalterP said:

 

But can you see Ed's similarity to the Pharisees, Josh?

 

They did nothing but talk about god and Mosaic Law.

 

But the way they lived their lives was anathema to Jesus.

 

In much the same way Ed talks a great deal about Jesus and grace.

 

But the way he lives...?

 

The way he treats others...?

 

?

 

What this breaks down to is the bible on one hand claiming that "works" don't equal salvation in the NT, but at the same time promoting the view that christian spirituality is known according to "works." 

 

The way Ed lives and treats other amounts to Ed's "works."

 

On that standard his spirituality is immature according to the texts. But if Ed glossed over that part of the bible and only payed attention to the other texts which are against "works," then he could get the idea that smoking, drinking, cursing, and social conduct have no bearing on salvation because he is not saved by works but by grace through faith in jesus. 

 

I know people like that who smoke, drink, and curse as they will and fall back on the "grace through faith," mantra. Where does this lead? The spirituality immature according to the bible can be saved anyways because spiritual maturity has no bearing on salvation? 

 

Or is it more simple than that? 

 

The same book that starts off having days before the sun or any other exists contradicts itself time and again all the way through to the NT and it's End???

[WalterP]

I'm glad you are excited Josh about finding an anecdotal relationship that points towards your spirituality.  Btw, it points to the Christian God as well.  Can pull multiple verses if you would like.  

 

Seriously, if your faith is in quantum amplitude to demonstrate God (in a confined volume?)... good deal.  I liked Moses's glowing face in the presence of a higher energy source.  celluostic water purification (the staff in the water), and have forgotten several I'm sure that held my attention for a time.  OH, the water phases, the triple point lol.....that was a good one, demonstrating the Trinity. 

 

I'll add yours to my list.

 

You have utterly failed otherwise.....thx for playing.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Hmmm... Edgarcito thinks that he is winning the debate and Josh is failing?

 

How can that be when Josh has defined his model of spirituality AND supported it with strong scientific evidence?

 

We're still waiting to see a coherent definition of spirituality from Ed.

 

Relationships and grace and stuff and hot air and handwaving do not constitute a coherent definition of spirituality.

 

And we're still waiting to see Ed support his (so called) model of spirituality with evidence.

 

So I'm scoring this debate as Josh 2 and Edgarcito 0.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[midniterider]

Ed: "I'm glad you are excited Josh about finding an anecdotal relationship that points towards your spirituality."

 

Also Ed: "OH, the water phases, the triple point lol.....that was a good one, demonstrating the Trinity." 

 

...

 

I saw a person with 3 zits. Boom! The Trinity, bitches. 

 

 

[midniterider]

Ed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFBZ_uAbxS0

 

 

[WalterP]

Edgarcito is turning into the pigeon that knocks over the chess pieces, craps all over the board and coos that it has won.

 

http://maai.x10host.com/playing-chess-with-pigeons/

 

Fyi Ed, Josh's knowledge-based spirituality has been confirmed by the very thing you are using to read these words.

 

Science.

 

 

 

Using knowledge he described his spiritual model and the interconnectedness of everything that is fundamental to it.  Then, I was able to show that his model is strongly supported by scientific evidence.  But what have you done?

 

Referred back to a two thousand year old book which you believe in by faith.

 

Nothing that book says can be tested in the way Josh's model can be tested.

 

Josh's model of spirituality is relevant today and can be experimentally verified, today.

 

Josh's model of spirituality can be demonstrated to be real with evidence, today.

 

So, your cries of 'Victory!' are not borne out by the facts.

 

But, you don't deal in facts, do you?

 

 

 

 

Oh and btw, you've screwed up again in your understanding of science, Ed. 

 

No faith is required. 

 

Hint: If you're going to criticise something it helps if you understand it in the first place. 

 

You don't.

[WalterP]

Lol, I've been called on the carpet for lack of evidence...me being a Christian.  And here we have a distinct lack of evidence many of you are scientists.  I guess Grace would be in order at this point......like the myth argues.  Amazing, you people are truly amazing.  I digress.

 

 

 

Why would something from a myth be in order at this point?

 

Why would something from a myth for which there's no evidence be in order at this point?

 

Why would something from a myth for which there's no evidence and which is believed to be real by faith be in order at this point?

 

Why would something from a myth for which there's no evidence and which is believed to be real by faith and which Edgarcito is totally lacking in be in order at this point?

 

?

 

 

[WalterP]

I've asked you repeatedly to make a knowledge based link, between some yet unknown spiritual definition you've yet to disclose (other than people getting high in the jungle), to some guy's explanation of space.  You have NOT done that.  NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT done that.

 

 

 

Yes, Josh has done exactly that.

 

He used his knowledge to describe a spiritual model that shows the interconnectedness of all things.

 

I used my knowledge of quantum mechanics and cosmology to provide evidence that his model is real.

 

That is the knowledge-based link you asked for.

 

I can cite the exactly where Josh and I did this.

 

He has done what you asked Edgarcito.

 

In spades.