Christian doublespeak? Say it ain't so!

Originally posted by DeathbecomesLife
A flawed what?

Being.

What flaws?

Character, judgement, emotion, etc.

By who's standard are you measuring these flaws?

The standard of life.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Erbal
Well, clearly, it's a biased and inaccurate opinion.

Biased and inacurate? So you do not feel people have been smacking each other around over religion for all of our recorded history?

The whole, 'I like my flavor of God better than yours' thing. No validity?

The origin of this side-discussion are these words: And there you get organized religion. The cause of most if not all war, death and destruction since the beginning of "the age of reason".

I'm not pretended like no war has religion as it's main motivating factor to a point religion is the root cause of said war, but I feel it's virtually a self-evident truth, assuming one has at least a basic knowledge of the history of war, that the opinion religion has caused most, if not all war, is both biased and inaccurate.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by DeathbecomesLife
A flawed what?

Being.

What is a being?

I am trying to ensure clarity on exactly what we are talking about here. You may have a different Idea of who you are than I do.

So, what do you mean by being?

Originally posted by Erbal
I'm not pretended like no war has religion as it's main motivating factor to a point religion is the root cause of said war, but I feel it's virtually a self-evident truth, assuming one has at least a basic knowledge of the history of war, that the opinion religion has caused most, if not all war, is both biased and inaccurate.

He said 'war', but he also said 'death' and 'destruction' so you can not claim that 'war' is his only modifier for religion leading to human suffering. There were non-war related occurences, or occurences that were by products of war that were done in the name of religion.

Originally posted by DeathbecomesLife
What is a being?

Something living.

Is this going somewhere or are we going to play semantics?

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by DeathbecomesLife
What is a being?

Something living.

Is this going somewhere or are we going to play semantics?

It is more than semantics. When we are discussing what we are, we are drawing from information we have received in this life and offering up answers based on what we have heard, analysed, and found agreement with.

Each of us receives different information in different ways and thus sorts it and catalogues it in different ways. And, arrives at differing conclusions.

Now we have arrived at the point where you are saying we are Life.

Well I can agree with that too.

What is something living?

I know these questions seem elementary, but we haven't found anything on which to disagree yet.

Though I do not see flaws, which means I must ask until I see something by which we do disagree.

So, what does it mean to be alive? What is life itself?

Originally posted by DeathbecomesLife
What is life itself?

A chemical experiment that has taken over the laboratory.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by DeathbecomesLife
What is life itself?

A chemical experiment that has taken over the laboratory.

And here we start seeing flaws.

We are life, and it seems flawed.

We did not create it, and because of it's magnificence, we find flaws.

I do not see flaws in life. I do not see it as an experiment.

I am marveled by it. And I cannot even further describe it.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


It gets even more ridiculous when you consider all 3 areas originally listed.

You feel his statement wasn't biased and inaccurate? Fine, that's your prerogative. Or are you simply defending a fellow mason whose words are being criticized? Again, that's your prerogative.

If the both of you want to represent the statement as fact and not opinion, well, that's where you run into trouble.

Originally posted by Erbal
You feel his statement wasn't biased and inaccurate? Fine, that's your prerogative. Or are you simply defending a fellow mason whose words are being criticized? Again, that's your prerogative.

My personal opinion, formulated on my personal studies in history, is that religion, then politics, are the causes of the majority of human suffering throughout our recorded history. If you want further clarification on what network meant you will need to ask him as I can only offer my own opinion.

Originally posted by DeathbecomesLife
I do not see flaws in life. I do not see it as an experiment.

To me if it was not flawed it would not evolve. It would have stayed in the proto-bacterial stage and that would have been that. Life came from somewhere and is heading somehwere else.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Life came from somewhere and is heading somehwere else.

Then what you see as flaws are perfect drivers to get Man from point A to point B in this journey.

Otherwise, we would sit still.

Originally posted by DeathbecomesLife
Then what you see as flaws are perfect drivers to get Man from point A to point B in this journey.

Otherwise, we would sit still.

That is what I just said.

reply to post by network dude


I recently questioned that idea... It spawned from the image of the compass and square, which ironically also answered my question.
I learned that although there are many interpretations to the compass and square symbols it can be generally be defined as a tool which creates perfection. Therein is the compass... A tool which creates perfection.
Once I had concluded the idea... the notion to disregard the square occurred to me simply because duality exists only if I accept it. Thus... after I am perfected by Freemason and his majestic compass... my need to let go of the square was imminent becuase as long as I embrace them both thereafter will a contradictory establishment and/or entity will exist to contradict my inherent perfection.

Is there a devil.... yes, but defining it/him is critical and certainly my without understanding.

No mortal can ever be so clever as that particular character. We only believe it to advance.

Using the same logic and reason demonstrated in the OP regarding the linked website being "Christian hate", I feel one can easily consider much of the masonic rhetoric common here at ATS to be significantly more potent, religious hate speech. I don't see any clear evidence from the OP's link that it's "hate" even though that word is used multiple times in the OP, although I admit I haven't read the entire website, only the masonic section.

It's a slippery slope of double standards and hypocrisy.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by WhoKnows100
To simply be able to write words like 'hate' and 'cult' and 'Christianity' in one paragraph is my guess.

But fundementalist Christians have been acting like a hate filled cult for some time on this and other websites when it comes to incessant commentary about Masonry. They seemed to have missed the live and let live aspect of life.

Yes, I too have noticed this tread of hate inspired speech against Masons, and other groups and religious ways too. In fact, it is becoming quite clear in this very forum the cult mentality of the religious crowd, as can be seen by their actions, words, and threads alone. What I think is happening, and I may be wrong, but I think they are attempting to bring about Armageddon, at any cost. Only in the manner will their beliefs and faiths be validated. The funniest thing is when they say THEY are being "persecuted."

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by DeathbecomesLife
Then what you see as flaws are perfect drivers to get Man from point A to point B in this journey.

Otherwise, we would sit still.

That is what I just said.

Then if man is a being...

and this being is life...

and life is a perfect driver to get man from point A to point B...

Where is the flaw?

reply to post by WhoKnows100

Dualism is not in scripture.

And God said,
"Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."
(King James Bible - Cambridge Edition.)
Let me see here, scripture, yes, the word "us," meaning two or more present....sounds just like Duality to me. And something you Christians are always forgetting is the Female part of the Divine Essence, the Mother. Oh, you try to make it so Males are the only beings that create, but that does not compute, and you know it. What man can create human life without Woman? Everything is a Duality, our planet, our Sun, our Universe.

Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by WhoKnows100

 

Dualism is not in scripture.

And God said,
"Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."
(King James Bible - Cambridge Edition.)
Let me see here, scripture, yes, the word "us," meaning two or more present....sounds just like Duality to me. And something you Christians are always forgetting is the Female part of the Divine Essence, the Mother. Oh, you try to make it so Males are the only beings that create, but that does not compute, and you know it. What man can create human life without Woman? Everything is a Duality, our planet, our Sun, our Universe.

edit on 6/18/12 by autowrench because: (no reason given)

Wonderful! I cannot see from your point of view, so I wanted to be sure.
So, knowing the sacredness of the womb, what are you willing to sacrifice for it's protection?
What are you willing to do to show the love and adoration that we agree should be shown?
I am asking you, everyone who agrees with our view, what can we do to change things?
What we are doing now as a society, does not reflect what we acknowledge as truth.

If you dare

Page 5.

reply to post by DeathbecomesLife

First, I want you to know that I gave you the star but it was by accident, I would take it back if I could.

As you avoided the debate about duality and an important point brought up by the post just before yours, you turn the conversation from duality to reproductive rights? Who are you, Kirk Cameron?