On Language

@philokalia said
You are also famous for literally taking notes on what everyone posts and trying to use it against them months later -- including even when they no longer post in the forum, as if you can conjure them back to existence with some rant. But IDK, it's kind of your thing, right, it's how you think you are displaying some superiority, perhaps. Who knows. We will never know because you do not really expand on anything that you do.

"Superiority"?

@philokalia said
Others treat this like a discussion forum and you treat it like a shooting gallery -- just camp, snipe, and keep your strike zone as small as possible like a midget with a baseball bat.

I think this is a mischaracterization of my contribution to this community.

@philokalia said
Divegeester insults another poster (who hasn't even posted in this thread) on the first page.

@divegeester said
Channeling Suzianne this morning Kelly?

@philokalia said
Divegeester insults another poster (who hasn't even posted in this thread) on the first page.

Is it an insult to Suzianne to be likened to KellyJay?

@philokalia said
But perhaps it would be useful for us to think about where we are failing in building bridges, and whether we are arguing with the goal of getting better, exercising ourselves, facing challenges, etc., and whether or not we are just engaging in an egotistical and malicious exercise.

I know you don't like talking about the torturer god ideology, so you don't need to respond.

We can take it as read that you still feel whatever it was you said the last time you tried to fob it off and say you didn't want to talk about it. But, the capacity of language to encapsulate succinctly ideas that are complex is an interesting topic.

I'd say that the words "egotistical and malicious" constitute reasonably effective language for encapsulating the torturer God Christian ideology:

'My thoughts and beliefs will make me immortal [or vocabulary to that effect] [egotistical]; while you deserve to be tortured for eternity for having different thoughts and beliefs from mine [malicious].'

I don't think there is much difficulty understanding torturer god ideology - at least not any difficulty that is caused by 'language' per se.

No, the difficulty is caused by the lack of moral coherence underpinning the "egotistical and malicious" assertions that the ideology's proponents rely upon.

@fmf said
@divegeester said
Channeling Suzianne this morning Kelly?

@philokalia said
Divegeester insults another poster (who hasn't even posted in this thread) on the first page.

Is it an insult to Suzianne to be likened to KellyJay?

Go back and review the context; it is clearly intended to be negative as the two had already begun opposing one another.

@fmf said
I know you don't like talking about the torturer god ideology, so you don't need to respond.

We can take it as read that you still feel whatever it was you said the last time you tried to fob it off and say you didn't want to talk about it. But, the capacity of language to encapsulate succinctly ideas that are complex is an interesting topic.

I'd say that the words "egoti ...[text shortened]... ce underpinning the "egotistical and malicious" assertions that the ideology's proponents rely upon.

I think the main topic was generally over the sort of thing that you would like to talk about. It also involves people coming up with proscriptive ideas on what is the right way to relate to one another given the issues with language -- and as I said on page one, you aren't exactly the sort of guy who is into 'positive' language, positive beliefs, etc. You are a negative thinker, and a nihilist.

Of course, we would have to engage on the topic that you shoehorn into the thread in order for it ot be of any use to you because you would not engage in good faith.

This is your signature: always teetering off topic and becoming vicious & personal.

Classic FMF.

@philokalia said
I think the main topic was generally over the sort of thing that you would like to talk about. It also involves people coming up with proscriptive ideas on what is the right way to relate to one another given the issues with language -- and as I said on page one, you aren't exactly the sort of guy who is into 'positive' language, positive beliefs, etc. You are a ne ...[text shortened]... your signature: always teetering off topic and becoming vicious & personal.

Classic FMF.

There is no onus on you to respond to the point I made about how "language" is sometimes not a difficulty in expressing ideas about belief.

@philokalia said
Go back and review the context; it is clearly intended to be negative as the two had already begun opposing one another.

You used the word "insult". That is the language you chose to use. How is likening KellyJay to Suzianne an "insult" to your way of thinking?

@philokalia said
You are a negative thinker, and a nihilist.

No. I don't think I am. I think you are mistaken.

@fmf said
I know you don't like talking about the torturer god ideology, so you don't need to respond.

We can take it as read that you still feel whatever it was you said the last time you tried to fob it off and say you didn't want to talk about it. But, the capacity of language to encapsulate succinctly ideas that are complex is an interesting topic.

I'd say that the words "egoti ...[text shortened]... ce underpinning the "egotistical and malicious" assertions that the ideology's proponents rely upon.

I think it morally incoherent to assign the "torturer god ideology" into the narrative of the Bible.

The Bible knows nothing about such a thing. By imposing "language for encapsulating" concepts foreign to the biblical narrative in a debate forum "constitutes" "egotistical and malicious" misrepresentation of the truth, and is indicative of intellectual dishonesty, and the moral incoherence of those that promote nonexistent ideologies.

It is morally repugnant to engage in a defense against an unsubstantiatable ideological assertion made by the misuse "of language to encapsulate succinctly ideas" not found in the narrative of scripture.

@fmf said
You used the word "insult". That is the language you chose to use. How is likening KellyJay to Suzianne an "insult" to your way of thinking?

It's simple FMF. Divegeester used the comparison to deflect from the topic of discussion, and to belittle kelly.

@secondson said
I think it morally incoherent to assign the "torturer god ideology" into the narrative of the Bible.

The Bible knows nothing about such a thing. By imposing "language for encapsulating" concepts foreign to the biblical narrative in a debate forum "constitutes" "egotistical and malicious" misrepresentation of the truth, and is indicative of intellectual dishonesty, and th ...[text shortened]... by the misuse "of language to encapsulate succinctly ideas" not found in the narrative of scripture.

Most of the Christians here propagate a torturer god ideology. divegeester doesn't. Suzianne doesn't.

@secondson said
It's simple FMF. Divegeester used the comparison to deflect from the topic of discussion, and to belittle kelly.

Does likening KellyJay to Suzianne belittle KellyJay?

@fmf said
Most of the Christians here propagate a torturer god ideology. divegeester doesn't. Suzianne doesn't.

That is a false accusation. No Christian in this forum has propagated "a torturer god ideology".

No such language exists in the narrative of the Bible. It is the language of atheists like you and of unscriptural and alleged Christians like divegeester that asserts that ideology, further compounded and conflagrated by your insistent and persistent accusation of the same. It is a disingenuous and intellectually dishonest technique of the ambiguation of language.

The fact that you do it is evidence for the agenda you pursue to silence the Word of God.

@fmf said
I think this is a mischaracterization of my contribution to this community.

I'm not sure what part you think you are playing, but I think he nailed it.