h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Well yes we that is the other people here who havent had their Uspace modded and whoa rent under constant supervison fromt he mods like some kind of potty mouthed, tantrum throwing toddler havemade up their minds to attempt to engage in civillised conversation with each other.

A conversation is where all parties talk to and *listen* to each other and think about what they have heard before simply blurting out the next thing in their head.

Atheists talk with AndrewS without there being any insults thrown and the same is true of other believers talking to rationalists.

You cant manage that, I can do it with other people, Id like you to name the rationalists you get along with?






Moving on to ideas rather than presentation amongst the many false things you have claimed is that 50% reduction in risk couple with 50% reduction in the remaing qutient of risk equal 0%

You were wrong.

You have been wrong about so many things that generally when ever I see you say something i tend to instantly assume the opposite.

After examining the evidence you think there is a bigG in heaven directing the show. Having got to know you and how regularly you are wrong even if Id never heard of the bible your faith in it would be enough for me to dismiss it.





In short admire your adherence to a position of faith in much the saem way as Id admire a scale repoduction of the Venus De Milo crafted out of dogs doings.

A truly astounding thing, I want to keep my distance from, utterly pointless and of no merit.

On the other hand, Blickster, you have to admit that she's a wonderful examplar of "christian values".

That is if you accept christian values as including intolerance, lack of reason, general hatred of other nationalities and races and lifestyles, and a habit of prevarication.

Personally, I had hoped that those were NOT "christian" traits, but she has persuaded me that they must be.

"She" is the cat's mother...

Hi Della,

"Math, as you've decided already what I would have said, there's no need for me to say anything."

Can we take it then that you do not wish to comment on any scripture that makes you uncomfortable, or with which you disagree?

Or have you decided to follow that scripture by example...?

Blessings,
Matholwch .

<>

I'll take this, although it's addressed to Della....

She/I have decided not to answer questions deliberately phrased in such a way as to make them unanswerable.

You know the answer anyway... my brother when he was alive, many others and also I, have answered *every* question you've asked and re-asked over the last 7 and a half years. You've run out years ago, and just keep repeating the same ones. This is not because you want an answer, it's because you're playing to the gallery, showing off your "cleverness". Man, you remind me of the "Scribes and Pharisees", with their constant trap-laying questions! (Not that I am claiming to be Jesus... just His follower.) If you know the Bible as well as you claim, you'll know what I mean...

Vicky

Hi Della,

"She/I have decided not to answer questions deliberately phrased in such a way as to make them unanswerable."

Fair enough, but my original point was to ask your opinion on some specific areas of scripture that you, as a Christian woman, could perhaps give a personal insight.

You have chosen to avoid doing this for what I can only assume (as you will not tell me) is the fact that despite your claims to be a christian many aspects of that religion make you very uncomfortable.

You have not answered every question I have asked of you, many you have pointedly ignored or you have dissembled. Not to speak ill of the dead but your brother's standard tactic with me, as I recall, was to berate and insult me.

I do not have this same response from other christians on h2g2, including Jordan and Andrew S, who will try and answer fully, often teaching me new interpretations of scripture as they do. Indeed I regard Andrew as a teacher for he has sent me into corners of the Bible I had not visited for years with fresh eyes.

I am neither a scribe or pharisee as I have nothing to defend nor anything to lose, as they did, by asking you these questions.

Sometimes you remind me of dear old JtP. I asked him several times to enlighten me with his interpretation of the parable of The Good Samaritan - he would not and tried every tactic under the sun, including yikesing me, to avoid doing so.

His problem, as seems to be yours also, is that there are teachings in the Bible, even in the NT and amongst Jesus's own words, that he fundamentally disagreed with and that he could not accept, but to do so publically would undermine his self-image as a good christian.

I wonder if that is the case here? I expect though that you would prefer to avoid answering these questions for the reasons I have described above.

C'est la vie.

Blessings,
Matholwch .

<< Not to speak ill of the dead but your brother's standard tactic with me, as I recall, was to berate and insult me.>>

That's nonsense. He was very patient with you, although he almost wept with frustration at the fact that you'd ask the same question 3 months later as if it were new. He didn't do patience very well, any more than I do - we get that from our mother. But he certainly tried!

<>

Jordan and Andrew S are wonderful - I've learned a lot from Andrew myself. But with all due respect to them, my status here is different - I have been designated a target... so it's very likely that questions I am asked are not genuine queries. (My brother felt that too, that you would hammer the same questions at him, to try to trip him up, hence his frustration.)

<>

Your self esteem?

<>

The only thing I have in common with JtP, aside from that he's a Christian, is a refusal to be bullied, albeit mine has taken a while to grow - I was always much more easily scared and intimidated than him, but now I've had the worst happen (an unjust banning) and so I am so disillusioned with h2g2, that I don't care and therefore can't be manipulated. The whole tenor of this place is the opposite of what it was in 2002-3, and it's one of the nastiest, least fair and honest fora on the web. Some views here are mainstream and protected - the people
holding these views are the majority here, although they take pride in *not* being... because they tell themselves, the outside world persecutes their like. Beaulocks! The outside world loves them!
<>

No, there's nothing to which that applies...
If you're referring to the "house-keeping" verses you quoted, my brother's view, and I concur, is that those strictures were cultural, and of their time, hence no longer valid. But it was vital for the growing Church not to scandalise the people in the wider community. There are plenty of Bible passages that say otherwise from what you've quoted.
I think something worth looking at, is Paul's discussion about the eating of meat sacrificed to idols. God's children have liberty, but must not misuse, or use that liberty in such a way, as to harm the "weaker brethren"...

I look forward to seeing what Andrew S., has to say. He knows a heap more than I do, and as you've found, I've found the same, he's lead me to things I'd never considered before.

Vicky
Little P.S., - not Della. Never. I know, I shall start calling you - Saruman, how's that?

Gandalf would be closer.

But the reason you get called Della is because you wnt through a phase when every time we came back to the boards, you'd changed your name. I remember I started to use your user ID just to keep track.

You changing Math's name for him is rather different.

When did Math ever call himself Saruman?

--

Jez

Maybe we should go right, right back and call you Debbi Kay?

Wasn't that the original moniker? Back in 2001?

--

Jez

<>

If it stops him using (in order to anger me, and he might as well admit that), a name I've tried to give up *four years back*, then it's all good.

The "phase" you mention was a futile attempt to dislodge the name Hoo seems to have permanently saddled me with as a gesture of what at the time, seemed to be contempt, and what I know now, was simply His Issues...

I have tried all sorts of things, and probably the best thing is to use what I learned at NZIHC in the 1980s... i.e., to extinguish the undesired behaviour by ignoring it.

But that doesn't work - hasn't in four years. No one has that much patience, and so Saruman it is, (and S*** for azahar - I am kindly not using all of her real name)until either or both of them learns from experience, what it feels like to have people deliberately use a name you hate.

Hi Della

I call you Della as it is the name I have always known you as, simple as that. if you think that the original Della-persona is one you'd rather forget and rankles that is your problem not mine. Would a Rose by any other name smell as sweet. As far asI am concernde you can call me what you like - Saruman, the Great Deceiver, Shaitan, Noddy - it makes absolutuely no odds to me (thoug you might confuse ithers if you chng it too often ).

"That's nonsense. He was very patient with you..."

Yes he was, but his alter ego was quite vicious I recall.

"But with all due respect to them, my status here is different - I have been designated a target... so it's very likely that questions I am asked are not genuine queries."

Your feelings of persecution aside my questions are genuine and always have been. You continually puzzle me Della, christian one minute, disputing and ignoring scripture the next, so I ask you questions. When I repeat the same questions later it is because you generally haven't answered the previous ones, or the conversation has moved back over the same ground and I have another oportunity to get a straight answer out of you.

My self-esteem? Really? There are people here I have met in the flesh and they can assure you that my self-esteem is irrelevant in my search for truth. I cannot see how the opinions of a group of virtual contacts would have any affect on my view of myself - unless I felt I had let myself down that is.

By the way, being asked your opinion or for a straight answeron a discussion forum is not bullying. You should see the roastings I have had from Kel, SoRB (Hoo) and Eddie the Bonobo , but they were just trying to get me to explain myself clearly and answer their questions.

Persecution is when people come to your house in the middle of the night and drag you away for questioning, not when they politely ask you a question on a web forum. Please get a sense of perspective on this Della, before you do yourself an injury.

"...those strictures were cultural, and of their time, hence no longer valid."

At last back to my original question. If that is the case then what parts of the Bible are not cultural or of their time? The whole of Leviticus? Rendering unto Caesar? Good Samaritans? Anthing Paul or Peter are repored to have written? The book of Revelation?

You must admit that is an awfully big get out clause.

Blessings,
Matholwch, aka Saruman the White .

<>

Then you don't recall very well, do you?

<>

I've never claimed to be persecuted. I don't know why you say I have.

Hi Vicky, Lets stop playing blame games then I will do all I can, which is to make a genuine plea to you and the others involved to suspend name calling, any mention of educated guesses at the psychiological condition of others, claims about their status or otherwise.

This goes for all involved.

You will not declaim to know more about a subject than I, and I wil not do the saem to you.

I will ask Math to use the name you are posting under or at the very least your Unumber.

We wil all try to give summaries of articles we are linking to and not demand that others read them

We will refer people to previopus answers as best we can and not simply say I hav answered that question ie. "I answered that X months ago in the "abc" thread".

We will all attempt to "live in the now", while not forgetting the past accept the principle that going on an on about the past isnt always the best way to a better future.

Im in if you're in Vicky!

one love

<>

Essentially, yes, of course! (Once I get over the shock of you being the peacemaker! )

VL

Lets try this again!

No caveats either you do or dont if there is something you need to change before an unequivocal yes then say so now.

Are you in or out?

<>

You're not *kindly* not posting my real name, you just like saying this every couple of pages or so. How is it *kind* when you are clearly holding it over my head like some sort of Sword of Dellacles?

Everyone here knows my real name anyhow, or could find out in about six clicks, so it's no big deal.

az

Wow...I've never seen a moderated site that would permit someone to threaten another poster with identity exposure!

It's one thing to use a name that another doesn't like...sticks and stones, etc.

But to threaten to put someone's actual identity on the Internet is the worst kind of visciousness and would simply not be tolerated elsewhere. I can't believe that such offensive behaviour is tolerated here!

well its not really a threat of identity exposure there are ways of finding out who az is. The more important point is that Vicky or anyome for that matter shouldnt use threats as a tool in debate.

Fortunately it seems az is smart enough to see through that empty bluff and bluster.

Perhaps.

But the ease or difficulty of finding Azahar or anyone else's real world identity is irrelevant. That someone would use that threat FOR ANY REASON is just beyond the pale.

Does anyone seriously think that someone should be cut any slack for threatening someone with a gun, just because the victim had body armour on benath a jacket?

That is beyond a lapse in netiquette; it shows an utter lack of human decency.