Lstinthwrld
-
Posts
239 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Lstinthwrld
-
-
people see what they want to when a justification is required.
-
Hahah. Okay, okay. I have to call shenanigans, now. Come on, Lost. You can come clean now and we won't even hold it against you. This is actually just a little funny, now.
Why wouldn't we call you a liar face to face? Is it because you're really tough? Are you a black belt in Kung Fu or something? Are you a mixed martial artist champion or a professional body builder?
Because if you're saying you spent the better part of a decade in cloistered religious studies with the greatest Christian minds and also spent time in studying the world religions after AND you're a master of Kung Fu, I swear this conversation will become so stereotypically internetish that nobody in their right mind will believe you.
So just so I can confirm: You're a Kung Fu kicking, Schwarzenegger-esque ex-Chaplain trained by the latest head of a major church fallen from grace and now seeking meaning in an empty life?
'Cause if that were a television show, I'd turn it off because it's so unbelievable. I'm not even upset, Lost. You're making a lot of claims and it's frankly tiring. People on the Internet who reference how great they are in real life very rarely are what they claim to be. I'm just betting on averages now.
Assumptions assumptions assumptions you have shown your true colors. And your place as a true christian. Thank you for making my point for me. I had hoped mormons were different or just misunderstood but as you stand as a self appointed representative of your faith I can take your example. Thank you.
-
You can personal message your data to Funkytown here on this site.
No one else will see it.
Funkytown will check out your credentials and tell the rest of the world
weather you have earned what you boast.
The option of course is yours. But he gave it to you.
Provide me with a security certificate. Give me some assurance that it is private. Come on this is an open forum people don't be stupid. Message me an e-mail. You people OF FAITH have already made assumption as to the validity of my character where is my assurance that you of good morals. Isn't there in your holy book a parable about he who casts the first stone? You wanna call me a liar fine man up and at least let me hear your voice when you do it. I guarantee neither one of you would if we were face to face. Internet anonymity goes a long for people like you. Man up or shut up.
-
You did the right thing.
I appreceate you and I am sure many others do also.
Keep up the Good fight brother.
It matters not that Lstinthwrld has no faith in what he may have learned earning the credentials he may hold.
He told us He could show us.
We say OK, go ahead.
We have explained ourselves well enough. His turn.
Bro. Rudick
What have you explained to me? Nothing you have shown me that you are fanatical automatons with little to no capacity for thought outside of the group think of an organized religion. Please. Do better your dear and fluffy lord expects it from you.
Until either you or Funky One man up and offer some contact info (I will provide you the information you request) Shut up and keep your high and mighty crap to yourself. I am done with both of you empty shirts who just want to preserve your good ol' boys club here.
-
Angels will ask him for them.
I wonder if they will be impressed.
Bro. Rudick
quit ignoring my posts I have said I will.
-
Historically you are in error. Smith was apparently tried, but not convicted. But then Jesus was tried, convicted and executed. Was it a secret that Smith was "glass looking?" Not really. In fact it was a common folk magic practice of the time. Bushman believed he got jobs seeking treasure because the neighbors wanted to give the Smith family a little financial help without making them beg. So, by giving Smith a few coins to "seek treasures" on their land, it kept him busy and gave the family some needed income.
No one ever denied the use of seer stones. But they were used after 1830, and after the translation of the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon was translated using the interpreters given by the Lord.
Clearly you didn't read, or didnt trust the reference I gave on the use of "magic" in the Bible. But it's from an independent source. You can choose to igore the facts, but they are there. Magic and "occultism" was used by men of God for Godly purposes. So clearly, the modern day notion of black magic (which really dates to about 1960) being evil and of the devil must be false, or at best misconstrued.
So, use of the seer stones is not evil, and was a gift from God. You can choose to believe otherwise, but history, and the Bible prove you wrong.
Don't remember the Salem witch hunts and trials that might have happened a little earlier than 1960 huh? If all those people weren't killed for practicing black magic and witchcraft as the people of the time understood it to be evil why were they killed then. A rebellious knitting circle? I think they had very well defined understanding of black magic then and we still have this understanding today.
-
Then what is your belief?
Agnostic. I know there is a higher 'power' I personally have issues trying to quantify it though. It has cost me a lot of sleep and maybe a little sanity over the years but here I am.
-
Problem is they are emotional responses that can be tested and measured through external external stimuli/ physical response which put them in the wind category. (Fear and anger especially.) Not sure about beauty and humor response being measured but they can be caused by external stimuli.MRI perhaps?
How do you come by this? A schizophrenic has measurable reactions to hallucinations that to every one else are not there but to the patient they are very real. You can also medicate some one with a hallucinogenic substance and get the same reaction so not sure your conclusions are quite valid. Neat perspective though thank you for taking the time.
-
So can I expect that you will provide the credentials you had promised? If not, I invite you not to make claims on your authority that you do not have.
I have already in many posts told you I can and will but not on an open forum where every one and their brother has access to my information. You say you feel the need to debunk me and defend the faith huh? Who are you that you believe you are high and mighty enough to do this. Makes my point about ego. Do you really think the mormon religion needs you as a defender when they have so many well trained/educated apologists? I always enjoy these self appointed defenders of the faith that more often than not exhibit a very non christian attitude while defending christianiy. Oxymoron anybody?
Like I said Funky One I will provide you my credentials (once again that I have no faith in the christianity that they are based in) but it will happen in a way that I can be sure you aren't an internet criminal. Deal with it.
Maybe the reason you are so defensive and on a crusade here is the weak saint you speak of who you are worried about reading faith destroying material here is you.
And just to be very clear I tell you and everyone here that I have no faith in christianity right? So how do you get that I am claiming some authority when the credentials we are speaking of are based in christianity? Seems like quite a erroneous leap of assumption on your part doesn't it?
-
Please feel free to provide the evidence you claim you can via this website. A phone does not transmit the images required for you to prove yourself, so I'm not wasting my time.
You seem offended that, when you said you could prove your credentials to anyone who asked, I asked you to back up your claim. Go ahead and do what you have said.
I quote again to you, Proverbs 26:4-5
Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.
And again, I stand by my assertion that you do not sound like someone who is searching for the divine. You sound more like one of Michel Onfray's followers using his proselytizing methods.
You have said you could prove you are who you say you are. That doesn't require a phone. I invite you to provide the information via this website.
Yeah I thought not. Good night.
-
Very interesting video.
The first part of it reminds me very much of Russell's "flying teapot" analogy: The fact that we can't disprove the existence of a teapot orbiting half way between Earth and Mars is no reason to suppose that such a teapot is likely to exist. The major problem with this (for me) is that flying teapots don't really explain very much about our existence, whereas God does.
Also I don't think "the wind" is the best example of a non-physical entity. (Although it can't be seen, it can be quantified and measured using physical apparatus.) There are plenty of non-tangible things which we all accept the existence of, like beauty, humor, fear, anger...even ideas themselves. Of all the things this guy could have mentioned, he picks an obvious strawman.
On the other hand, he does make some very good points about religious bullying, pushing God X over God Y etc.
Yeah i found some holes in his logic too. Thank you for taking the time to watch the video and comment. :)
-
I'm still waiting for you to prove you are who you say you are, which you have claimed to be able to do. I'm not providing you my private email or phone number. You offered to provide it, there are perfectly adequate ways of providing that on this website.
And I still stand by my assessment. You certainly don't sound like someone who has spent their life in contemplation of the divine, searching for truth.
Instead of arguing, since that's silly as you aren't providing what you said you would, I instead will quote Proverbs 26:4-5
Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.
No I sound like someone who has lost all faith and feel like I have wasted a lot of my life but I cannot stop searching and have admitted so. Lets see who do I claim to be. A agnostic seeker who likes to ask questions. I am willing to provide my credentials (that I don't even consider valid as I HAVE NO FAITH in the christianity that they are based in) you wanna call me a liar be a man and at least do it over the phone. I am totally willing to call you or have you call me. Your choice. Be a man don't hide behind your computer. Don't want to do this then shut up and keep your 'oh I will validate you to the world if you can prove yourself to me' crap to yourself. I have shot down your assumptions about me so far and I will keep doing it because what I said is true and I will prove it to you. If you are man enough. Personally I don't think you are. But if you prove me wrong I will validate your manhood to the world.
-
I stand by my assessment that you are lying about who you are. You were the one to state you are willing to produce evidence. If you are, I invite you to produce it. If you are unwilling, I invite you to not state credentials you can not prove. If you're saying that Bishop Jonah, the Metropolitan of the OCA who was elected back in 2008 had something to do with your training, your credentials will have no problems being validated: A couple of quick calls and I am more than willing to get on here and tell the world about your credentials.
Looking up James Paffhausen, can you tell me if you spent time with him at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley or did he train you during his time in Russia? Or was it when the newly-called Archimandrite Fr. Jonah took over as auxiliary bishop and chancellor of the Diocese of the South?
I suspect your answer will be that he is your spiritual father and that you agree with him despite never having met the man, but if he is more than that and actually a part of your credentials, he makes it remarkably easy to check out your background.
It's still an 'Appeal to Authority' logical fallacy, but I am more than willing to admit I was wrong.
Whats wrong no high and mighty response yet. Come on dude your letting you readership down.
-
I stand by my assessment that you are lying about who you are. You were the one to state you are willing to produce evidence. If you are, I invite you to produce it. If you are unwilling, I invite you to not state credentials you can not prove. If you're saying that Bishop Jonah, the Metropolitan of the OCA who was elected back in 2008 had something to do with your training, your credentials will have no problems being validated: A couple of quick calls and I am more than willing to get on here and tell the world about your credentials.
Looking up James Paffhausen, can you tell me if you spent time with him at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley or did he train you during his time in Russia? Or was it when the newly-called Archimandrite Fr. Jonah took over as auxiliary bishop and chancellor of the Diocese of the South?
I suspect your answer will be that he is your spiritual father and that you agree with him despite never having met the man, but if he is more than that and actually a part of your credentials, he makes it remarkably easy to check out your background.
It's still an 'Appeal to Authority' logical fallacy, but I am more than willing to admit I was wrong.
You got a high opinion of your self if you believe the world needs YOU to validate ME. In the end I don't give a hoot if an internet dwelling geek like you believes me or not. We will never meet you have no impact on my life other than a minor annoyance here. So wanna talk man up lets talk on the phone.
-
I stand by my assessment that you are lying about who you are. You were the one to state you are willing to produce evidence. If you are, I invite you to produce it. If you are unwilling, I invite you to not state credentials you can not prove. If you're saying that Bishop Jonah, the Metropolitan of the OCA who was elected back in 2008 had something to do with your training, your credentials will have no problems being validated: A couple of quick calls and I am more than willing to get on here and tell the world about your credentials.
Looking up James Paffhausen, can you tell me if you spent time with him at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley or did he train you during his time in Russia? Or was it when the newly-called Archimandrite Fr. Jonah took over as auxiliary bishop and chancellor of the Diocese of the South?
I suspect your answer will be that he is your spiritual father and that you agree with him despite never having met the man, but if he is more than that and actually a part of your credentials, he makes it remarkably easy to check out your background.
It's still an 'Appeal to Authority' logical fallacy, but I am more than willing to admit I was wrong.
Metropolitan Jonah was the man who accepted me into orthodoxy when he was abbot and just Father Jonah at St John of Shanghai monastery in point Reyes ca. where I ended up living and worked at for a time. Try again. Just making your self look stupid not me. I told you pm me a e-mail or phone number and I will give ya more to choke on.
-
I am not an atheist but neither am I LDS. There are many individuals on this forum that I respect wholeheartedly that are very intelligent.
I would like to know what you all think of this video.
Once again these are not my beliefs I just thought this video was...interesting.
Look foreword to reading what you all have to say.
-
The great thing about the email system on here is that you can just take screenshots of your credentials and paste them in to the email. Just as easy as sending me an email directly.
Some of these documents have personal information and with a picture included you have enough for identity theft.
You have already called me a liar without cause I have no trust in your moral character.
I want a commitment of personal information from you as well.
I will say that my spiritual father is the Metropolitan of the OCA. My guide and mentor was a ranking priest at the seminary I went to St. Innocent of Alaska seminary as well as the community associated with it.
I never took tonsure or ordination because I was already falling out of faith. I didn't want to be a hypocrite and tell people they should believe totally if I didn't. The two monasteries I lived in are in California one in the bay area one in northern California.
The minister credential is through a semi charismatic church organization based in the state I live in with my chaplaincy in the same organization before I went on my spiritual quest that took me through Buddhism's many tradition (Mahayana and Theravada) on to orthodoxy.
I made some Taoist studies with an old world Taoist who had just obtained rank when the cultural revolution in China started and he came to America.
The orthodox endeavor was my last in organized religion but I have continued my studies at the university level ever since.
I have a need to know.
Want personal details send me your e-mail or phone number lets talk.
-
I did...and it was fun...do it again! lol
-
Well phooey! You just ain't no fun!
What you didn't see the big bouncy ball? Fun is in my dna.
-
I have an idea...let's forget the whole thing! Please won't you please be my neighbor. :)
Gladly just dont call me Fred Rodgers:bouncing:
-
You're projecting.
I don't understand what you are saying with I am projecting. If I applied something to you that you did not say I am sorry I hate it when people do that to me and I try not to do it to anyone else. Once again sorry. Please tell me what words I put in your mouth. I don't like to repeat mistakes and would like to learn from this one.
-
Again, egotistical of you to falsely accuse me of being irresponsible! Don't put words in my mouth, ok?
What words did I put in your mouth?
-
Yes...but it took 50 posts for me to flesh out the underlying stream of this conversation. Rich conversations can be like that...ruffling the surface waters, slowly getting below, and then that lucky plunge where some true insight comes.
Thank you. I would attend one of you services I think.
-
The more I think about this question the more I'm convinced it's frot with the potential for trouble and misunderstanding. LDS can be sensitive becasue it most parts the world they are a small minority, and their faith has received considerable criticism from most sectors of the Christian world. My faith had the same beginning, but after a generation moved into the mainstream, and ultimately became widely accepted in Protestantism, and even with Catholicism (both have a Charismatic Renewal in them).
Now, if I lived in certain parts of Georgia, and constantly had my Baptist neighbors asking me how I could open myself up to demonic influences by speaking in unknown tongues, after awhile, I'd probably develop a bit of a chip on my shoulder.
My experience at LDS.net is that when questions are asked in openess and sincerity, I, a clergperson from a denomination that has lodged some serious anti-LDS criticisms, receive almost no flack. I've had maybe three posters here give me somewhat of a hard time, in nearly four years of posting. And two of those quickly backed off, when others let them know that I was fair and reasonable.
So, my answer to the question of why LDS can be so sensitive is...they sure don't have to be...the tone probably depends much more on the questioner than the answerer.
I can buy into this and definitely agree when you say they don't have to be. I would take that a little further and say no christian lds or other should ever be defensive when asked criticized or called on the carpet to defend their faith. If you honestly believe what you say you do and that the person you are talking/debating/arguing with is lost without understanding the fullness of the truth as you do then you feel sorry for them and deep pity. How can you be mad at someone in this condition. Its like being mad at a child when they burn themselves on the stove when they don't know it is hot and dangerous. You feel compassion for that child and do everything in your power to relieve their suffering. You don't get mad.
Public resistance to church...why?
in General Discussion
Posted
Sure i will message me your e-mail more than happy to.