Who Are We?

Who Are We?

You ask yourself,
“Who is it that she might be?”
Because she seems not like me
(Your) Eyes deceived,
Shall be relieved
For deception will not do
What you see are clothes and skin,
While you look outside, I reside within.
“Who are you?” I must ask. 
Are you the clothes and skin I see
Or, are you inside just like me?  ~ Arachne 12/17/12 in the late evening.

Don't see me for who I am; see me as I could be.  I could be you.

They, the Harper government (Kanada), have passed a law without our consent. As such, we do not have to honor it. We mustn't honor it. It is hoped that in unity and solidarity we can find a solution to the problem we call Kanada. We are one people (that means you too) to our mother EARTH.  Please help pass this message around the world so that others may see what is occurring in a supposedly civilized country.





Jasper Avenue, Edmonton AB. Canada Place. Dec 10 2012. In opposition to the colonial State of Canada and the assault on Treaty Rights by the Harper Conservative Govt (Bill C-45). See the write--up on the event here: http://www.thepaltrysapien.com/2012/12/idle-no-more-settler-colonial-canada/

Published on May 7, 2012

Official video archive of presentation by Professor Robert Miller at the Indigenous Peoples Forum on the Doctrine of Discovery March 23, 2012 at the Arizona State Capitol House of Representatives

Keeping a clean PC...

I have been using iolo Technologies' System Mechanic for going on two years and I couldn't be happier.  It is an amazing program that speeds up and cleans out my system so that it is smooth running.  My main system is not an old piece of crap either, but it still works wonders.  As for my other system, which is an old and slow piece of crap, it does speed it up.  Actually, as I write this, I am running it on my older system to have it jump when I wish.  If anyone would like to try it, go for it as it is worth every penny.  As cheap as I am, I bought it because of its worth to my machine and to my time.

Why don't you try it and tell me what you think.  I would bet my butt you will love it.  Check it out here:  System Mechanic by iolo Technologies

Lest I forget, if you have an external hard drive or several like I do, it will defrag and align the files just as it does on your internal hard drive.  External hard drives really get fragmented if  you are using it as a backup.  This makes it so that it is not so messy and all things are they way they should be.  All I can say is this is the best product I have used on my PC and I have used many.

Try it...you'll like it!

Whoops, if you have multiple computers, the product can be used on all of them.

Land of the Blind...The story of a revolution

Having watched the movie "Land of the Blind,” I came away with the following:

The year sometime after John Lennon and yet actual time is unknown.  As they mentioned John Lennon, he would have had to be known to be mentioned.  Despite this, time is clearly unknown as there is conflict based on clothes, cars, architecture, and technology.

Location of the palace looks like it is in Russia as the exterior possesses the architecture of onion domes.  However, within the walls, one can clearly see pre-revolutionary France.  The movie reflects France, Russia, China, and Islam in the clothes in and out of time lines and clothes lines.  Also, there are also touches Spain, Cuba, Germany, and Italy, but the actual location could be all or none.

Media under the president is skewed at intertwining of news with commercialism.  An example is a report of prisoner Thorne having written on his prison wall in excrement.  The interjection of  X cleaning product being used to clean such is as much a part of the news as it is a commercial in the news.  After the murder of the president in his pink plastic diaper and his wife in her green latex sex suit, the glam was over and the state became like that of Islam or China under Thorne’s revolution.  Commercialism was no longer interjected in the media nor were there airs of silly mindlessness.  Instead, the media was gravely serious.

Contrast between the president and Thorne is not only evident in their style of dictatorship (glam versus Islam (but not Islam) as one could easily think of Mao’s China or xtian extremism), it is evident in their stature and mind set.  The president was a little man in stature who inherited his power from daddy.  Although a man in power should be taken seriously, the president/actor/film maker made himself larger than life with his clothes and dialogue, i.e., material excess and the use of the “royal we” as if he were Louis XVI and his actress wife were Marie Antoinette.  How could such a man be taken seriously?  He was truly a little man in every sense of the word as he sought thoughts from others and punished them if his action, based on their thought, was negative or if he did not like their answer.  Thorne, on the other hand, was a large man in stature and a well-educated writer.  Having thoughts of his own, he did not ask others to think for him, but he did punish those who did not agree with his doctrine by eliminating or reeducating them in an Orwellian type of system.  Thorne did not take the glam road, but his road was just as ruthless and just as much tyrannical as the president that he killed.

Back to the drawing board...Thorne was killed by his burka clad mistress who, upon killing him, removed the garment and freed herself.  As the president had a nephew living in exile, he returned to his homeland and came to power much like that of a monarch in succession.

Joe, yes I just now mention him, found himself in an awkward position of being imprisoned for not signing the “loyalty oath” with Thorne.  Although Joe helped Thorne by allowing him access to kill the president, that was not good enough and for this he paid with years of his life in prison. After Thorne’s murder and the return to the former government, Joe was still in a predicament as he was the one who allowed for the murder of the president.  Where is Joe?  Did he get out of the camp?  One has to wonder as he appears at a diner.  A waitress, who looks like his daughter, notices that he bears the mark of the “camp” on his wrist.  His dialogue with her was reminiscent of the camp, “Nothing is better than a big juicy steak.”  Either through memory or reality, Joe is seen in the prison yet again.  Despite the dilapidated interior and exterior of the prison, his typing in a stark white cell on a stark white typewriter with stark white accessories leads me to believe that he was a prisoner of his own mind.  There are breaks where he is seen walking through the prison which seems abandoned and falling to pieces.  This brings to mind Thorne's words of Rudolf Hess being the only prisoner at Spandau Prison.  In this starkness, Joe's daughter appears and has a dialogue with him to which he does not respond.  However, at supposed chow time, Joe responds to the guard with the same words that he heard from Thorne when Thorne was a prisoner, “This used to be a hospital you know.  This prison used to be a hospital.”  Is there a CURE for such a loop? ~ Arachne ~ 10/29/12 in the p.m. EST

Argument with an idiot...

HER: I am used to debating, I was on the debate team in my high school. That was not debating. I thought I was going to have an intellectual conversation about something, but all I got was suckered into into a fight. You asked the question, I answered, then it was a feast on me. At first, you both talked about my comment like I wasn't even there.

ME: I knew you were there, but I only posted the following before you and Michael had words. Therefore, I did not talk about your comment like were you weren’t there as I was not there after posting my two initial comments to you which are as follows:

My initial answer to you was “What makes a god or gods come into existence? Our minds? I see no rational thought to there being a god or gods.” I asked two questions and inserted my personal opinion and nothing more. If you will look, I did not call you irrational. The other post I made came immediately after the last and was taken from the very article you liked. This is the post that I made:


Andrew Pinsent is research director at the University of Oxford's Ian Ramsey Centre for Science and Religion. He is also a trained physicist who once worked at Cern.

“We have to educate one another in the terms that we use,” he says.

For example, he explains, “philosophers have been discussing the meaning of [the word] truth for centuries”.

But for many physicists, it is uncomfortable territory to use that word when talking about what we know about the Universe and the Big Bang.

Prof Krauss says that the word is at the heart of “one of the fundamental differences between science and religion”.

“People who are religious believe they know the truth,” he says.

“And they know the answer before even asking the question. Whereas, with scientists, it’s the exact opposite”.

"In science, although we use the word truth, what really matters is if it works”.


HER: You implied that I am irrational. Then your friend went on saying I didn't bring any scientific evidence to the table, when I certainly did. I merely took scientific evidence, and inferred what it's implications may be. Isn't that what every scientist does? Excuse me that my evidence was a video and not a scholarly article.

ME: While you and my friend were arguing, I was not there as I was on the phone with my partner. When I came back, I noticed how things had exploded. Upon my return, I reiterated my first statement and advised you that I was not pagan. After that, you were gone and the friendly argument continued with Michael, Eric, and I.

HER: Had either of you watched it, you would have learned something about how the brain works, and how people tend to hold on to their beliefs, and get defensive as well.. and yes I did. I get defensive when I feel science confirms my beliefs more than it disproves them.

ME: I not only watched the video before you, I initially posted it on my wall and you shared it. The video came to me through a thread I participated in TED: Ideas worth spreading -Unofficial Group as posted in Linkedin. The thread was called “Why is "God"? What purpose would there be for a "God" in what appears to be a functioning natural system?” Apparently, you and I walked away with different views. In order for me to get my degree in psychology, I had to know how the brain works. If you will reference the 3:00 minute mark within the video, you will see how you were reacting on a primitive level to protect your thoughts. When looking at thoughts, one could think up unicorns or flying spaghetti monsters, but it does not make them real without empirical evidence. Beliefs are not observable nor can they qualify as truths to anyone other than believer. Therefore, when making a claim such as that “...there must be a god, and probably an infinite number of gods...” evidence is required. Thus far, NO god has been proven to exist save for in the minds of indoctrinated believers.

HER: Had it been a real debate, and you acknowledged my presence instead of just saying "nothing Vickie said was rational" and instead asked me to elaborate more, I could have commented on the actions of cell replication, and evolution, and how I believe the science in these processes confirms my beliefs as well.

ME: Vickie, as I have looked over and saved the entirety of the dialogue, and I do have my remembrance of that day, I did not acknowledge your presence because I was not present to do so. Nowhere in the dialogue did I say: “nothing Vickie said was rational.” Therefore, your quote is libelous in that it is a defamation of my character. Trust me, IF (As “if” is used, it is used strictly in the hypothetical position of introducing a conditional clause.) I WANTED TO BE (As “wanted to be” is past tense, the strictly hypothetical argument is just that: strictly hypothetical in the past tense.) insulting, I COULD (As “could” is used, it is used strictly in the hypothetical as it did not occur. Could is past tense of can.) have said that such a belief is “jackass retarded.” I have often said to my mother and my daughter that their belief system in god is jackass retarded. This proves my point that I can be very rude and insulting. Regardless of what was and what is, science will never confirm your belief in god or other’s beliefs in unicorns.

HER: Had it been a debate, you and your friend would have presented a counter argument instead of just telling me I said nothing rational. I'm no dummy for you and your friends to pick apart, and I was made to feel that way on your wall. I am a very educated individual from population genetics to quantum physics. It was all very rude what happened and my only regret is that I didn't delete and block you on this page also. This way you couldn't have made yourself feel better in your attempt to apologize.

ME: Vickie, your only argument was with Michael. It was he that you were arguing with and not I. However, I see that you do not see yourself in your own actions nor do you take into account what really happened. I see you exhibiting infantile behavior and a lack of self-esteem, but that is strictly MY opinion which does NOT make it a fact.

Please do delete me as I am better suited to those who can debate without crying. As my self-esteem is kick ass, I did not write to you to make myself feel better.

HER: Thanks for your apology.... however apologies don't really mean anything when you try to claim you were justified at the same time.

ME: At this point, I will treat you as I treat my daughter when she pulls such shit: I don’t give a flying fuck nor a rat’s ass. How does that fit? You lost your cool and went ape-shit in a discussion because myself (in my first two comments) and Michael (in all other comments), did not buy into your belief system. Unless you can prove god exists, I suggest you stick with your own god believing people or be prepared to argue your point without popping a nut. You did nothing for your credibility.

HER: You will not see me at Brushwood, as I don't see myself ever going there ever again. I got myself too involved the year before and I finally saw the place for what it really is, and it is no longer for me. I don't subscribe to gossip, but much of that gossip which has been forced upon me has made me feel unsafe there, and unwelcome. Brushwood does not deserve my energy.

ME: Who the fuck should care about gossip and what others think? A strong person can overcome such and will not buckle.

HER: Good luck believing in just yourself, for you are a small and insignificant speck of on a ball of dust hurtling though space in your empty existence. I too, believe in myself, but I believe I am connected to something much, much greater than this planet, or this universe. This gives me strength to withstand people like you, and without it I would have left this plane of existence long ago. So, I apologize for getting so defensive. However, it is an action of the left hemisphere of my brain I cannot control.

ME: I don’t need luck and people like me are fucking awesome! As only the good die young, my attempted suicides just made me stronger to last even longer. By the way, you did not withstand; you buckled.

Adios

Non-voter to Registered Voter...

The following is my debate in a thread about voting.  Although I thought I would never vote, I felt it necessary to get off my duff and register.  Granted, the changes that I demanded were not met, but in good conscious, I could not let go of my vote.  I am now a registered Democrat and I am voting for Obama.  Indeed there are two sides to a coin and they are connected by the middle, therefore, a conscious choice to choose the lesser evil was made.  Perhaps at some point, the system will either get repaired or there will be an evolution revolution.  Time will tell.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The day I cast my first vote, the following changes will be made to the system: I would vote providing the system were changed to eliminate corporate lobbyists, corporate campaign donations, corporate campaign funding, the electoral college, smear campaigns, vague answers to important issues, grand conventions, propaganda techniques, corporations as persons, religious reference from money, law, and schools, et al.

The day I cast my first vote, the following changes will be made to the system: I would vote providing the system included, equal access to promote the candidate's position in a neutral media zone, a clear and concise plan for their time in office, clear answers to public debate questions without going off topic, runs only on merit not money, more than a two party system, public education on how government works and what each party stands for, transparency, local/city/state representatives must have an agreement from all those they represent before making, breaking, or modifying a policy or policies, et al.

I refuse to vote in a broken system. 

NOTE:  Religion should not play a role in politics PERIOD.

Thank you E. Even if I were to push my thoughts forward, how many people would agree with what I propose? How can my vote matter when the electoral college makes concessions for only a certain number of votes? New York, for example, has 29 electoral votes. At present, the state is strongly Obama. Does my vote really count if the actual number of voters are not taken into consideration? I think the system is crooked to the core. If I am waiting on a fairy tale, which I happen to agree with you, then my vote will never be counted. In good conscious, I cannot vote in this system.

I have broken my own rule and will vote for OBAMA! This will be the first time in my life that I have ever voted for a politician. I hope to hell Obama wins!

Edit: I would like to thank all you conservatives, especially Hardick and Burke, for making me see the light. However, I also saw the light in Obama himself as he addressed the nation in his second debate with Romney.

I would like to thank all of you as well as President Obama. It feels odd to be a first time registered voter who registered as a Democrat. However, I cannot, in good conscious, stay silent with Romney running as an opponent. Yes, I would prefer four more years of Obama.

Despite my breaking my own rule about voting, I still would like to see that which I noted earlier in this thread come to be. Change is required. Peace to you all and to all a good night.  ~ Arachne ~ Friday, October 19, 2012 in the p.m. EST

Divided We Fall...

P. , yes the original structure. All MEN were created equal and yet Jefferson owned slaves. I guess the slaves did not consist of men. As women did not have the vote, they were also not equal. Then there were those pesky Indians who were not considered human. We started in a divided system that has become increasingly divided with time. We have not been to the point where UNITED WE STAND, because we are divided on so many levels.

E., the system is fucked up and I will say so in plain English. Engaging here in dialogue may or may not open people to see the two evils and perchance think to remove what is and start again. The Declaration of Independence clearly states so. My notes are in brackets.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men (This should read humans.) are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator (This does NOT say god as NOT ALL people believe in the same god and NOT ALL people, myself included, believe in god.) with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty (If we have true liberty, business owners who choose to have smoking within THEIR establishment, should be allowed. The government should not dictate such. It is also none of the government's business what a woman does with HER body in regard to abortion. Where is the liberty for gay people to marry? Religion is at the base of two of these issues and it SHOULDN'T be. Somewhere along the line, "their Creator" turned into GOD and it is in politics, law, and currency.) and the pursuit of Happiness (In this case happiness means property and should be noted as such as it is misleading. Property does not equate to happiness.).--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men (humans), deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed (There is much we do not consent to, however, since when do the people count? The corporations count; you don't. Money talks.), --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it (It should be abolished.), and to institute new Government (Yes!), laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness (Again, this should not come down to property.). Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable (The masses are more disposed to suffer.), than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed (People are happy in their misery.). But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism (It is coming in case you can't see it.), it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. (Indeed!) ~ Arachne ~ September 8, 2012 in the PM

Walking against the current: A Dialogue

Him quoting a source:  We have uncovered that Amerindians do not relate with any other worldwide population, according to their HLA genetic profile. The study of chromosome Y haplogroups also supports the uniqueness of Amerindians.
 
Him: The Calico Dig Site in California seems to place us here 100,000 years ago as our pre-evolved form: Homo-erectus. This flies in the face of the Africa based evolution and supposes we were always here and in fact evolved here.  Also, the distribution of haplogroups in Asia are not consistent with the Bering Straight hypothesis. The lack of language and cultural similarities also presents a problem with the "out of Asia" notion. Alright, now find out the mitochondrial past of native Americans. Keeping in mind the fossilized human footprints found that date back 50,000 years and the Calico Dig Site which shows artifacts dating back 100,000 years. 

Me:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-chromosome_haplogroups_by_populations

Also:  Haplogroup Y is a descendant of haplogroup N9.

Distribution

Haplogroup Y has been found in approximately 66% of Nivkhs and approximately 20% of Ainus.[2][3][4][5] However, this haplogroup also has been found in approximately 2% of Koreans,[3] and in South Siberian and Central Asian populations with an average frequency of 1%.[6][7] It is also fairly common among indigenous peoples of Kamchatka and the Malay Archipelago.
Its subclade Y2 has been observed in 40% of a large pool of samples from Nias in western Indonesia.[8]

Subclades

Tree

This phylogenetic tree of haplogroup Y subclades is based on the paper by Mannis van Oven and Manfred Kayser Updated comprehensive phylogenetic tree of global human mitochondrial DNA variation[1] and subsequent published research.

Y
Y1
Y1a
Y1b
Y2

Him:  With the thin blanketing of that particular haplogroup in Asia you must assume that the haploid came from here and spread to there. It really seems the only logical answer. Also, if the peoples from those regions came here then the language and culture should at least be similar. However, there are no similarities.  Especially when it comes to the evidence that predates the Asian Migration theory.  It basically says "You have no right to be here or anywhere else for that matter. This land is the property of Europeans now. Assimilate or die."

Me:  Does it matter where it came from? We are one with each other as well all bleed red. If you would like, I can research this further.

Him:  It matters because the invaders would like nothing more than to justify their actions.

Me:  I don't see anyone pointing a gun and telling anyone what to do. Where you would like to see division, I would like to see union based on the principle that we are all human first and foremost. Just be...

Him:  You don’t need an actual gun, you just need indoctrination on the scale that has been produced by America. Little by little, through blood quantum and other stipulations of the Indian Act we are being taken out of the equation. So, if this is your "unity" then you can keep it.

Me:  Despite what is written by someone else, does it take away from who you are? It only does IF you allow it. Just BE!

Him:  How does one just BE in a society that demands conformity without ultimately leading to a huge revolution in which you are sure to fail due to the overwhelming odds stacked against you by the established order? Remember, we live in a world ruled by religious thought. As such, our own spirituality is drowned out and in some cases killed off. Think residential schools, etc. There can be no just being, not under these circumstances. In order to be as you wish to be you need to be free from this oppression. That takes a serious conflict, not by assimilation.

Me:  What is it to be? Do you conform? Odds? Yes. Religion? Yes. Our own spirituality, if we have any, is our own even if morphed by such devises as indoctrination. Are you BEING right now? The world is full of oppression because the masses have allowed the few to control them. It is a matter of allowance at this point.

Him:   Even if you have chosen to walk against the current, you still do so with like-minded people. That is conformity in and of itself. The odds stacked against you are the sheer number of people pulling you back into the perceived "norm", whether they do so by force or by the indoctrination of your base support (family). The world is full of oppression that people often don't feel, because they feel it was always as it is. That is their "being". The very thing you wish to break from. So again I ask you, how does one just be in a society that is itself just being (in the sense they are unaware of their oppression or simply don't care)?

Me:  Walking against the current would mean walking away from the status quo. If you are with like minded individuals walking upstream, you do so freely and knowingly because you are aware. The odds are always stacked against those who stray from the norm, however, how does one change the norm if one does not go against it? The perceived norm is based on whose perception? It is yours or someone else’s? Can you be forced to perceive or do you just perceive? Are you SELF or are you your family? Is your family made up of individuals who are SELVES perceiving as well? The world is full of oppression and people are aware of it as they experience it. Perhaps those that do not feel oppressed are not oppressed or they have become so used to their condition, they choose to be comfortable in their discomfort. The only way for a person who is comfortable in their discomfort is to become more discomforted to the point it is not comfortable and awareness is then had. The society, in its being, is comprised of individuals. Those individuals ARE. They are beings BEING, however, they are either Joe Norm Conform or Pierre Aware.

Him:  Your perceptions are dictated by the input you have received.  That is instrumentality.

Me:  To perceive is to attain awareness or understanding of <whatever>. One may become aware through senses. What sense will be made of senses is a matter of perception and subjectivity. ~ Arachne ~ 9/6/12 @ 9:14 p.m.

Definition of PERCEPTION 1 a : a result of perceiving : observation (see perceive) b : a mental image : concept 2 obsolete : consciousness 3 a : awareness of the elements of environment through physical sensation <color perception> b : physical sensation interpreted in the light of experience 4 a : quick, acute, and intuitive cognition : appreciation b : a capacity for comprehension

Mountain Man?

I don't know who is behind this site, but I have a few words. As I choose not to have TV reception, I happened to catch a glimpse, on someone else’s set, of what seemed natural living by a man named Eustace Conway. However, like with all things, I must question the picture. My logic lead me to believe that History Channel show, in which Mr. Conway plays himself, is a so called "reality TV" show. This being the case, you lead me to question the reality of it all. What is reality? View this as a philosophical question if you must. How real is real? IF an individual is living off the land, how might the land be providing internet access or telephone reception? It is possible that the phone is cellular in nature AND it is possible that he receives e-mail via the cell. Then again, the Turtle Island website mentions a computer. Beyond selling wood and teaching for profit, is the man Eustace Conway paid by History Channel to "perform" for them? I ask this because some things do not add up. I am not Smith nor are you O'Brien trying to have me see four when there are only three (*Orwell). Concerning the doe, feeding eight people for the winter is not possible based on the weight of the meat. My ex-husband used to hunt moose and that fed a few families for the winter, but there was about 800 lbs. of meat. So, what is the reality of it all?

*O'Brien, now Smith's inquisitor, tortures Winston with electroshock, showing him how, through controlled manipulation of perception (e.g.: seeing whatever number of fingers held up that the Party demands one should see, whatever the "apparent" reality, i.e. 2+2=5), Winston can "cure" himself of his 'insanity'... Wikipedia  ~ Arachne 9/5/12 @ 8:32 p.m.

The Word...

“THE WORD” is absurd to those that do not follow or swallow stories of fiction, contradiction, restriction, and refrain.  Tis man made by a “do not do as I do; do as I say” mechanism placed proper for control.  Say nay to those who speak with forked tongues whose rungs have you at the bottom looking upward and forward to salvation.  

Look not up!  Look IN for no sin exists save in the minds of those who are narrowed by a book which took away the natural human being and substituted it with a sheep.  Bah to the sheep that bleat while following the shepherd to their slaughter.  “The Word” IS absurd to a mind that questions the ingestion of such by such.  Prey, pray not.

I hope, in a mindfully figurative sense of  speaking, that a purge occurs in the stalls at malls where the sheep ultimately go to consume.  - Arachne penned @ 8/19/12 in the p.m. EST

A Dialogue Inspired by Ryan~

What is the value of words be they whispers or screams? Governed is a state of being...a condition with conditions and missions that are not...ours. The shrug of a loose shoulder is flipped and should be snipped for lack of concern, but those who flip and sip see not the value of life and this is their flaw. The value of life is not the tangible substance that the flippant cling to. Therefore, see the superhero looking back at you from reflections that are not viewable in the looking glass. Do you see what I see? Where art such matters trivial?

What is life without tests and quizzes? Questions arise and answers are found only to make another loop in your soup of alpha... bets are that if you seek the source, you will find the force. Failure is a label that you lick and stick to skin thinking it is sin...that's a spin of your own making. Can the universe fail or sail an unmanned vessel to safe harbors? When taste is laced with bitters, the sweet of the feat that you wish to create will be at stake for the steak is tainted. Open your eyes to the surprise of light and realize SELF in greater proportions without need to expand your britches. Do you seek material gain which is a pain to which you are owned? The strong seek long into themselves finding truths and fallacies intertwined like climbing ivy which cannot be parted lest it be put down to ground is not safe nor sound. Defeat goes over defense before deface and with that knowledge, chuckle. Reiterated from time gone by: To thine own self be true. Deceit is at the head of the table waiting for your bottom to sit in it. Your feast lies before you. That is the twist.

Alone is only a belief which can be laid to waste via profound thought. A hole needs be whole for recognition lest it not be counted. Shall we count and find space in places where deceit at the table may not be presented to the guest? Profound thoughts may lie in skulls beaten bloody by one's own hand as the poison made its way through the ear canal and affected the brain. No time to drain. Train wreck! To this came havoc on the voices within. Warped and twisted metal bent out of shape and later used for scrap...indeed recycled. Phoenix, rise to meet the raven who clamors NEVERMORE...

Arachne~ 8/10/12

When A Guilty Bitch Worries...

BTW, THIS IS WHAT I forgive, but I can’t forget~ (Post of May 25, 2011) has come down to.  Got it?  Good.

As Festival is around the corner, the bitch started to worry. Only a guilty bitch would worry about having her ass kicked and that is why she asked my guy if I was going to beat the shit out of her or what. Of course he told me about her fear so I wrote to her to address her concern. If you read her well, you will note that she states she WILL be at the festival and later she changes it to IF. BTW, this is not Annie shithead, however, this one is also a snot cloth. Aren't they all? LMAO Me: Only guilty people worry. Right? ~ June 22 Her: you know what. this truly is and was between you and your partner. i have stayed completely away from him and the drama between the two of you and am more than willing to continue to do so. i'm sorry i ever got involved, no matter how briefly. i never intended harm or to get into a messy situation. i have been involved in many healthy and loving poly relationships over the years and didn't know how rough things were, or that for the first time in years and years i would end up being seen as the protaganist. i'm sorry. truly. i hope you two are in a better place. i will be at sirius this year. there are many friends i wish to see, it's been a home for me for well over a decade. i'm not coming there with any malicious intentions at all and i hope that we can avoid spending time at such a beautiful place in a state of conflict. if you need to confront me, i'd prefer it if we can go somewhere and do that privately and not make it into a huge community drama, but ultimately that is up to you. Me: IF you never intended anything, you would have respected my wishes as he relayed them to you. Sweet meat, you are only poly, but there was no amory and you know it. You just like to fuck what moves. Why don't you just admit to being a ho? He had told you I was against it. However, you being the peanut butter legs that you are, did what you did. Just stay the fuck out of my face. Got me? Cool. AND if you have any questions as to how I will react to you, you don't do a baby ass thing like ask him. You ask me. Later. Her: wow. got some anger problems? for some reason you see this all being my fault?? and none of this being your ****'s? you think he just laid out your desires and had no part in this shit? i didn't jump him and force him to do anything.. and we didn't do very much - by the way.. for all of 20 minutes of getting lost in a moment and then stopping ourselves .. - BECAUSE BOTH OF US FREAKED OUT AND DIDN'T WANT TO HURT YOU. not because we wanted to. I wish you could hear that. and stop blaming all of this on me. and no ****** i am not a HO .. luckily i know myself well enough .. but i am also not going to become your victim and the person you can blame entirely for shit between you and ****. i'm sorry i was attracted to him. initially to you both actually. i'm sorry that i was not as completely disciplined about my actions as i usually am that night. we went out drinking til 5am, and i did go sleep on the couch. but when those stupid people in the hallway started screaming at 6:30 in the morning, in my exhausted drunken state i went to sleep in ****'s room and should have stayed away from him when we were both pretty drunk.. for that you can blame me.. and fine ****** - i'll ask you. i just haven't been in touch with you in a long time. are you going to be at sirius? how would you like me to navigate being in that space with you? i'd like to know and as much as i can and the requests are rational i will try and be respectful if you would like to tell me. Me: **** was drunk? Is that what you are telling me? Do me a favor and verify because that is not my understanding. Also, what do you think happens when a woman jumps in a man's bed? Nothing? How old are you? Twelve? According to him, you sent a text asking if you could "play" to which he responded "yes." However, after talking to me, I said "no." This was supposed to be respected. If you think that I did not make him miserable, I did make him miserable. So you got your finger job and you offered a blow job (instead gave him a hand job). How sweet. Before your poly fuck friend ass decides to do something, ask both partners. Drunk is no excuse. As for angry, you're fucking straight I'm angry and have a reason. I will be at Sirius. Navigate by staying the hell away from me. If you want to get laid, look elsewhere. Ya know? Also, in regard to respect, you should have thought of RESPECT before you did what ya did. That is where I stand. Have respect and stay the hell out of my face. If dogs can be disciplined, so can you. Get some training. Why don't you pay a visit to The Heartless Bitches International - Poly People I Can Do Without. Maybe, just maybe you will learn something. http://www.heartless-bitches.com/rants/manipulator/polypeople.shtml Her: as hard as it is to hear all this, i just want to say you're right. you're just absolutely correct. i knew better and i knew we didn't have permission, i keep wanting to defend my own ethical high ground because i try to be a good person, but i wasn't and i have no defense. i really and truly didn't live up to my own standards and my part in all of this hurt people i really don't think deserve to be hurt. i am so sorry. i am going to leave this alone now and stay out of your way and ****'s. i'll do my best to give you space if i am at sirius. Me: Indeed you are guilty and that is why you worried about your hide. You KNEW you did not have my permission, but your selfish nature wanted to whore around not giving a shit as to the outcome. To me, you have no ethics and you are not a good person because your act of selfishness almost destroyed a relationship. I'll accept your sorry, but I still want your sorry ass as far from me as possible because I know how I am. IF you are at Sirius, avoid me as that is the best recommendation I can give you. BTW, fucking learn from your mistakes as you never know when you will be fucking with the wrong person. *I wonder IF she will show up. Snicker. ADDENDUM:  She never did show up.  Goodie.

Do you believe in God? The debate.

Arachne • There are two ways to read this: godisnowhere.

God is now here and god is nowhere. I take the latter stance. Why? There is no proof of his/her/their existence nor was there ever proof. One might as well believe in Santa or the tooth fairy.

If there is a god(s), have him/her/them create a boulder so heavy he/she/they cannot lift it. Yes this is a paradox.

Arachne • The concept of “now” is just that: a concept. How can “now” exist when it has one foot in the past and the other in the future? Even before a mouth opens to perform speech, the brain has formed thoughts into words and words into sentence(s). In essence, what one says in the supposed “now” are past thoughts projecting themselves into the future via speech. Why do we even bother with “now” when “now” does not exist?Present time, precise moments, and present circumstances define “now.” As time moves forward, how can “now” be idle? It defines logic.

Reality is also a concept. If looking at what defines reality we could walk away with the notion that everyone experiences a different reality. A microbiologist or a physicist may not see the world as everyone else. Therefore, their reality would differ based on their being able to see things that most people don’t. We can’t see gravity, but it is there. In addition, gravity can be reproduced where there is little gravity simply by adding velocity. Reality 1- the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them 2- a thing that is actually experienced or seen 3- the quality of being lifelike 4- the state or quality of having existence or substance.

As for god, those in power (past and present) use him/her/them as a tool for manipulation. There has been so much bloodshed in the name of god than there has been for anything else. In the event no one noticed, god blesses Amerika in the form of a bible which indicates favoritism to xtainity. Bah humbug!

I am still reading comments.


Arachne • My God: The All Powerful Flying Spaghetti Monster~

He is all powerful. He is so powerful that he can create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it. Imagine him performing such a paradoxical thing! He is infinite in age because he was here before any of us knew what time was as time did not exist. My time started to exist for me when I was born. As I got older, I realized that there was a time before me and that there will be time after me. My god is my world and I am his. How do I know my god is a he? I was told by him as he spoke to me in spirit. Also, I read it somewhere. Sometimes he tells me to kill those that do not believe in him, but then I think how morally wrong that would be so I do defy him there. He has threatened me with eternal damnation, but I say "what the flock!" I will rot like a dog. I do love him though. You know what I mean don't you?


Arachne • I am my own god capable of creation and destruction. With this capacity I am responsible for my actions or lack thereof and thus I take the blame and/or credit. Do I have super powers? No. I am human just like all y'all. Acknowledgment of someone who does not exist equates to lunacy. How many adults here TRULY believe in Santa, The Tooth Fairy, or The Flying Spaghetti Monster? To believe in god is the same thing. If anyone has had the opportunity to listen/watch Richard Dawkins talk with creationists, you would find that creationists cannot back up what they say. However, they do a wonderful job talking in circles. Me thinks Dawkins forms an elenchus much like Socrates did when dealing with Euthyphro. And like Euthyphro admission will not be had despite knowing one does not believe what they say they believe.

Arachne • Addendum for Rudy, I am not an atheist as I subscribe to no label. Thank you, but no thank you.

Arachne • Fred, please do not repeat what you wrote yesterday about linguistics. In my opinion, I wrote and write in clear English poking fun (in the event you did not notice) at people who believe in that which does not exist. Not only is it hysterical that people believe in something that has never been proven to exist, but they take it so far as to worship that which has never been proven to exist.

In extreme cases, killing or suicide is necessary because that which cannot be proven to exist requires it. (They either read it somewhere or someone told them.) Cough–choke...where was I? Oh yeah.... What do you think of those who believe in space aliens and abductions? Would you question their beliefs? Would you ask for proof? OR, would you just believe them without question? Do you get gifts for you kids and tell them you bought everything OR do you LIE to them by telling them Santa came to your house? If you lie to them, why do you do it?

Ah hem. Did you just ask me to define the concept I reject? Whoa Nelly! The burden of proof is on you to prove that what you believe in actually exists. Go for it man and make your case. I would love to debate you. Let’s not deal in metaphors. Let’s just deal with belief systems starting with yours. It is far better to get down and dirty than to play word games.

If I had my way, this is the way things would be:

Everyone is free to worship or not to worship as they please. However, no structures will be made for the purpose of worship. What you do at home with yourself, and STRICTLY YOURSELF, is your business. Grouping for the purpose of worship will not be allowed. Grouping for the purpose of religion would create division. You are not your religion. You are you and if you really believe in your god(s), then you and your god(s) will be content in a totally PERSONAL relationship. In order to keep children mentally healthy, inoculation from indoctrination would be mandatory. No child would be exempt.

Arachne • Rudy, you know damned well Dawkins is a staunch atheist and I believe he wears his label well. As I do not subscribe to labels, I won’t wear that one as it is a divider. However, human would work just fine as that is the one thing that we all have in common and to which label we all can subscribe to. Then again, how many humans are humane?

You have a point in regard to who had the meatballs to come up with a spaghetti monster when there are so many types of pasta. As our common ground is that we are all human, let's use pasta monster to level the field. Is that better now? No pasta shall be left behind. :D

Arachne • Quoting Rudy • "Some people hear voices, without real voices out there. They are diagnosed as schizophrenia. All of the prophets fall in that category."

Paranoid schizophrenia is often incompletely characterized as an illness in which individuals have auditory hallucinations or misperceptions. The hallmark of schizophrenia, however, is a profound disability, usually rendering the individual incapable of normal daily functioning.

What is the evidence that the prophets did not hear real voices?
What is the evidence that the prophets had disabled lives?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What reliable historic evidence do you have of the prophets' existence other than the bible?

You know if these guys really existed, they also could have been tripping out on schrooms (Psilocybin) or something. Right? Psychedelics can also create auditory hallucination which could mimic schizophrenia. If not using at the time of hearing, consider flashback as a cause. If no longer using, then consider Hallucinogen Persisting Perception Disorder. Ya huh.

Arachne • @Jagu - Get a dictionary.

staunch 1 (stônch, stänch) also stanch (stônch, stänch, stnch)
adj. stauncher also stancher, staunchest also stanchest
1. Firm and steadfast; true. See Synonyms at faithful. * Although synonymous with faithful, faith has squat to do with FIRM, STEADFAST, nor TRUE. Dawkins is a firm atheist. Is that better? Faith? Fugghedaboudit!

2. Having a strong or substantial construction or constitution.

staunch1
adj
1. loyal, firm, and dependable a staunch supporter

1. solid or substantial in construction

1. (Transport / Nautical Terms) Rare (of a ship, etc.) watertight; seaworthy

[(originally: watertight): from Old French estanche, from estanchier to stanch]

Arachne • Quoting Fred • @ Arachne: religion is both private and public by nature. To prohibit the public part of it is to deny religious freedom: the beginning of dictatorship, as the history of the 20th century has shown.So take care in limiting the rights of other persons'convictions.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In my little utopia, I would surely as the sun shines BAN RELIGION. Why? It serves nothing. If anything, it creates division and hatred. Heck, just look at the right wing jokers pulling their god out of the rectum...god this and god that! For what? Power? Oh yeah!

Dictator my eye! If anything, removing religion would be liberating. Just think there would be no more signs saying "GOD HATES FAGS." There would be no more pointing fingers and singing "my god is better than your god" and "if you don't believe in god you are going to hell." Wow! I would love to rid the world of that garbage.

Yo, did you ever analyze the book of Genesis? I did and I think you should. Tell me what you see. I have this feeling you are going to pretend you are looking at Rorschach cards instead of what is really there.

BTW, I used to be a catholic, but now I am just ME.

Arachne • Joanna, I thank ya kindly. I can only my myself. Then again, I am my own god and not in a delusional sense. Think about who you could be if you let your hair down and did not conform to the cookie cutter machinery that is out there (society a/k/a Dick and Jane Norm). Oh, it is all beige. Can't you see it? Although this is the land of the virtual, you can bet your butt (and win), that I am absolutely the same in real life. Cheers!

Arachne • Quoting Rudy • Arachne and Jagu, spend a bit of time talking with someone who's worked with intoxicated individuals, regardless of the substance or route of access, and you'll see that these folks aren't very prophetic - or coherent - at all.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Rudy, try becoming an substance user/abuser especially hallucinogens (oh, throw in alcohol for good measure) and then come talk to me. Until then, talk to the hand!

Yo mang, I still remember my first trip (I was 13) on two hits of purple haze. The colors that my black and white TV had were amazing and that fact that I only heard every other word was weird to say the least. And the voices...wow! Did I tell you of the little people who ran up and down my arm? Mind you, when you trip, you KNOW that these things are not real unless you beez crazy to begin with.

Arachne • Joanna, would it then be logical to say that you do not in fact believe in a god? Nature is what we are part of, god is something some fool made up. Do you think you will get off the fence and take a stand? Those pickets you are sitting on will get uncomfortable after awhile.


Arachne • Rudy, don't thank me as I did not answer my own query and don't think as you might get hurt. Man, can you assume, but not at the expense of you making an ass out of me. Do you get my drift?

Trip first. Talk to me later and tell me what you have experienced. Apparently, you know nothing based on experience. Wow! That is kind of like toting a bible...preach, but know not.

NEXT...

Arachne • Quoting Robert S. • Arachne – Does the following get close to what you might think and say to others?

The same question is posed to any other contributor who chooses to answer.

We recognize or would like an organization openly dedicated to the acceptance of Man’s true nature—that of a carnal beast, living in a cosmos that is indifferent to our existence.

*No organizations please and I only speak for myself. Humans are animals (body) with reason (mind) who choose to think and/or act in certain ways using their developed facility and the cosmos are indifferent to our existence. Throughout the universe, creation comes at the expense of death. Then again, the same could be said for earth i.e., fires, volcanic eruptions, autumn, any corpse left to rot, etc.

Use (any-name) or symbol that best suits the nature of we… who are carnal by birth—people who feel no battles raging between our thoughts and feelings, we, who do not embrace the concept of a soul imprisoned in a body. (Any-name) represents pride, liberty, and individualism—qualities often defined as Evil by those who worship external deities, who feel there is a war going on between their minds and emotions.

*Bugger off with the carnal by birth as it is stupid. Check the definition okay. Yin/yang or polarity best suits the nature of who we are, then again, we need night to recognize the day, fall to recognize spring, winter to recognize summer. Opposite yet necessary. Look at a common battery and you will see that it too has a negative and positive side. Some use words like good and evil. One human’s good may be another human’s evil, but that depends on perspective. Imagine a flat roller coaster. The roller coaster would represent the peaks and troughs. When you remove the peaks, it is boring as you are riding a flatline ride. Life requires contrast and ups and downs to make it interesting. As such we feel battles raging between our thoughts and feelings because we are not robots. Although some can be viewed as bots, automatons, drones, and zombies. Soul? Nah! If I die tomorrow, I will rot in the same manner as anything else that kicks the bucket; I will be recycled. As such, I could come back as grass that some horse will eat and later let out as dung. I, being me, represent pride, liberty, and individualism (and so can you). If someone is dumb enough to take these qualities as evil, they need help.

Man—using his brain—invented all the Gods, doing so because many of our species cannot accept or control their personal egos, feeling compelled to conjure up one or a multiplicity of characters who can act without hindrance or guilt upon whims and desires.

*Early humans, using their brains, invented the gods to explain things that they could not understand. You can call it ignorance. However, as humans got smarter (some of them), they realized that these gods or a god could be used to control other (not so smart) humans. As for the rest of what you wrote, throw it in file 13 (garbage).

All Gods are thus externalized forms, magnified projections of the true nature of their creators, personifying aspects of the universe or personal temperaments which many of their followers find to be troubling.

*If you look at the pantheons, those gods had the qualities of humans and were fallible. Period.

Worshiping any God is thus worshiping, by proxy, those who invented that God. Since we understand that all Gods are fiction, we do not bend a knee in worship to—or seek friendship or unity with—such mythical entities; (any-name) places him/her/itself at the center of his/her/its own subjective universe as his/her/its own highest value.

*Worshiping any god is stupid since god does not exit.

We are, thus, our own “Gods,” and as beneficent “deities” we can offer love to those who deserve it and deliver our wrath (within reasonable limits) upon those who seek to cause us—or that which we cherish—harm.

*What you state is human nature.

However, such self-deification is not for everyone, since it requires total responsibility for one’s choices and actions, and the realization of a social contract which makes for a civilized state of being. So our way, the way of (any-name) is not meant to be “The Way” for all people, since we consider it a sad truth that only a small percentage of our species has the intelligence, adherence to reason, and self-discipline to handle our perspective.

*Those are you words and not mine. I have addressed this issue above.

Arachne • Quoting Robert S. • Sorry Arachne, don't understand your answer. Are you agreeing, partially agreeing or not agreeing at all?

* As you stated anyone can answer, I answered. If you read what I wrote, you would note where agreement or disagreement is had. If you seek clarity from a specific answer, do address me.

I never attributed any of the words I wrote to something you said, so, no putting of words in your mouth.

* Where I indicate "Those are your words and not mine. I have addressed this issue above." I am saying to you that your last paragraph has already been covered in my above answers.

I apologize for the confusion as I was in a rush.

Arachne • Joanna, sometimes difficult choices have to me made. In the case you make of your child versus your sister's child, to fence sit would cause both to die. Would it be beyond reason that you save your own child? Do you think that your sister would hold it against you? I understand why you would feel bad in choosing your own over another as that other is close to you. However, our instinct is to survive.

Arachne • Alfredo, are you familiar with Orwell's 1984? Do you remember The Ministry of Love? Do you remember O'Brien saying "How many fingers am I holding up Winston?" If you don't, it was expected that Winston say what O'Brien wanted him to say. The same holds true for the church and religion in general. If that is love, we are in a world of trouble.

I as an ex catholic I can tell you that I never felt any love from god. As much as I was told about him and forced to do and say things that went against my grain because of him, the bugger wasn't there. How could I possibly feel something that was not there to feel? As a kid, I was forced to go to church and I really hated it. Sit, kneel, stand and repeat after me do not sit well with me since there was so much hypocrisy. Do as I say and not as I do. Bah, pish, and fie!

YOU SAID: Once you experience the God =Love, nothing becomes the same. Once you find out you are created for eternity, even though you must pass through death, your time in this life becomes meaningful. I was created human, and human will continue to be. No grass, no worm, no water. Created for eternity.

Are you familiar with cycles of birth and death from the subatomic partical level to to cosmic level? Check into Fenymen diagrams (particle collision). Also, find out how stars and planets are born.

When you say: "I see in those who abandoned their catholic faith, they still have in their minds the religion and church that was when they abandoned, and wońt accept it might have changed to welcome them again. Such anger! With a God of love, such anger!"

What people are you looking at? How do you arrive at that conclusion? What evidence do you have to back it up? Are there available statistics?

You say that religion has evolved? How so? Have priests stopped raping young boys by coming out of the closet and admitting they are gay with pedophile tendencies?

As I don't believe in god, do you think I do not find my life meaningful? What would happen if tomorrow it was found that your god died and will never come back. What would you do?

As you state you will continue to be a human once you die, can you explain that?

YOU SAID: It happens when humans try to put themselves as the center of the universe, and their will and individualism as the only moral roadmap. They say "my freedom stops when I touch your freedom" but they are meaning "your freedom stops when you touch my freedom", and impose upon all who dońt think like them an intellectual fascism: if you think otherwise, then you are stupid

YOU ALSO SAID: 84% of he World's population believes in deity (God). The ones saying "God does not exist, to think it does is being stupid" are calling stupid billions of people, and telling us they are the only smart ones, and that we must conform to that notion just because they say so. I dońt buy in

*Intellectual fascism? You jest right? If 84% of the population were into incest, should I play follow the leader? You will have to forgive me if I do not jump on your propaganda bandwagon, but it is not appealing nor rational. It is, however, stupid. Yes there are billions of gullible people out there who are flock to the shepherd. Baah sheep baah. No one is asking you to conform, however, how do you know god exists?

Question time...Do you put all people before yourself? Are you the center of your universe? If not, who is your center and why are they your center? I personally think that believing and worshiping something that does not exist is lunacy. Would you think me crazy if I really believed in the flying pasta monster in the exact the same way you believe in your god? Wouldn't you question?

Have you actually read the bible? I have. I read the King James version which I still have in its marked up and battered state.

YOU SAID: Still prefer the God of Love, and no anger

I would prefer people not being sheep.

Arachne • Fred, before I even enter a dialogue with you, please explain to me how you KNOW god exists. Speaking of freedom, how do you feel about homosexuality, lesbianism, and abortion?

Arachne • Fred, you can interpret all you wish, however, only the writer knows what he/she is really saying. The bible is also interpreted isn't it? Have you heard of the band called Bad Religion? American Jesus http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12kcpP-8jfM
The Voice of God is Government http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2K_xZcjsVuw Get into the groove good buddy!

Arachne • Alfredo, how do you find someone/something that does not exist? So, I should go looking for that which does not exist? Is that what you are saying? You believe that when you die, your body and spirit will come back together? If that is so, where are all the people who died since the beginning of time? Shouldn't their spirit be back with their bodies by now? How large would that population be? Where might they be located? How do we go about finding them? As you say god is all about experience and fact, what are the experiences and facts? Do share. As god is the center of your universe, how do you feel about your children, wife, mother, father, sister, brother, cousin, etc? If you have children, do they come in second, third, fourth, or fifth? How do you manage your resources?

You have read the bible for 33 years. That is impressive. So, you think there is a problem with the King James bible huh? Can you tell me what is wrong with this book and what is right with your book?

One does not have to be angry to say that someone or something is stupid. Where do you get the idea that I am angry? Admission, I do have potty mouth.

How does it take courage to be a catholic? Are there snipers using them for target practice? Explain yourself as what you say does not sound like it rings true.

Why would you require a false picture if you believe in god? Are you saying that those that do not believe in god hide themselves?

I am happy as is and will not blame myself for something as bizarre as not believing in something that does not exist. Lighting? HA HA HA Good one. What happens if a child grows up in a household were no religion and no god exists, how does god embrace that child or make that child aware of his existence? This particular family live on a little island in the middle of nowhere. They have no computer, TV, cell phone or landline. Every missionary who has ever been alive has tried to reach this island, but they never make it.

Are you saying that if I want to experience god I have to set aside anger/resentment that I do not have for a thing that does not exist? ,I am not angry or resentful so please do not assume such.

How did you become indoctrinated?

Arachne • @ Fred, how does any religion (including yours) contribute to the well functioning of societies and states? I can't speak for Tim, but the idea of creating anything called "Covenant of the Knowing" would indicate "lack of knowledge." If one is knowing, there is no room for inquiry and I rather like inquiry.

Arachne • @ Alfredo, what do you know about the catholic bible? Can you tell me its history?

From what I understand, the end times brings people back to their body at an unknown location. Right? What makes you so sure OTHER than your faith? To test your faith, let us do a little mental experiment. Let us say that I break both your legs, arms, and wrists and leave you in a forest. Will your god save you or will you die? In this game, you cannot help yourself as you must rely on god the all powerful one. Okay. What do you think will happen to you?

Saying a population is huge tells me nothing. You specifically stated: I do have answers to all the rest of questions. If you have the answers, please share them in detail. I am sure everyone would like to know.

I have to die to find out something is that correct? How do you know you find out something when you die? When other animals die, do they find out something as well. We must remember that we are animals (mammals).

You failed to answer this question: As you say god is all about experience and fact, what are the experiences and facts? Do share.

You have established that god is the center of YOUR universe. What lies beyond the center?

Are you saying that without being under god's love and guidance, you would not love your family? IF god is the source of all love, how do you account for those who love without believing in god?

Are you familiar with economics? What percentage of your resources do you put toward god and others? How much is left for yourself?

What happens if a child grows up in a household were no religion and no god exists, how does god embrace that child or make that child aware of his existence? - I asked YOU this question.

"How did you become indoctrinated?" Ooooh, it took a lot of time to wash my mind...

You admitted you were brainwashed. Interesting.

Must I reiterate that I am not angry? I am one of the happiest people I know.


Arachne • @Fred, plainly speaking and without metaphors, can love exist without god? If it can (and it does), why then is god necessary to you?

What is moral freedom and moral responsibility? Who can judge what is moral or immoral? What is good what is bad? What makes it so? As the matter is subjective, I would love to hear what YOU have to say. You will not be able to speak objectively as it won’t apply.

Moral defined: 1) concerned with the principle of right and wrong behavior and the goodness and badness of human character 2) conforming to accept standards of behavior

Conform defined: 1) comply with rules, standards, or conventions 2) be similar in form or type

Rules = control. Standards = something used to measure the norm or model in comparative evaluations - principles of honorable, decent. Convention = a way in which something is usually done - socially acceptable behavior

This sounds like robot building. What say you to this?

Let me see if I have this straight, the church thinks that gay marriage should not be because it goes against natural law, but that it would accept the law, but fail to marry couples who love each other. Is that correct? How does the church feel about other animals who engage in same sex behavior as it is part of their nature? *scratches head If natural law...nature, same sex...hum.. Could it be that god only wants to control some animals?

As you are pro-life and pro-life adherents must comply to not only the principle of 'not killing,' but also to the best way this can be reached - as an objective, why is there WAR? Don't you think that war should be abolished as so many adult humans die as opposed to the fraction of fetuses that are aborted?

From what I hear, war is money and aborted fetuses are future wage slaves and tax payers.


Arachne • @Robert B., based on this statement: The system forces us to make conscessions to our morality. It forces us to serve satan by making us choose what we hope is the lesser of two evils but the sin is in serving this system in the first place.

Do you believe satan really exists? Please tell me no.

Arachne • Alfredo, my name is Maggie not Maghie.

Civilians do not create war, governments do. When men and women go to war, we loose family members that we have come to know and love. Some of these family members have children, mothers, fathers, et al. Those that died were alive and functioning as people. The same cannot be said about fetuses.

I understand love, but I wonder if you do. As I don’t believe in god and you have not proven god to exist, how can you say something that applies to you “Love=God” when you can’t understand it?

I know more people than you care to image, however, your assumption leaves you being an ass.

Trying to convert someone who has already been there (god/religion), but who sees that it bogus is like trying to turn water into wine. No way Jose.

Arachne • Robert B., I have made these same arguments with the BOS (Brotherhood of Satan), and they are just as delusional as those that believe in god. I won't even bother with your words because you cannot see that humans are both sides of the coin good/bad, negative/positive. You have embraced ignorance so I leave you to enjoy it.

Arachne • Robert S., do you know how ridiculous you sound when you insinuate that Roi reveres Hitchens as a god? Look at who is taunting who now? You are a big baby when someone gets on you but you think nothing of riding someone else.

YOU are taunting Roi and for what? He does not believe in your fairy tale of god taken from your low level of ignorance?

You and Joanna are a joke with your Google, gargoyles, and gargling stepping away from the topic at hand. Even in The Void, off topic discussions are given warning by mods. Too bad the same does not apply here.

Calling a spade a spade in plain simple folk talk, I call your actions STUPID. Oh go ahead and flag me because you really make me want to BARF. Yup, I have potty mouth again. If I were able, I would negatively rep you or thumb down just about everything you say. This goes for a couple of other diehards as well. Back up your preaching with LOGIC or STFU. You may have to Google STFU.

Arachne • Robert S., I would not come to your assistance if you were on fire.

Ludo, view me as foul if you will, however, from MY PERSPECTIVE, Robert S. has been quite foul and I have flagged him for his rude comments to Roi. Do I care if I am banned? No. I speak my peace and will continue to do so.

Arachne • Robert S., earlier today you wished people to judge me. Is that correct? As you are a xtain take heed to the following:

The Holy Bible: King James Version. 2000.

The Gospel according to
St. Matthew
7

Judging Others
Lk. 6.3738, 4142
1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

Arachne • When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross. - Sinclair Lewis (1935)

Jeanne  • ...and it will visionary. :-)

Arachne • Joanna said to Roi - However, I could defend you too - I would say that you are someone who cares passionately about something deeply...

Joanna, could and would are not solid. Have you heard of coulda, woulda, shoulda? You did NOT defend him. Did you even read his reasoning? Perhaps not. I notice a pattern with you Joanna. You like to jump on bandwagons. Examine your own actions.

Joanna  • It's true Arachne, I do want to be loved! ;-)

Harry  • ........Good "Straight Up" Comment Arachne........re Flag and Cross

“Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic/religious fervor, for patriotism/religion is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind.

And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry.

Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism/religion, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so.

How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar.” – ?Julius Caesar

Arachne • @Jeanne - Roi and I have freedom of speech and can and will stay if we so desire.
Also, if you view me as Joanna, storm like, that is cool with me. However, as you have only been on for 5 days, I suggest you go back and read the thread from about 12 days ago. What do you say? Can you do that?

Arachne  • @Joanna, you want to be loved? Hum.

Jeanne  • hmmm. to be honest, I don't care if you and Roi stay around for ever. I popped that's all, from the constant whining. my foul.

Nor do I have any image of you or Roi other than what i've been here to see. If this feud is 12 days old...that tells me a lot anyway.

Jagu • Arachne, I see you as a candid, blunt, nothing to hide, no axe to grind, a surprise for some, a delight for me. Keep it up. if you don't I will have to complain to the moderator that the thread is no more fun. :-))))))))))))). It was so refreshing this morning to read your post. It had vigor, it had vibes to shake up few of meek heart, and it had thunder and a roar. Now some may feel offended because it did not agree with their religious sensibility. But that is their problem between their god and them. Keep it up, please.

Arachne • For Jeanne - The essence of Christianity is told to us in the Garden of Eden history. The fruit that was forbidden was on the Tree of Knowledge. The subtext is, All the suffering you have is because you wanted to find out what was going on. You could be in the Garden of Eden if you had just kept your fucking mouth shut and hadn't asked any questions. - Frank Zappa

Joanna • Arachne, you said " For Jeanne - The essence of Christianity is told to us in the Garden of Eden history. The fruit that was forbidden was on the Tree of Knowledge. The subtext is, All the suffering you have is because you wanted to find out what was going on."

My view on this is different. I think the Garden of Eden story is saying that when we behave selfishly, instead of striving for the common good, we destroy the thing which sustains us.

I relate this story directly to the way that shareholder capitalism, powered by self-interest, is now destroying Earth's life-giving ecological processes.

Arachne • @Joanna~ Do you see that knowledge is something that is not supposed to be and that if you seek knowledge you sin?

Tell me, do you seek knowledge or do you play follow the leader?

Arachne • Joanna said ~ I think the pure atheist would reject all these views and say that human lives do not have a purpose, and that existence does not have a purpose, but rather that it is all random chance that is bound to occur over massively large chunks of space, matter and time.

Joanna, what is a pure atheist? How do you come to the conclusion that a “pure atheist” would “say that human lives do not have a purpose, and that existence does not have a purpose...?"

Although I do not believe in god, I do not subscribe to the label atheist and I do think (not believe) that human lives have a purpose, and existence does have a purpose. So tell me, how do you draw your assumption?

Joanna • Hi Arachne, I don't believe I have drawn any assumptions, I choose my words carefully so people know I am not stating "facts" but rather expressing an opinion.

I attempted to define a pure atheist as that seems to be an end point of a spectrum, and therefore worth defining.

My understanding is atheists are inclined to believe existence serves no greater purpose, but just "is".

If you do not subscribe to my definition of pure atheist - no problem! My guess is that you fall elsewhere on the spectrum I have attempted to describe (probably poorly), or that, as I do, you fall in many positions at once.

Arachne • Why do you attempt to define that which you do not know? Where have you obtained your understanding of atheists? Again, I do not believe in god
and COULD wear the atheist label and will for the purpose of this reply.
Existence serves a purpose called experience. If there were no purpose to
life, we might choose to take our lives, but that is not how it works.
Just like you, we are human, have family, friends, and emotions (such as
love, anger, joy, sorry, etc.). We work, contribute to our community,
involve ourselves in politics, and we look just like you...human. We,
actually I can only speak for myself, enjoy life to its fullest and gain
knowledge from our experiences. I created this saying which I enjoy using:
For all things a purpose and a purpose for all things. However, there is
no god in the equation.

Joanna • Arachne! Surely you don't see my comments as an effort to create division! I'm all about recognizing the essential humanness of us all! I don't have a view of "us" and "them".

My attempted definitions are formed based on my own finite experience.

My motivation is exploring ideas and learning from each other.

Your definition of what it all means to you is another point on the spectrum, which is probably infinitely divisible.

I don't believe there are "right" or "wrong" positions on the spectrum of belief, but I would like to see humanity unite in compassion for each other and all the world's species.

Arachne • Joanna, surely I do see your comments as an effort to create division. I see you creating an us versus them and a right and wrong.

I too would like to see humanity unite, however, with such belief systems in play, either they would all have to be dissolved (this will never happen) or there would have to be some gods eliminated so that the division ends. This too will never happen. Then again, even if one god were chosen and worshiped world wide by all believers, you would still have those that do not believe.
                   
ALEXANDAR • Sorry , language barrier. I like the idea that human soul belongs to God .But the path to God sometimes is very complicated and long .
Is it enough clear @

Arachne • How do you know the human soul belongs to god? If the path to god is
sometimes very complicated and long, why bother with the path at all? What
makes you believe that god exists?

Arachne • Alexandar, you still did not answer my question.

Reiterated: How do you know the human soul belongs to god? If the path to god is
sometimes very complicated and long, why bother with the path at all? What
makes you believe that god exists?

Arachne • Robert S., why do you believe in god? How did you become indoctrinated? Why do you so adamantly defend what has never been proven? Is god just a theory that has yet to be proven?

Although the idea of the atom, the smallest, indivisible component of matter, was first proposed in 400 BC, Aristotle didn't like it. He claimed that there was no smallest part of matter and that different substances were made up of proportions of fire, air, earth, and water. As there were of course no experimental means available to test either view, Aristotle's prevailed mainly because people liked his philosophy better.

Of course it was later proven. Can the same be said of your god?

Arachne • Matt, didn't Socrates drink hemlock and die? Mind you, he did have the opportunity to flee, however, he did not. He was found guilty and took his punishment like a man. The poor man was guilty of questioning. As you may know, Socratic method is used in law and education.

Arachne • @Ludo~

Frank Zappa is one of many that I have quotes from. If you would like, you
may find some interesting quotes here and thus know of my mind:
http://www.mentalanarchy.com/quotes.html

Thank you for reading The Forbidden Fruit in its three parts. Although
long and unfinished, I think it gets my message across to some who are
willing to explore sans blinders. Tis odd how a modern society can still
believe in that which is so mentally detrimental.

Here is a cute little ditty:

Jesus also promoted the idea that all men should castrate themselves to go to
heaven:  "For there are eunuchs, that were so born from their
mother's womb: and there are eunuchs, that were made eunuchs by men: and
there are eunuchs, that made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake.
He that is able to receive it, let him receive it." (Matthew 19:12 ASV
<http://www.evilbible.com/February.htm#Feb%2026> )
I don't know why anyone would follow the teachings of someone who literally
tells all men to cut off their privates.

I wonder how many xtian men have done this for their faith?

Arachne

"Opinions,"
said Lord Palmerston "are stronger than armies." One of the first
conditions of any institution being altered is that people should come
to imagine it as altered. The great difficulty of the reformer is to
get people to exert their imagination to that extent. ~ From the book:
Darwinism and Politics by David G. Ritchie

Arachne • Jagu said: Arachne,
Division can be created by any uttered or expressed word or phrase. Joanna is not creating division, but people who read it may. By charging Joanna of creating division, you are creating division yourself. Divisions are inevitable, just the thoughts, ideas, principles, dogmas, beliefs, words, language, culture, etc. vary. Even nature has created division by creating diversity and variety.

Arachne • Agreed. Thank you for pointing that out my friend.

Arachne • Matt said • Yes, a very accurate interpretation, Arachne. But his guilt came down to those who did not believe his system of thinking (also, partly his rejection on specific gods and goddesses).

Arachne • @ Matt ~ Should a person be sentenced to death because of the way they think? Socrates, through the use of questions, sought truth. Should a person be sentenced to death for the rejection of any god/goddess? I think we were very lucky to have someone of Socrates' caliber alive and accounted for by people that knew him (Plato and Xenophon) as well as those who made fun of him (Aristophanes). Can the same be said about god or his supposed son jesus? Historical evidence is lacking.

We have Socrates accounted for by his student Plato and Plato accounts for himself. Aristotle also accounts for himself with his writing and, as you know, he was a student of Plato. Why is it that the philosophers can be accounted for although they came long before the supposed anointed one? How would you account for that? Was someone not paying attention to the man of fiction called jesus?

Arachne • Here are the quotes from Jesus that proves that he lied:

1) And Jesus answered and said to them, "Truly I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what was done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, `Be taken up and cast into the sea,' it will happen. "And all things you ask in prayer, believing, you will receive." (Matthew 21:21-22 NAS)

2) Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. (Matthew 7:7-8 NAB)

3) Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven. For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst. (Matthew 18:19-20 NAS)

4) Amen, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, 'Be lifted up and thrown into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it shall be done for him. Therefore I tell you, all that you ask for in prayer, believe that you will receive it and it shall be yours. (Mark 11:24-25 NAB)

5) And I tell you, ask and you will receive; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. (Luke 11:9-13 NAB)

6) And whatever you ask in my name, I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask anything of me in my name, I will do it. (John 14:13-14 NAB)

7) If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask for whatever you want and it will be done for you. (John 15:7 NAB)

8) It was not you who chose me, but I who chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit that will remain, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name he may give you. (John 15:16 NAB)

9) On that day you will not question me about anything. Amen, amen, I say to you, whatever you ask the Father in my name he will give you. Until now you have not asked anything in my name; ask and you will receive, so that your joy may be complete. (John 16:23-24 NAB)

A lot of Christians ignore what Jesus actually says in the Bible. They also tend to add things to the actual words to make them say something else. If you honestly and truthfully read these quotes, without adding to them, it is very easy to see that jesus is not saying that god will think about your prayers. He says god will grant all your prayers. Clearly, god doesn’t grant all prayers and this proves that jesus was a habitual liar.


Arachne • Kill those who are not Christian or Jewish:

You must kill those who worship another god. Exodus 22:20

Kill any friends or family that worship a god that is different than your own. Deuteronomy 13:6-10

Kill all the inhabitants of any city where you find people that worship differently than you. Deuteronomy 13:12-16

Kill everyone who has religious views that are different than your own. Deuteronomy 17:2-7

Kill anyone who refuses to listen to a priest. Deuteronomy 17:12-13

Kill any false prophets. Deuteronomy 18:20

Any city that doesn’t receive the followers of Jesus will be destroyed in a manner even more savage than that of Sodom and Gomorrah. Mark 6:11

Jude reminds us that God destroys those who don’t believe in him. Jude 5

Ignorance is bliss. Christians should not practice free inquiry nor socialize with non Christians:

Don’t associate with non-Christians. Don’t receive them into your house or even exchange greeting with them. 2 John 1:10

Shun those who disagree with your religious views. Romans 16:17

Paul, knowing that their faith would crumble if subjected to free and critical inquiry, tells his followers to avoid philosophy. Colossians 2:8

Judge other religions for not following Christ:

Whoever denies “that Jesus is the Christ” is a liar and an anti-Christ. 1 John 2:22

Christians are “of God;” everyone else is wicked. 1 John 5:19

The non-Christian is “a deceiver and an anti-Christ” 2 John 1:7

Anyone who doesn’t share Paul’s beliefs has “an evil heart.” Hebrews 3:12

False Jews are members of “the synagogue of Satan.” Revelations 2:9, 3:9

Here are my two personal favorites:

Everyone will have to worship Jesus -- whether they want to or not. Philippians 2:10

A Christian can not be accused of any wrongdoing. Romans 8:33

Arachne • I do not accept the Bible as god’s word because it contains thousand of errancies and contradictions that can not be solved, only rationalized. I refuse to accept jesus as my personal savior, for his behavior and teachings often expose one who should be escaped and not worshiped. I ask that you read this pamphlet in light of the bible’s teachings; Christians should be “open to reason” (James 3:17 RSV), that we should “reason together” (Isaiah 1:18) and “he who hates correction will die” (Proverbs 15:10) to understand my perspective that the bible has MANY shortcomings.
1. According to your Bible I am to believe that human kind is sinful for Adam and Eve ate the fruit of knowledge. Why are we being punished for the original sin? After all, they ate the forbidden fruit, we didn’t. Reason would lead one to say it’s their problem, not ours. Even the bible contradicts itself by claiming in Deuteronomy 24:16, “children shall not be punished for the sins of their fathers.”

2. We are told that the Bible has no scientific errors and is utterly perfect/protected, yet it says the bat is a bird (Leviticus 11:13 & 19), hares chew the cud (Leviticus 11:5-6), and some fowl (Leviticus 11:20-21) and insects (Leviticus 11:22-23) have four legs.

3. Heaven is supposed to be a perfect place. It is of course, the place you strive for and name “salvation”. Yet, it experienced a war (Revelation 12:7). How can there be a war in a perfect place and if it happened before why couldn’t it happen again? Why would I want to go to a place in which war can occur? That’s exactly what I’m trying to escape, aren’t you?

4. We are told salvation is obtained by faith alone (John 3:18 & 36) and then the Bible claims that it is repentance that shall save us (2 Peter 3:9) yet Jesus told a man to follow the Commandments-Matthew 19:16-1 8 (saving by works)-if he wanted eternal life. So which way is it and how do you know your belief is the correct one?

Arachne • 5. According to the text there are 29 cities listed in Joshua 15:21-32. One need only count them to see that biblical math is not to be trusted. The total is 36.

6. Surely you don’t believe Ecclesiastes 1:9 RSV (“What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; there is nothing new under the sun”)? How many cities had an atomic bomb dropped on them prior to 1945, and how many people walked on the moon before 1969?

7. If the Bible is our moral guide, then how can it make pornographic statements such as: “...they may eat their own dung and drink their own piss with you” (2 Kings 18:27)? Also consult Numbers 31 where a whole tribe of people, including the elderly and children are slaughtered. The only survivors were the virginal women, who were later raped by the “just and perfect” Moses and his men. Is that what you want your children reading on Sunday?

8. If God created everything, (Colossians 1:16, Ephesians 3:9, Revelation 4:11 & John 1:3), then he did create the world’s evil (Isaiah 45:7, Lamentations 3:38). Thus, he is responsible. Any being who could create situations such as rape, death, malnutrition, disease, molestation and murder is certainly not fit for worship.

9. For justice to exist, punishment must fit the crime. No matter how many bad deeds one commits in this world, there is a limit. Yet, hell’s punishment is infinitely greater. It’s eternal. Shouldn’t a sinner suffer until remorse is felt and the crime is atoned for? What “justice” is there in infinite damnation?

10. Jesus said, “whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire” (Matthew 5:22). Yet, he himself did so repeatedly, as Matthew 27:19, Luke 11:40 & 12:20 show. Shouldn’t he be in danger of hell too? Jesus also told us to “Love your enemies; bless them that curse you," but ignored his own advice by repeatedly denouncing his opposition. Matthew 12:34 (“0 generation of vipers”), and Matthew 23 :27 (“... hypocrites... ye are like unto whited sepulchres.“) are excellent examples of hypocrisy. If Jesus himself is a sinner by his own admission then surely he can not be the “perfect lamb of god”.
13 seconds ago

Arachne • 11. Except those of biased Christian writers, there isn’t one writing outside the Bible in all of ancient history that clearly refers to Jesus of Nazareth. The decision to dedicate my life to a deity requires at least one shred of conclusive evidence. Your lord knows non believers exist as a result of this, yet he makes no attempt to supply proof. How can the bible claim god wants all in heaven if he doesn’t make efforts to ensure that we all believe in him?

12. Paul says Christianity lives or dies on the Resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:14-17). Yet Jesus made many promises concerning his return during the lifetime of his then followers. (Matthew 16:28: “There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom”. Matthew 23:36, 24:34, Mark.9:1, 13:30, Luke 9:27, 21:32 & John 21:22) None of these prophecies have come true. Does this not make Jesus a false prophet? If so wouldn’t that make Christianity invalid?

13. I find the idea that a man had to die for my sins revolting. If God was truly omnipotent he could have simply forgiven us. What kind of deity, would execute one child in order to forgive it’s others? Modern society would call an individual like this sadistic, insane and cruel. Surely, you would not worship a child killer, why do you expect me to? Would you find a judge worthy of the title who would allow my child to be executed in lieu of my sins?

14. John 14:12 states a follower in Jesus can perform any of his works and do it even greater. If you continue to insist I believe in Jesus, it is only fair I may ask of you to show just how strong your faith is. After all, you would be my “mentor” in Christ. I’m not a believer as of yet, but surely you are. Would you mind perhaps resurrecting a dead relative or walking on water?

15. Okay, obviously you didn’t do number 14 and backed out with the “this is metaphorical” excuse. Surely you can try Mark 16:17-1 8 which says believers can drink “any deadly thing” and “it shall not hurt” them. But I don’t think you would be naive enough to drink any arsenic offered. Perhaps I’m wrong and you would be willing to test the Book’s veracity-”lay it on the line” so to speak?

16. All right, so now you have backed out of two of my questions. I’m starting to think you don’t really care about my salvation as much as you claim. Well, unlike your Jehovah, I shall be kind and offer a third chance at redemption. Consider Jesus’ teaching in Luke 6:30 “Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.” Perhaps, if you emptied your wallet and “give of thee” I may seriously ponder accepting Jesus as my savior.

Arachne • Ryan M. said • Arachne, thank you for your analysis. It was well thought out, and it's obvious that you have read more of the bible than the average person.

* I have read the bible (King James Version), however, what I posted came from the site called http://www.evilbible.com/

This is why I ask, why such criticism? The bible is a collection of ancient texts---a "book of the world" which has served as a guide for human morality.

* IF it has guided morality (morality is subjective), why have the book(s) and religion(s) caused so much hate and death?

Yes, I agree that it doesn't always makes sense. It doesn't necessarily relate to our modern world. Its stories might be more of myth & legend rather than historical fact.
But you don't have to believe every word in the bible in order to grasp its wisdom.

* IF it is just stories more at myth and legend rather than historical fact, why bother with it? What parts of it (book/religion) should be removed to make it more user friendly?

People who take the bible literally are truly missing out on a good book.

*Ah, the thing is that most do not read the book and what they do read or hear, they take as fact. How can this problem be rectified if people are not educated? If you have the answers, I would love to hear them. Perhaps you can enlighten Robert S. because he really needs enlightenment.

Arachne • Robert S. said • Arachne is another sage who knows things about everyone and everything including what I need.

* I never said that. There you go trying to be a ventriloquist again.

Now how is that possible since she also knows nothing about me or what I know and don't know.

* Robert, I kind of know what you don't know. You don't know that god is fiction.

But it is just easier to go after the person. That doesn't require any thought or good argument.

* Whatever you say sweetie, however, I have to go get my little violin.

Robert, please stop crying. After all the petty pinches you put in, I am sure you can defend yourself without a self-pity party.


Arachne • Jeanne P said • Arachne, you post a lot of other people interpretations: " I have read the bible (King James Version), however, what I posted came from the site called http://www.evilbible.com/"

Is it just more expedient, since you agree with it totally? And if so, how is that different form Syed quoting the Koran?

*Jeanne, I thought you were smarter than that. I guess I gave you too much credit.

Arachne • Robert S. said • Still personal Arachne. You don't see it because you have hate inside of you and that is what comes through in your posts.

*Robert, you assume that I hate because I do not hang onto your coattails. Actually, you make me laugh out loud. Therefore, I am a happy camper.

Arachne • Robert S. said • Arachne • And did you use words like savagery, fool, STFU and the other colorful language... I was referring to the words you and Roi post not what I post.

* No duh. I know what you were saying. Perhaps you did not note: why don't you admit that you enjoy our colorful language as you only write in shades of gray.

Arachne • Robert S. said • I'm glad you're happy Arachne. You hate becasue that is what you post, hate and you post from hate sites.

* Poor sweet Robert. The link is not from a hate site, however, it is from a site that notes problems in the bible. Don't you see that? Are you not open to another's perspective?

Easy to see.

* You easily see god too from what I understand. Have you seen his good book explored in such a way or have you not read it? Perhaps if you read it you did not understand it. Yup. That could be the case. No matter. Are you still willing to defend that which is so diabolical?

Arachne • Robert S. said • And of course evilbible is not a hate site? But it seems to be OK to promote hate, here.

*Robert, to me it seem that you promote hate, however, that is just my opinion.

Arachne • Milda, if you don't know about the old and new testaments, how can you make any claim about what jesus represented in the fairy tales of the new testament?

Your statement is not wise.

Arachne • Robert S. said • Is that it?

Tim? Arachne?: Roi? Any more insults?

*Why does the bible insult you? Are you afraid that others may see exactly what hatred in spewed within the confines of the book? Is that why you view evil bible as a hate site? The bible is a hateful piece of literature. I am glad you finally see that.

Arachne • Milda Y. said • @Tim,

"But I repeat the question: has Arachne misquoted the bible? If not why are you upset. It is afterall the book you believe in is it not? "

Sorry but these quotes were also cited from Bible by Arachne and I read them again and again. I don't see anything wrong with them, do you? Does Jesus speak of war, killing, abuse, etc.?

*Did you read the heading of what this was about? It was in regard to jesus lying.

Arachne • Robert S. said • No Arachne the hate comes from your words.

*Do you mean the bible postings? I would agree that they are hateful, but those words are not my words. They come from YOUR bible. Who really wrote that good book and why was it written?

Robert you say that the bible should not be taken literally right? Well then why should it be accepted at all? Should I accept T'was The Night Before Xmas as gospel as well?

No one is stuffing anything down your throat that you haven't supposedly already eaten. Isn't that so?

Arachne • Milda, what have you read on jesus? I suggest you read the bible and then tell me how well you like it. Do start at the beginning. The beginning is the old testament.

BTW, are you aware there is no evidence that a person jesus ever existed?

Arachne • Robert S.  said • We are talking abut what I have already posted about not taking the Bible literally.

Now you are stuffing it down my throat, the same thing you don't like but its' ok for you to do to me.

Robert S. • Arachne said • No one is stuffing anything down your throat that you haven't supposedly already eaten. Isn't that so?

* I don't see your beef with my words.

Arachne • Matilda said ~ And what is lying exactly?

* Adjective: Not telling the truth: "he's a lying, cheating, snake in the grass".
Synonyms: mendacious - false - untruthful - deceitful - untrue

* IF we were to take those words in the literal sense, we would see that they cannot be actualized by the supposed person who said them. Therefore, the words are deceitful i.e., lies.

I don't believe in a personal God, but I do believe that if one puts his heart and soul in something, whatever that may be, he may achieve it.

* Are you saying that you are your own god and thus responsible for your actions or lack thereof? Are you saying that if you want something done, you go out and do it yourself?

I believe in Global conciousness, in the power of thoughts, so can I call that God and relate it to these verses...

* I too believe in the power of thought as I do think. However, I do not associate my thoughts to any god. I am solely responsible for myself. Are you akin?

Arachne • @Matilda ~ Words of wisdom are always welcome.

Milda  • Arachne,

Then you and I are on the same page here.....BTW, the name is Milda, not Matilda!

So why then attack a book, a character, or the wisdom when it’s the people that are using it as a weapon?

* I like your page. :-) The book is the gun. Guns in themselves are not deadly for they cannot get up and harm anyone. Guns don't kill people; people kill people. If someone were walking around with a loaded gun and the safety were off, wouldn't you want to fire the gun to show them the damage it can do when not handled properly? The good books have been used for centuries by humans who use them as a weapon against other humans. The weapon should therefore be exposed for what it is.

*Sorry for the name mix-up Milda.

Arachne • Robert S., I extend my hand in peace and trust that our arguments will be of a friendly nature.

To those of you who have gone, I wish you a goodnight. For those of you still here, do have a grand and glorious. Peace out for now.