Is God all he's cracked up to be?

Well semantics be damned, the energy discussion is best suited for the philosophy forum anyway.

However a fun piece for Shaky, Buddhists and Hindus came up with the earliest atomic theories in/around the 6th century!

Yes. Yes, he is.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Yeah...I agree...noit every sentence...jsut every spiritual claim.

I see....and masturbation is slander to my right hand?

Well....jsut to make that clear...that is by definition wrong:

slan·der ( P ) Pronunciation Key (slndr)
n.
Law. Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation.
A false and malicious statement or report about someone.

Killing someone is no false and malicious statement and it is certainly not Oral.....also "life" is not a "person"....

You are just being silly now.

Slander can be more then oral, and it can be more than to just a person. I can write something that is slanderous to a people. To kill out of hate, is to show be slanderous against that person's life. To kill in self-defense is not slander. To kill in order to protect the weak in not slander.

someone on the board likes to play word games......................

Semantics are the only way people can argue these days. But I do rather like the elaboraton on Shaky's idea of slander.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You are just being silly now.

Slander can be more then oral, and it can be more than to just a person. I can write something that is slanderous to a people. To kill out of hate, is to show be slanderous against that person's life. To kill in self-defense is not slander. To kill in order to protect the weak in not slander.

Also you could just say that killing is the only sin.
Rape would be killing of the sexual rights then. Slander, killing of ones reputation. Stealing killing of ones property.....

Sorry, slander is quite well defined and your definition is just out of proportion and...dare I say it...even wrong.

Also, there are many miracle type things that happen all the time that are not Christian....That would also have to do with energy....Then there are the people's who can walk on hot coals, and hang from hooks, and do incredible things.....There is also the paranormal things that would have to do with energy.....It's would seem energy can be used by your body and transferred to another's body as well, as in healing's (which btw are said to be of Satan, if not in Jesus name)....

Healings such as the one televised in China with no hands touching the women......A tumor just disappeared from her kidney...They had ultrasound devices inside her and scanners over her....It was on the Science Channel.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Also, there are many miracle type things that happen all the time that are not Christian....That would also have to do with energy....Then there are the people's who can walk on hot coals, and hang from hooks, and do incredible things.....There is also the paranormal things that would have to do with energy.....It's would seem energy can be used by your body and transferred to another's body as well, as in healing's (which btw are said to be of Satan, if not in Jesus name)....

Healings such as the one televised in China with no hands touching the women......A tumor just disappeared from her kidney...They had ultrasound devices inside her and scanners over her....It was on the Science Channel.

I see...so you basically call everything you don't understand energy....and then you go ahead and call everything you do understand (little as it may be) energy.....hmm, thinking about it ....makes sense.....

Originally posted by Bardock42
I see...so you basically call everything you don't understand energy....and then you go ahead and call everything you do understand (little as it may be) energy.....hmm, thinking about it ....makes sense.....

Originally posted by debbiejo
Well, what would you call it?.........And remember the water experiment.....And now the televised healings on the Science Channel. Two men who didn't even touch her ya know....It was a transference.....What would you call it?

Well, I'd call it a fake for one....maybe that's just me though...I dopn't believe everything I read on the Internet or see on TV....

If it's true they will be able to repeat the experiment and it will get the recognition it deserves....if it's a fake, well no one will ever talk about it again and some other Bullshit "experiment" will come along in due time....

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, I'd call it a fake for one....maybe that's just me though...I dopn't believe everything I read on the Internet or see on TV....

If it's true they will be able to repeat the experiment and it will get the recognition it deserves....if it's a fake, well no one will ever talk about it again and some other Bullshit "experiment" will come along in due time....

Originally posted by debbiejo
For gods sakes it was on the Science Channel, and that was only one of other such type experiments or miracles....And again, what would you call this transference?....Fake is too lame.....

Well, let's go quite far hnere and pretend it is actually true, so ´mabye it's magic ...or whatever....how does that in any way prove that EVERYTHING (that is what you claim) is energy?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Nope...no, that's not in the definition.

Also you could just say that killing is the only sin.
Rape would be killing of the sexual rights then. Slander, killing of ones reputation. Stealing killing of ones property.....

Sorry, slander is quite well defined and your definition is just out of proportion and...dare I say it...even wrong.

Not according to my dictionary of Buddhist terms. You see, words have different means depending upon the context. Your definition is the legal definition, but laws have to be written with narrow meanings. I on the other hand, can do what ever I want to do, as long as I adhere to the rules of this forum. I suggest that we get back onto topic and stop this meaningless semantics game.

A lot of people on this site have a disturbingly narrow view of how semantics work; Bardock is one of them.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Not according to my dictionary of Buddhist terms. You see, words have different means depending upon the context. Your definition is the legal definition, but laws have to be written with narrow meanings. I on the other hand, can do what ever I want to do, as long as I adhere to the rules of this forum. I suggest that we get back onto topic and stop this meaningless semantics game.

I agree. But Bardock is the Lord of Semantics and Relativism, so he'll argue you're wrong and he's right all day long. It's what gets him through each day.

Originally posted by Janus Marius
I agree. But Bardock is the Lord of Semantics and Relativism, so he'll argue you're wrong and he's right all day long. It's what gets him through each day.

I hope it does not get him banned again.

You're too kind. If I had a BAN button, this place would be pretty damn empty. There's nothing I hate more than people who argue like he does. It's absolutely obnoxious.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Not according to my dictionary of Buddhist terms. You see, words have different means depending upon the context. Your definition is the legal definition, but laws have to be written with narrow meanings. I on the other hand, can do what ever I want to do, as long as I adhere to the rules of this forum. I suggest that we get back onto topic and stop this meaningless semantics game.

Alright...so lets go back on topic. God is a lamp. He's cupboard and therefore comics is surely. Audio very much so as well. And Orange Juice is so called.

Oh, you're asking how that's on topic...hmm well I guess it's not in your dictionary but in my dictionary the words lamp, cupboard, comics, surely, audio and Orange Juice are very differently defined...so it makes perfect sense in my dictionary.....oh what now? You want to go by the real...the english dictionary again? Oxford? Webster? Why suddenly?

See, what you have done there, Bardock, is take an utterly ludicrous exaggeration and tried to make out that it undermines the concept.

It doesn't, and it is just childish. Use some brainpower and you can easily see what Shakya means.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Alright...so lets go back on topic. God is a lamp. He's cupboard and therefore comics is surely. Audio very much so as well. And Orange Juice is so called.

Oh, you're asking how that's on topic...hmm well I guess it's not in your dictionary but in my dictionary the words lamp, cupboard, comics, surely, audio and Orange Juice are very differently defined...so it makes perfect sense in my dictionary.....oh what now? You want to go by the real...the english dictionary again? Oxford? Webster? Why suddenly?

You shouldn't try so hard at sarcasm. It just looks worse when you fail. Shaky is giving you a religious definition of "slander", not a legal or strictly Oxford dictionary version of one. In this case, it encompasses many wrong-doings in a single word, which is pretty damn efficient.

Instead of bitching about the use of the word, why don't you argue something useful for a change? Or are you only here online to badger people who don't think exactly like you?