Discussion in 'The War Room' started by mrbaapt, May 14, 2018.
Also used by John Lennon in Julia on the White Album.
they are less than 8% of the population and are not even black they are more mixed than african americans who are on average like 30% to 40% or 50% not black. Saudi black arabs are more mixed than northern sudanese. Basically they wont exist in 100 years with continued intermixing.
what other countries? Sudan is only other one i can think of. Sudanese arab is said to be 70% of population but really they are mixed as is most of sudan. Mali, niger, chad, use to have no population except wandering berbers (non blacks) but now the black population south of the sahel moved up into those areas.
Yeah, it is probably most famous with our generation because of Lennon. Lennon was like that too. Bunch of meaningless stuff in his songs. Like gibberish mixed in with good stuff.
Lewis Carroll had an interesting style. He was a mathematician and his prose has a mathematical and logical flow to it. Trying to figure out what he is saying is like trying to solve a math or logical problem. You may have bring out some pen and paper to figure it out. Carroll was brilliant. And a pedophile too I think.
Like, look at this sentence:
Be what you would seem to be -- or, if you'd like it put more simply -- Never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might appear to others that what you were or might have been was not otherwise than what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise.
Maybe because the pacification wasn't working? There may be problems with the OPs premise, but I don't understand why people keep bringing this up as some kind of deal-breaker.
Why does the government allow people to buy cars that go over the speed limit, but then throw people in jail for speeding?
this guy doesnt look black to you? The Saudis I saw were black enough to be considered black by saudis and themselves. African Americans are not on average 40 or 50 percent non black. I've seen enough real mullatos to know that.
Why does meaning need to be "out in the world"?
I'm not sure that idea is even coherent tbh.
The two institutions definitely bolstered one another. The church extracted money from the poor and the wealthy(LANDlords) donated huge sums of money generated by the poor to build these buildings to ensure their place in heaven. The church could have used some of that money on the poor(which most people were back then) instead of so many cathedrals.
They were living a miserable lie. If these people were able to keep the money that they earned for themselves, not forced to live as pawns for landowners and the church, and actually encouraged to pursue real things like education and economic freedom I'm sure they would have found a lot of meaning in their lives. We'd probably have just as many nice buildings and we might be further along as a species.
Quick to call someone dense. I was referring to the person/people that translated. Also, Jesus did not exist but even so, Koine was the lingua franca of the place and time. Someone of similar life circumstances living around when Jesus purportedly probably spoke some Greek. If you lived in an urban part of the Greek speaking world you probably had some familiarity with their religion no matter your own or your native tongue.
Well if Joseph Atwill says it, it must be true. I guess everyone will just stop going to Church now, since Joseph Atwill said it's make believe.
It doesn't, but externalism is the more common theory of mental content. The majority of philosophers hold externalism to be the case. The internalist position is a dualist theory.
There is scientific evidence supporting the conclusion that the brain thinks independently of language. We feel in control of our mental life because we "think in language", or that's how we feel; that voice in our minds is us thinking. Clearly this is an illusion. Though is prior to language and language is not even necessary for thought. I think meaning and all mental content, is an illusion too. We are our brain and our brain thinks and does all the things in its (our) life.
If you deny the last bit then you are a dualist.
The insult may have been a bit low.
Jesus probably had a passing vocabulary in Koine, but most assurdly spoke Aramaic - its near universally accepted - and certainly would have used that or Hebrew when addressing other Jews.
And you said Jesus used Hades and pointed out how he was confused in doing so.
I think this is partially true, and that we exert some control over our thought, though probably less than we think.
I don't know what it means for mental content to be an illusion. The experience of mental content is a fact to any subject. Whether the substance of that experience is something different from the rest of the world is a different question, and one that concerns me less tbh.
With we I take it you mean the brain, right?
Mental content being an illusion is basically the brain cooking up the illusions of meaning, intentionality and so on. All there is is chemicals in the brain, neurons firing and so on. The external world and our body trigger trigger these reactions through our sense organs.
I take it to mean the consciousnesses that experience being selves, which emerge from brains.
In your second paragraph, I'm curious what work the word "illusion" is doing. Do you mean the brain makes meaning seem like it's out in the world, when really it's only internal?
You could also mean, a la Dennett, that perceived consciousness of meaning is entirely illusory (perhaps because consciousness is too), but then I have to wonder who or what the illusion is deceiving exactly.
LOL, people like this are just sad.
Thoroughly raped minds ITT.
Your logic is atrocious. So, Romans are failing to control the masses with one religious philosophy that promises an afterlife for good behavior, so they manufacture another religious philosophy that promises an afterlife for good behavior hoping for a different result? And then they persecute the people who subscribe to said religion to reinforce the original religion.
That was a ridiculous analogy.
Speed limits are not constant around the world.
Sorry, but reducing the argument to generalizations doesn't work.
Rome was trying to get rid of the Jews. The premise is that Christianity was constructed to reject Judaism (after all, what do we hear Christians say time and time again? They don't worship the Old Testament ), and accept their plight rather than challenge the authorities (turn the other cheek, meek shall inherit the earth, etc etc). They were also an easy scapegoat for the Great Fire of Rome, and when they called Nero the anti-christ, he got pissed off and went to plan b.
Mind you the premise is not that Christianity was some full on conspiracy - it was an attempt by a few people to see if they could subvert the Jews by including the Hebrew Bible (OT), but then offering the NT which supposedly rejects what the Jews had basically been following all along, in effect having God say "I made an error in what I taught you guys - I'm sending you my son who will show you a new, more peaceful way).
I don't personally agree with the OP, but there is nothing illogical about the proposition.
Nice story, bro.
Separate names with a comma.