what if jesus really did assend into the sky....

[Good1]

Quote from Free Thinker:

this might be of some small help to you conspiricy nuts. but in order for it to have an effect your mind has to be capable of reason:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urTgHndtOSY&feature=g-all-u

I'll take this as a 'no'...you don't think there is any evidence that 911 was an inside job. You accept the official story. And already, you've resorted to ridicule to keep me from thinking freely about it. I've only asked you about 911, but you've linked a doctrinal that mentions practically every theory ever proposed on either Alex Jones or Art Bell and holds them all up for ridicule, while the preacher wears a tin foil hat for emphasis.

Since i've only asked you about 911 i didn't bother to listen past the first few minutes of ridicule naming a couple of dozen items of interest, all as if a reasonable thinker would know the true story in every case.

According to the ridicule i did listen to, apparently you would also ridicule anyone who doesn't think that Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK.

This all goes to the heart of *what is evidence*. Evidence, to you, is evidence if you agree with it, and not evidence if you don't. This has little to do with honesty/reason and everything to do with what you wish for.

 

[Good1]

Quote from Free Thinker:

come on? you are superstitious and a truther too? on second thought i guess they go together.

Ok, so you've said here that anyone who does not believe the official story about 911 is superstitious, regardless of the evidence, which to you must not be evidence.

Yes, i am about knowing the truth. But i'm not calling the conclusions of any research into the evidence of 911 "the truth". I am only using it as an example to test your alleged ability/willingness to think freely, as your name suggests.

And now i think your name is misleading if not entirely fraudulent.

The Truth is a being, that i've also described as the Original Reality. Should we discover that World Trade Center 7 was the result of a professional, precision controlled demolition, that would only be "true" relative to what we've been told through the official story. It's relative. It would not be *The Truth*...which is, as i've said, a living Being...and only that Being.

I wouldn't expect you to grasp what i'm saying if you could not first grasp - or be honest about - a much more micro example of a *true-versus-false* paradigm, each with evidence that depends upon what the thinker wants to believe.

There's no point in having a discussion with you about macro matters while you would be dishonest about micro matters. Not everyone who disbelieves the official story about 911 agrees with me about macro matters. But it's a start, and it helps. A mind could not grasp what i'm saying for the same reason they could not grasp any other story except the official story about 911.

 

[PHOENIX TRADING]

Quote from Good1:

Ok, so you've said here that anyone who does not believe the official story about 911 is superstitious, regardless of the evidence, which to you must not be evidence.

Yes, i am about knowing the truth. But i'm not calling the conclusions of any research into the evidence of 911 "the truth". I am only using it as an example to test your alleged ability/willingness to think freely, as your name suggests.

And now i think your name is misleading if not entirely fraudulent.

The Truth is a being, that i've also described as the Original Reality. Should we discover that World Trade Center 7 was the result of a professional, precision controlled demolition, that would only be "true" relative to what we've been told through the official story. It's relative. It would not be *The Truth*...which is, as i've said, a living Being...and only that Being.

I wouldn't expect you to grasp what i'm saying if you could not first grasp - or be honest about - a much more micro example of a *true-versus-false* paradigm, each with evidence that depends upon what the thinker wants to believe.

There's no point in having a discussion with you about macro matters while you would be dishonest about micro matters. Not everyone who disbelieves the official story about 911 agrees with me about macro matters. But it's a start, and it helps. A mind could not grasp what i'm saying for the same reason they could not grasp any other story except the official story about 911.

the official version on 911 is the govt is/was grossly incompetent.

 

[Good1]

Quote from Free Thinker:

people like you seem to let their mind go in strange places. it you wanted to determine if what your mind was telling you was true by what criteria would you do it?

If you haven't noticed, the circumstances surrounding your mind at this moment are strange. And if i'm located anywhere on a blue marble spinning in the blackness of space, lit by the light of fire, then my mind is also in a strange place.

I am describing how "we" or our mind has gotten "here", which sounds strange because it is strange! I've asked you about the reach of my mind, and by implication, what is the reach of your mind. I've asked where one starts and the other stops, assuming mind has any boundaries at all. I've suggested that mind has much more power than you are allowing...and i've told you what kind of "god" such a mind might invent if it so wished. I've told you that what you've been calling "reality" is a "god"...invented. I've told you there is an Original Reality not built by particles, nor the laws of particle physics.

You've jumped to conclusions about all of this, telling us just how "free" your thinking really is...as if your mind is not utterly surrounded by all that is strange, not to mention the laws of particle physics.

So to answer the second question; by what criteria?

The criteria i use to answer any question about truth starts with Identity...who/what do I think I am? Coincidentally, you use the same criteria. Depending on what you decide and/or accept, you will receive evidence in support of either whatever you choose to believe, or whatever you choose to remember (to know). I choose to remember what i know...not to continue supporting what i wish to believe.

Once a mind is lost in a labyrinth of belief/faith, it can only escape by reversing/retracing it's steps, to go back the way it came. If the mind does not understand the way it came, it will continue to wander...lost. The way our minds come to a strange world is through the denial of what we know about our Self. Therefore, the way out is to *know thy Self*. The criteria, all along the way back is: Who am I?

Start with this: I am the Truth.

 

[Good1]

Quote from PHOENIX TRADING:

the official version on 911 is the govt is/was grossly incompetent.

I wouldn't call a perfectly executed precision controlled demolition of a skyscraper(s) incompetent. Neither would i call the maker of the particle world incompetent. Nor do i believe the official story about either. Atheists have an official story, and theists have an official story. The dichotomy confuses the issue, which is also the intent. In whatever case, the circumstances we experience are intentional...not accidental flubbery. The prime intention is to obscure our true genesis; to render it unknown, or else a lie. And in this way, knowledge about who/what we are is suppressed under a massive load of propaganda.

 

[PHOENIX TRADING]

Quote from Good1:

I wouldn't call a perfectly executed precision controlled demolition of a skyscraper(s) incompetent.

Well using a 747 fully loaded with jet fuel IS a novel way of doing it.
So perhaps the word incompetent is the wrong term.

 

[Good1]

Quote from PHOENIX TRADING:

Well using a 747 fully loaded with jet fuel IS a novel way of doing it.
So perhaps the word incompetent is the wrong term.

But a smokescreen (deception) is not a novel way of waging war. And fire is not a novel way to bring down a skyscraper designed to handle wind sheer loads much stronger than any jetliner impact. And one out of three of the skyscrapers that went down by fire that day did not require the cover of a jetliner impact to bring it down under a smokescreen.

Perhaps that's because some folks have learned that people will believe what they are told under the color of legality and/or authority. Fire is not a novel way to bring down a skyscraper because it is not a way to bring down a skyscraper.

 

[MarketMasher]

Quote from stu:



You can’t follow 2nd commandment and be humane, when god is commanding you to smite thy neighbor, like it so often does command people.

Here have a smiley on me seeing how you like them so much

Here is the passage again, since you might have misread it....

“Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul and with all thy mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like unto it: ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.’ On these commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”

The "when god is commanding you to smite thy neighbor, like it so often does command people" is your own addendum - because of your biases.

Now, attend - and follow....

Since a commandment is a commandment, it's pretty much a given that there are going to be a few "Thou/thy"s in there somewhere.

But besides that, what is the word that is important enough that it bears repeating in both commandments?

It is true that such a trait would be viewed as limited in supply by some, particularly among those most parsimonious with it....

But then - that would be an attribute that springs from the thoughts and biases of that particular person, rather than the wording of those commandments....

 

[PHOENIX TRADING]

Quote from Good1:

Fire is not a novel way to bring down a skyscraper because it is not a way to bring down a skyscraper.

Quite frankly it's a perfect way to bring down a skyscraper of that design.

Incompetence of govt plus sheer luck in picking a susceptible target.

 

[Good1]

Quote from PHOENIX TRADING:

Quite frankly it's a perfect way to bring down a skyscraper of that design.

Incompetence of govt plus sheer luck in picking a susceptible target.

They weren't designed out of wood, nor has a steel and concrete skyscraper come down due to fire, although there have been cases of towering infernos. They would need more than luck to bring down - in a few hours - the first three skyscrapers ever due to fire.