...fairly stated, Ray.
and guilty as charged, about the occasional 'cocksure' bit anyway.
*sardonic grin* we all have our little battles.
but i do not just make stuff up. i have deeply considered most of what i write about, even if the actual expression in the moment is 'fluid'.
and i admit to having gaps in my knowledge and usually welcome a polite "hey did you know...?". Don't let my confidence stop you or give you the idea that i wont listen.
Well, I was over aggressive in my original reply to you. So I apologize for that.
that being said, how do you propose that i 'back up' my statements? when we talk of a thing bearly belived in. muchless properly explored.
I require it. Most people do in fact. Except for the naive and gullible. Or people that just believe something that they 'feel' is right and it makes them feel good.
I have an issue with that kind of logic I guess.its not like i can show you my data: it consists of days and days and days of hoovering up cyberspace, science and experience. years of observation and synthisis. and like most metaphysical (deep mind) research the proof is in the personal pudding.
Sure you can. Most people posting on here leave links or sources. It's not that hard. You're obviously computer and internet savvy.instead of pointing to some culture that says that lucy is 'good' (that that i ever said he was not good) and then using that as some proof that i'm making shit up, why not pick an actual point in my argumant and tell mt how you see it diferent. i care much more about your personal ideas and expewrience than i do some dead cultures preistly ideas.
I was posting that source to show the opposite opinion of yours. That site has the same cocksure conviction that you do.
So who's right?
They are both kooky perspectives imo...Hell, they even know what Enki's favorite bands are...and his height and weight!
Here is a more conservative link:
Luciferianism is a belief system that venerates the essential characteristics that are affixed to Lucifer. The tradition usually reveres Lucifer, not as the Devil, but as a rescuer or guiding spirit[1] or even the true god as opposed to Jehovah.[2]
Luciferianism is identified by some people as an auxiliary of Satanism, due to the popular identification of Lucifer with Satan. Some Luciferians accept this identification or consider Lucifer the light bearer aspect of Satan.[1] Others reject it, arguing that Lucifer is a more positive ideal than Satan.
[quote/]
[
link to en.wikipedia.org]
I'm not a Luciferian btw...Just giving a more mainline description of Lucifer.so.
if you got a beef with my words. pick 'em out and show me where i done bad.
i been wrong way more den i been right.
I did in my original reply. I thought my "picking" was pretty thorough.
I can dissect and analyze it more to do some hyper picking if you want.
Also, it was just that post that I found faulty. Not your overall writings on the site.bring it on, Bro
Oh...It's already been 'broughten'! ;) Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24542515 replies in red
ah, the conversation continues: sweet.
i'll respond in more depth tomorrow morning when my mind functions in that special morning way...
/nod
ugh: i hate long quotes.
you know? embedding your responce inside of my previous post makes a long discussion difficult to follow.
just sayin'
so.
"Or people that just believe something that they
'feel' is right and it makes them feel good.
I have an issue with that kind of logic I guess."
one should start at feeling and then logically progress. it is neither logical nor illogical to begin with feelings. logic is a process, a type of path... a means.
logic depends entirely on assumtions and only produces correct 'results' when all the variables are acounted for. for this reason, logic often leeds us astray, particulalrly when we are blind to more than half of the 'equation'.
if i had to choose feeling over logic, i'd go feeling without question. and the times i didn't i slammed mind first into false conclusions arrived at using impecible logic but based on an incorrect variable set.
you can either dispute my logic or my initial assumtions, but don't call me illogical when pointing at my assumtion set.
...
"Sure you can. Most people posting on here leave links or sources. It's not that hard."
This assumes that all of my ideas originate in cyberspace and are a result of reading someone else's ideas. Many of my ideas come from within and are based on a chaoitic data set of experience, observation, and somatic responce.
dispute my words on their own content rather than by their lack of a referance list. you are welcome to use another's words to do this if you like, but an idea is not automatically invalid simply because it is without precidence.
...
on to the actual subject:
"I was posting that source to show the opposite opinion of yours. That site has the same cocksure conviction that you do.
So who's right?
They are both kooky perspectives imo...Hell, they even know what Enki's favorite bands are...and his height and weight!
Here is a more conservative link:
Luciferianism is a belief system that venerates the essential characteristics that are affixed to Lucifer. The tradition usually reveres Lucifer, not as the Devil, but as a rescuer or guiding spirit[1] or even the true god as opposed to Jehovah.[2]
Luciferianism is identified by some people as an auxiliary of Satanism, due to the popular identification of Lucifer with Satan. Some Luciferians accept this identification or consider Lucifer the light bearer aspect of Satan.[1] Others reject it, arguing that Lucifer is a more positive ideal than Satan."
so you continue to speak using other's words. i would like to here *your* actual ideas, as i already mentioned.
as to the words above:
they don't actually *define* lucy, they just say he's a good guy and then say how some lucifaritans go with satasim and some don't: do we really care about this fact?
"venerate the essential charcteristics affixed to lucifer"
so what *are* these characteristics, in your mind?
/curious
and finally: the above referance does not actually dispute my words: i make no value judgements about lucy and speak of both possitive and negative aspects and of ballance.
there is plenty of 'reason' to venerate lucy and i spoke highly of many of his atributes.
but to call him God?
this is deeply misguided in my opinion.
