|
Post by silver on Dec 27, 2014 15:54:28 GMT -5
I didn't see what you wrote just now as condescending in the least...this is the type of thing that surprises me the things you label as condescending coming from yourself. I don't know what to make of it, but I don't think it's all that important (one of many possible meanings of my shrugs). What your revulsion/sadness is from, I figure it's because the past is still alive and just because you shine it all on instead of addressing it/discussing it etc. is an explanation that comes rather readily. You can give that a think or not. Yes, I get the last paragraph. Sorry hun', opposite day has been over for me for a long long time now. I forget what opposite day means, but why are you always seeming to be worried that what comes out of your mouth won't be clever enough? Whether you say things the boring old fashioned run of the mill way or way clever, it's still going to sound pedantic. And um lacking in any sense that you believe yourself to be not separate from the rest of the world...Iow love.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Dec 27, 2014 15:56:14 GMT -5
I'm going to the library now and run errands. And while I'm gone, stop being such a bad influence, figsy!
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 27, 2014 15:56:40 GMT -5
" figgles tagged you in the thread What's real and what's illusion spillover." Anybody any idea what that's supposed to mean? Yeah, she was smashed last night. Just shifty finger meets vino-tinto.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 27, 2014 15:57:22 GMT -5
Sorry hun', opposite day has been over for me for a long long time now. I forget what opposite day means, but why are you always seeming to be worried that what comes out of your mouth won't be clever enough? Whether you say things the boring old fashioned run of the mill way or way clever, it's still going to sound pedantic. And um lacking in any sense that you believe yourself to be not separate from the rest of the world...Iow love. Hate much?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 27, 2014 15:58:21 GMT -5
that figs has a Reefs idée fixe ? Yeah, that's no secret, actually.
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 27, 2014 15:59:35 GMT -5
Why would even assume that I would 'fully accept everything AH says as indisputable truth'? It's not at all new what they teach. Do the hermetic laws ring a bell, maybe? "Assuming" would take the form of a solid assertion. You might have noticed, I asked you a question; "Do you fully accept everything AH says as indisputable truth?" It was framed in a question, because I did not merely 'assume' that I knew the answer. Pay attention to what's being written. Your interest in finding fault with me is muddying your vision. It was a double bind that you weren't even conscious of posing. Pure trash.
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Dec 27, 2014 16:00:43 GMT -5
Those are understandings open for discussion, until you start another mock trial.. then, the club shows up to play judge and jury to your theatrics.. yes, the forum is littered with your mock trials, so offense taken is just more theatrics.. what is missing here is your sincerity to have an OHCD.."Offense taken"? That's your giraffe -- I've not only specifically disclaimed offense but explained, in detail, how the appearance of the condescension was witnessed and not felt. Are you capable of a dialog that is free of your hiding behind this double-bind? Do you consider the underlined OHCD? What can you possibly identify in what you replied to that had any similarity in form to what's underlined? There was no insult, no mockery, no ridicule in what you replied to there. As you've abandoned OHCD in this dialog I'll simply be very frank: your abandonment of OHCD is just one more example of how your constant demand for it, as you refuse to bring it, is just a very persistent illusion with an audience of one. No.. you simply are looking to avoid admitting that you like to play lawyer and hide behind massive quote walls that people simply ignore, but.. when they do look at your references, most are inaccurate and misrepresentations.. me thinks you doth protest a bit too much..
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Dec 27, 2014 16:05:28 GMT -5
"Assuming" would take the form of a solid assertion. You might have noticed, I asked you a question; "Do you fully accept everything AH says as indisputable truth?" It was framed in a question, because I did not merely 'assume' that I knew the answer. Pay attention to what's being written. Your interest in finding fault with me is muddying your vision. It was a double bind that you weren't even conscious of posing. Pure trash. It was not a double bind. I was curious if he regards everything they say as being beyond question....there are some who do because of the nature of the message (being channeled from non-physical beings).
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Dec 27, 2014 16:08:49 GMT -5
I forget what opposite day means, but why are you always seeming to be worried that what comes out of your mouth won't be clever enough? Whether you say things the boring old fashioned run of the mill way or way clever, it's still going to sound pedantic. And um lacking in any sense that you believe yourself to be not separate from the rest of the world...Iow love. Hate much? Is that the new club tactic, play the hate card, when it's not even in the deck?..
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Dec 27, 2014 16:09:36 GMT -5
"Assuming" would take the form of a solid assertion. You might have noticed, I asked you a question; "Do you fully accept everything AH says as indisputable truth?" It was framed in a question, because I did not merely 'assume' that I knew the answer. Pay attention to what's being written. Your interest in finding fault with me is muddying your vision. It was a double bind that you weren't even conscious of posing. Pure trash. Tell me more about civility.............
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 27, 2014 16:31:49 GMT -5
It was a double bind that you weren't even conscious of posing. Pure trash. Tell me more about civility............. No need, just use your eyes. As you abandoned civility between the two of us in this dialog first you are in no position to comment on a dialog that you're not a party to. Do you have any notion of the outsized spiritual-circus-based ego that you're putting on display by pretending otherwise?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 27, 2014 16:33:04 GMT -5
It was a double bind that you weren't even conscious of posing. Pure trash. It was not a double bind. I was curious if he regards everything they say as being beyond question....there are some who do because of the nature of the message (being channeled from non-physical beings). Right, like I said, you're still not conscious of the fact of it. Does it mean anything to you that you often unconsciously pose double-binds to your correspondents?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 27, 2014 16:36:06 GMT -5
"Offense taken"? That's your giraffe -- I've not only specifically disclaimed offense but explained, in detail, how the appearance of the condescension was witnessed and not felt. Are you capable of a dialog that is free of your hiding behind this double-bind? Do you consider the underlined OHCD? What can you possibly identify in what you replied to that had any similarity in form to what's underlined? There was no insult, no mockery, no ridicule in what you replied to there. As you've abandoned OHCD in this dialog I'll simply be very frank: your abandonment of OHCD is just one more example of how your constant demand for it, as you refuse to bring it, is just a very persistent illusion with an audience of one. No.. you simply are looking to avoid admitting that you like to play lawyer and hide behind massive quote walls that people simply ignore, but.. when they do look at your references, most are inaccurate and misrepresentations.. me thinks you doth protest a bit too much.. Which one of us in this dialog is holding onto something? Answer the question of which one of us is bringing up content from outside it of it and then stop thinking .. are you capable of such self-honesty? Why did you abandon OHCD? Are you capable of maintaining OHCD for more than just a few days? The offer for OHCD is always open to you. What will you choose?
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 27, 2014 16:37:20 GMT -5
Hate much? Is that the new club tactic, play the hate card, when it's not even in the deck?.. What makes you think that you (or anyone else for that matter) deserve anything other than a double bind in reply to a double bind? When will you stop hating like this?
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Dec 27, 2014 16:37:27 GMT -5
Tell me more about civility............. No need, just use your eyes. As you abandoned civility between the two of us in this dialog first you are in no position to comment on a dialog that you're not a party to. Do you have any notion of the outsized spiritual-circus-based ego that you're putting on display by pretending otherwise? I did use my eyes, you provoke that response so you can play this game.. No, i didn't abandon civility, you defined civility to suit your need to escape the discussion..
|
|