Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

Larry N Moore

Members
  • Posts

    1,542
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Larry N Moore

  1. I went to one seminar on the Momentus program (I think I also wrote to the guy who initiated it -- and maybe bought one of it's books) about 20 yrs ago. I remember thinking -- This thing is bizarre! But I had to check it out because a very dear friend of mine had recommended it to me. I still love the guy but, I had to pass on his suggestion that I enroll in the program. Too cultish for my taste buds.
  2. Very few verses were written about the other manifestations. Does that mean they're equally unimportant? Three chapters in Corinthians were written to address the manifestations and/or gifts of the Holy Spirit -- and they cover them quite well -- what exactly would you expect? That plus, what was written in the Book of Acts in regards to the times when the manifestation of SIT is mentioned.
  3. This post (and Belle's) has been reported as a personal attack on another member of GS. It commits the following fallacy. Fallacy: Ad Hominem Description of Ad Hominem Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against the person." An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of the person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form: 1. Person A makes claim X. 2. Person B makes an attack on person A. 3. Therefore A's claim is false. The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made). Example of Ad Hominem 1. Bill: "I believe that abortion is morally wrong." Dave: "Of course you would say that, you're a priest." Bill: "What about the arguments I gave to support my position?" Dave: "Those don't count. Like I said, you're a priest, so you have to say that abortion is wrong. Further, you are just a lackey to the Pope, so I can't believe what you say." P.S. At least when I make a report of a post I find objectionable I won't hide behind anonymity. I'll let the person I'm making a report about know that I reported their post. You (the one being reported) have the right to defend/explain why you think I'm wrong. You could do it through a PM and if your reasons are good I'll extend a public apology for reporting your post. You'll have to wait until my response is viewed and released.
  4. The Total Compensation Of The Chairman of the Board
  5. Like I said Mr. Squirrel -- I really haven't bothered reading the posts there -- I'm only reading the ones here about that place. And it's comments like this . . . . . . that makes me wonder what it is you're really doing. I'm sure you didn't post a "stream of insulting posts" but isn't even a trickle unnecessary? I whole-heartedly agree with you about giving "someone an opportunity to think". But you can see for yourself through me, when in doing so and in doing so allegedly in an insulting manner what the results might be. Is that what you really want? And then to return here to boast about how you were banned or censured or ignored. (But you do do it in a humorous fashion and that I appreciate).
  6. I appreciate your sense of humor Mr. Squirrel. I think most members of GS do. But I question what your motives are when you admit -- It almost seems (imo) that you might be posting some things that you dare them to delete. I confess I haven't taken the time to read yours (or anyone else's) posts there so I'm only going by what I'm reading here and this is the impression I'm getting. I wonder how many here might think it's a bit trollish.
  7. Let me see if I'm getting this correctly: Some of you are posting at a board that doesn't welcome your posts?
  8. What other forums are you referring to? I have yet to see someone actually post a link to the threads that JL participated on at GS. And obviously that point is -- Nope, ain't gonna happen but, if it amuses you do carry on. Perhaps it's his position that it's not very respectful of those who claim to be his supporters to be dissing him in public. He has made it known that those who (really) care about him are free to contact him via email or the phone. Or it could be that people whose agenda it is to attack him are not worth his time. I think his silence (assuming he's even aware of this thread) is comment enuf.
  9. Happy birthday Jeaniam! I don't have the wherewithal to include anything fancy so I hope this will suffice. Fifty isn't that bad. ;)
  10. If I understand you correctly, I would agree (born-again of incorruptible seed) but that argument wouldn't change a person's mind which functions on reason and logical conclusions. Therefore, even though we might think -- once a Christian, always a Christian -- in practicality that's simply not true.
  11. Ok. Thanks for the clarification. I wasn't sure that's what you meant.
  12. Excuse me for butting in but isn't this the same as saying pagans are evil -- just that they don't know it?
  13. Suda, this thread has been an interesting read. I've enjoyed (especially) reading your responses and analysis (?) of some of the responses. I could recommend a number of sites that might enlighten you on the subject of journeying from Christianity to Atheism. The responses here have been very good and seemingly helpful to you. This site might be of help as well. From a personal perspective -- if I had not spent a great deal of time on Atheist boards interacting with some wonderful atheists I may not have been able to handle my own son's journey from Christianity to atheism. Sometimes I wonder if God didn't lead me to those places to prepare my heart for his rejection of Christianity.
  14. :) That's always something to be joyous about -- even more so when your first grandchild arrives. I have six of them and they all melt my heart.
  15. A few days ago I finished reading Christian's book "The Secret Curse Surrenders". I wrote to him telling him how I judge a good read. I essentially told him it's when you pick one up and get slightly irritated when you get distracted and have to put it down. Another indication that you've read a good one is when you get to the end and are disappointed that there's not more (although at the very end of it there's about four blank pages -- maybe they're there for you to fill in). I highly recommend reading it.
  16. Dan, the email addy I use for this site is one I only check about once a week. The settings I have for my junk folder is set to delete all email after five days. Apparently, email coming from the GS server s considered "junk" (although topic reply notifications are not for some reason). Anyways, I never check my junk folder to see what's there -- until I saw your message. Seeing as how it's more than five days since you sent it I never saw it. Would you like to try again? I'll be looking at the folder now that I see what has happened. P.S. Thanks Paw.
  17. I checked her profile and it doesn't reflect any change. Now you could put this to rest by producing evidence that Mary Cate requested an ID change. Of course if you don't save that in your logs I guess you can't, can you?
  18. If that is true (and it may very well be so) then why does Mary Cate only show up as Up Yers when you try to download the thread in a different format than the original?
  19. Paw, you missed the point of what I posted above. It's not about PMs. Now since you went public with it why not afford me the courtesy of going public in defense of myself. In a previous post I told you that you could do the honest thing and close this thread IF you have no intention of giving me the opportunity to respond to the attacks I've been subjected to in this thread. If I was allowed to post this whole thread might have turned out differently. I did NOT know who the moderators were prior to this topic -- other than Kit Sober and I believe it was Modcat.
  20. Let me be sure I understand you correctly WW. Are you saying that what I'm saying here. . . . . . was speaking to you in an arrogant and condscending tone? P.S. AnotherDan says: "Yes, Larry, that is a condescending tone. Extremely." Your opinion is noted (and welcomed) Dan. Matter of fact I welcome anyone's opinion on it. What's that Bible verse say? "There is safety in the multitude of counselors." Or something like that. (Darn -- I'm really gonna have to brush up on my Bible reading -- I forget more the older I get). Nevertheless, Dan, I think I addressed a few comments your way and I'm puzzled why you chose to respond to this one (even though I thought I was addressing WordWolf) instead of the other posts sent your way. Oh well, lot's of things in life will remain a mystery -- I suppose. P.S.S. Belle says: "Wanna complain? Put your money where your mouth is." Good one Belle! I own and had operated a few boards. I never passed the "basket" for donations to support it for a very simple reason. People have the mistaken notion that when they give you their money they own you. NO THEY DON'T!!!! I find it ludicrous that you would even make such an argument. How much do you think I should give to buy my posting privileges back?
  21. They do have this or you could use this or you could just email me (to discuss my behavior) instead of trying to score some brownie points. Your choice. I always did find it odd that when I decided not to continue sharing my heart in your thread that you didn't bother to email me.
×
×
  • Create New...