Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Your lying aren't you? ... lairs gotta lie I guess ... I imagine your whole life is a lie ... your lifestyle ...
Your Lie-Style .. ha ha ha ha ...
That's funny, Donkey.You aren't here to question. You are here to subordinate.
Jackanapes don't make me angry. How could they? They have no peace or joy. I feel sorry for them because they are so unhappy.Fair enough, only there's no need for anger. Your own church created the issue that hangs around your neck like a dead albatross. They left it dangling without an explanation that can work and be understood by the flock. And now America threatens a split in your church, complete with filthy accusations against the Pope!
Direct your anger at those who have caused good solid literal believing Catholics so much pain.
It's not my reasoning. It's a well known fact. Time does not exist.Your reasoning is faulty. Yes time exists, because if the Universe was created, at that very instant it began to age. Theology attempts to rescue god's funky, non-existent ass from finitude. In reality, nothing escapes the coming of time.
Derrida's arche-writing (trace) is more original than god.
'Derrida first asserts that for something to happen, there must be both a chance and a threat. He then asserts that this double bind cannot even in principle be eliminated, since if nothing happened there would be nothing at all. What I want to stress is that this argument presupposes that being is essentially temporal (to be = to happen) and that it is inherently valuable that something happens (the worst = that nothing happens).
In other words, it presupposes that (temporal finitude is the condition for everything that is desirable [italics]). Metaphysical and religious traditions have readily admitted that nothing can happen in the ideal realm of eternity, but they have been able to dismiss this problem by not ascribing any inherent value to the temporal.
On the contrary, the most desirable has explicitly been posited as the immutable and the inviolable - in short, as that to which nothing can happen.
....
Rather, I will show that deconstructive notions such as "arche-writing" operate on an ultratranscendental level, which allows us to think the necessary synthesis to time without grounding it in a nontemporal unity.'
(Haegglund, Radical Atheism: Derrida and the Time of Life)
John of Patmos quilling deliriously away belies the becoming time of space and the becoming space of time.
'Kant here rehearses the problem that haunts his transcendental aesthetic, namely, that time as the form of inner sense cannot provide a ground for the subject. Since the temporal can never be in itself, it must be synthesized by something other than itself, in order to appear as such. No alteration - and hence no passage of time - can be marked without something that persists as a measure of the change.
....
Derrida can be said to radicalize the above account of time and space. For Derrida, time and space are not transcendental forms of human intuition, which would be given in the same way regardless of their empirical conditions. Rather, the ultratranscendental status of spacing deconstructs the traditional divide between the transcendental and the empirical.
If time must be spatially inscribed, then experience of time is essentially dependent on which material supports and technologies are available to inscribe time. That is why Derrida maintains that inscriptions do not befall an already constituted space but produce the spatiality of space. Derrida can thus think the experience of space and time as constituted by historical and technological conditions, without reducing spacing to an effect of a certain historical or technological epoch.
If spacing were merely an effect of historical conditions, it would supervene on something that precedes it and thus adhere to the metaphysical notion of spacing as a Fall. Spacing is rather an ultratranscendental condition because there has never been and will never be a self-presence that grounds the passage between past and future.
(Haegglund, Radical Atheism, pp. 26-7)
Yes, it is you. You are actively promoting the end of religion. You want it to go away. That's not questioning religion. That's subordinating religion. But it's funny that you hide from it. It's almost as if you know it is wrong. You should lean into it, Karl. Don't shy away from your true colors. Own them.That's funny, Donkey.
You might fall to the ground ass up but that's not me.
It's not my reasoning. It's a well known fact. Time does not exist.
Yes really. The only point you could argue is that religion has benefitted you on a very personal level. Overall religion has created division and hate, even to this day.Wow, really? I guess you only see the parts that confirm your bias. What could possibly go wrong going through life like that?
Yes really. The only point you could argue is that religion has benefitted you on a very personal level. Overall religion has created division and hate, even to this day.
Yes, it is you. You are actively promoting the end of religion. You want it to go away. That's not questioning religion. That's subordinating religion. But it's funny that you hide from it. It's almost as if you know it is wrong. You should lean into it, Karl. Don't shy away from your true colors. Own them.
Actively?
I am stating my opinion on religion.
Which by the way I have every right to do. You must long for the days when religions could execute people for speaking out against them.
You can't even admit what you are doing.Actively?
I am stating my opinion on religion.
Which by the way I have every right to do. You must long for the days when religions could execute people for speaking out against them.
In only one day - the worst day - of the French revolution this atheists executed more people than the Catholic church had excuted in 500 years. And I hope you are an enemy of death penalty - otherwise your opinion here would be only much more funny. Everyonhe knows for example the slogan "freedom, equality and brotherhood" from the French revolution - but nearly no one knows slogans of this time like: "Hang the last priest with the intestinals of the last noble".
I am stating an opinion just like you are.You can't even admit what you are doing.
You can't even be honest with yourself.I am stating an opinion just like you are.
It just happens to be one you disagree with and you are so thin skinned you take it as a personal attack
You can't even be honest with yourself.
I don't care if you agree with me. I only care that you are trying to subordinate religion.I am. You just can't accept that others may not agree with you.
it's called denial
I don't care if you agree with me. I only care that you are trying to subordinate religion.
There is no evidence that the French Revolution was an atheist movement.
The corrupt church aided the corrupt King in his subjugation of the people.
What a nonsense.
Many things are totally stupid in real history - and in a totally other way than most people thki they ahd been. In the Bastille fot example was no one on political reaoisns. The only exception had been Marquis de Sade. His famylily asked the king to arrest him because he had brought shame over the family deSade. And the prison guards there - who had been murdered - had indeed been only normal citizens of Parsi and former soldiers of France who got this easy job as a kind of pension.
www.historyhit.com
