Jump to content

wynken vanaril

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by wynken vanaril

  1. The inhabitants of this realm seem to know me by the name of Wynken, though I recall naught of them. The torn pages of this journal are illegible. The writing is my own but I have no memory of it, and this sword chills me to the core though I dare not part from it. Such a twisted and ugly weapon would be considered unusable by most but I feel as if it is an extension of myself, and I wield it with power and precision. So angering that I struggle to know who or where I was one year ago but recount vividly the distant past that has made me who I am today. Those harsh realities, lessons well
  2. How tenable reality and how fragile the mind that, in a moment, all perceived truth could be admonished; that one could find themselves in a dream world, plagued by reveries and memories of events that had never transpired, or simply awake without any recollections at all, but now my past is once again made clear to me and I am myself. All that remains of my former self are the tattered scraps of some rambled writing and this tarnished sword.
  3. [quote name='Tarquinus' post='19488' date='Nov 4 2008, 10:01 PM']I don't think altruism is the source of moral behavior - I would call it the most qualifiable expression of moral behavior. As you know, I think its roots are biological.[/quote] What are your thoughts on morality? I don't know that we've established exactly what you believe other than your disdain for objectivism. [quote]As for the Levites - uh, they became the priestly class. See [url="http://bible.cc/joshua/13-33.htm"]Joshua 13:33[/url]. Red line to God? Sounds more valuable than material wealth to me, and it did to
  4. [quote name='Tarquinus' post='19474' date='Nov 4 2008, 11:56 AM']What is the use of morality that does not take into account altruism?[/quote] Does any moral system really claim that altruism is the source of moral behavior? [quote]I don't hold Israel liable; I hold the Deuteronomist and Priestly writers, and you and every other victim of their propaganda, culpable for asserting "Oh, never mind, there was really only one god. Sorry." The evolution of monotheistic practice is almost certainly a cultural rather than an objective phenomenon, and I will continue to argue that the only thing
  5. I'm sorry. I misunderstood you, and we're arguing semantics. I thought you meant that only Israelites as a race of people could receive God's grace. Anyway, we've strayed far from the original topic anyway and should probably have had this conversation in the "Religion Thread".
  6. [quote]It's ironic that you should bring up Objectivism, a philosophy I never tire of running into the dirt.[/quote] I also loath Randian Objectivism. I was just trying to emphasize the point that altruism and morals are not the same. [quote]So it matters to you that the Samaritan actually existed? Why? You can't prove a single word of truth in the Book, not one*; you can only say that the Book says so and insist it must be true. That's called begging the question, brother. In my view, that demeans the wisdom of the myths.[/quote] I don't see how a factual account of actual events carrie
  7. [quote name='lightsage' post='19416' date='Nov 3 2008, 10:09 AM']another topic eh? Let's say religion is relative for it's a relative truth...[/quote] You lost me at relative. Care to elaborate?
  8. ^ I take no offense, however in my defense, I typically reference only Christianity because it's what I believe to be truth. Also, my knowledge of other religions is nowhere near as expansive as my knowledge of Christian doctrine, and it is wise to speak only on topics that you know, hence my apparent bias. I have nothing against other religions, which is why I didn't opt for a "Christianity Thread". I just tend to debate and theorize within my area of expertise, as we all do or should. Another reason that Christianity gets the most mention is that the Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Ch
  9. In regards to that article, altruism and moral behavior are not necessarily one and the same. You can act both morally and selfishly at the same time. In fact, capitalism and Randian Objectivism are founded on just that ability, and free markets obviously work very well. While I generally oppose utilitarianism on the grounds that the ends don't always justify the means, I don't see any harm in doing good because it's our creator's will and plan for human existence. [quote name='Tarquinus' post='19111' date='Oct 28 2008, 10:07 PM']By contrast, the answer "a being of infinite complexity
  10. [quote name='Tarquinus' post='18960' date='Oct 27 2008, 02:50 PM']I don't follow you. There is no evidence for a god.[/quote] False. It just isn't empirical. [quote]That is an elementary apologetic argument, and it is easily dismissed. The answer to the question "from what" is, at the moment, "we don't know," but we have some ideas. That's beside the point: as scientists, those who study Physics make no claims to complete understanding. Science requires doubt to be worthwhile. I am not making a single statement of faith, not a one. I am simply saying there is no reason whatsoever t
  11. [quote name='Tarquinus' post='18960' date='Oct 27 2008, 02:50 PM']Easy there, killer. I apologize - it's a manner of speaking. You have my respect, and you ought to know it. I am expressing my frustration, that's all.[/quote] I'll respond to the rest of this as soon as I get a chance, but I did want to say that I was also merely doing a bit of venting of my own. I appreciate the respect and you have mine as well. I mostly wanted to take the opportunity to air some of my own intentions. I have been labeled arrogant and pretentious on other forums in the past, and I'd like to avoid such a
  12. [quote name='Tarquinus' post='18934' date='Oct 26 2008, 06:40 PM']You're the one who keeps falling back on 'free will' when the absurdity of omnibenevolence is held up for scrutiny. If there were such a being, and if she were to create the laws of Physics as we understand them, then it follows logically that we could come to our own conclusions if she did not go to great pains to establish her own existence beyond reasonable doubt, which she clearly has not done.[/quote] We sure could, but in keeping with free will, influence is not the same as control. It just seems to me that such a being
  13. [quote name='Tarquinus' post='18895' date='Oct 25 2008, 10:09 PM']If you mean the entire Olympian pantheon, sure, I'll give you that one... but Greek mythology goes back further into prehistoric religions.[/quote] The implication of this is that God put forth the effort to create a universe that would foster intelligent life and then allow those beings to ignore or forget altogether His divine existence. It seems unlikely. [quote]To use your definition or criterion of god, then, I would have to argue that from a historical perspective, such a thing is only as old as human awareness of the
  14. [quote name='Tarquinus' post='18819' date='Oct 24 2008, 01:41 AM']I would ask which God you think is the authentic one, but you have made your bias plain enough. Hail Zeus![/quote] This one's easy. The only gods that could have possibly facilitated the creation of the universe are those that are not at all bound by any of its laws including time. That eliminates the entire greek pantheon, and you'll find that it really only leaves a small handful (maybe 2) gods that have been recorded throughout our history. The FSM fails in this regard considering that it had the capacity for drunkenn
  15. [quote name='TheNinjunny' post='18802' date='Oct 22 2008, 09:45 PM']I can't say I've used the Mock feature much, but I'm surprised to hear there is some in there *makes a mental note to check that...* While It might be Nice to have some new Chat features, it will be pretty unlikely that they will be done anytime soon. Besides using the *s (or whatever works for you) to denote an action works well enough for any role play that might come up. and wynken, there is a system in place for these commands already, you have to unlock the code from the MD Shop though...[/quote] I just uncovered t
  16. Are you talking physically or conceptually? Probably more brain matter and more neurons. However, I believe that the mind is immensely powerful. Frostbite and hypothermia are caused by the mind ceasing blood flow through various portions of the body in order to preserve the heart and brain. Psychosomatic responses (such as hypochondria or Munchausen syndrome) are sometimes powerful enough to actually manifest physical trauma to the body. Basically, if your mind believes that you are sick...you will be. There are people who can withstand extreme heat or cold merely through willpower e
  17. [quote name='sanguinious' post='18772' date='Oct 22 2008, 11:26 AM']well ,I heard(from someone I cant remember) the universe was all linked together by a sort off ,mesh of energy we cant see, and ghosts and spirits are just this energy that has somehow grown so dense in a particular area that we can see it or it disturbs the physical realm[/quote] Sounds like metaphysics to me. I think Carl Jung delved into weird stuff like that, as did Drunvalo Melchizedek. It's actually quite interesting if you research it. It has a great deal to do with sacred geometry, and something referred to as Chri
  18. It could be set up like a MUD, having a character that signifies an emote action. Something like :bow would look like "Wynken bows to everyone in the room" And :bow Tiberius would display "Wynken bows to Tiberius".
  19. Part 2: There are many passages in the Bible that deal with slavery. It doesn’t outright condone it, but it doesn’t condemn it either. My argument is that Israel actually had very progressive and revolutionary laws and rights reserved for slavery, which was very entrenched in the social system and remained so throughout the Middle Ages. Slavery then was much like the peon of the feudal caste system. It was a legitimate occupation and a way to repay a debt. People would often sell themselves to slavery. All slaves in Israel had not only human rights, but spiritual rights as well. Alt
  20. Since it's a little slow going around here, I figured I'd post something that I blogged on another forum. I would commonly use blogs as a resource for myself so I didn't have to continuously repeat common arguments. Enjoy... __________________ This blog is more of a resource for myself. As many of you know, I spend a great deal of time in the Religion Thread where I am frequently asked to repeat past arguments on common points of interest. [size=4][b]Preface:[/b][/size] Some of these points will likely presuppose some of the arguments I've already made in my blog about God Paradoxes
  21. [quote name='sanguinious' post='18635' date='Oct 19 2008, 06:24 AM']i am strongly against the idea of god but ghosts may possible, but not in the way we think them as[/quote] Care to back either claim up?
  22. Wynken found himself standing once again in the Indexed Room. Feeling that he had completed his physical journey, his mind now also arrived at the realization that he didn't know why he had come. Nevertheless Wynken felt that he was there for a reason and so until that reason became clear, Wynken decided to again peruse the great collection of writings. He thought to begin where he had left off and move to the location of the enchanted book from his previous visit, but as he moved, someone entered the hall from the back room. Wynken quickly identified the man as an archivist, and one that
  23. As Wynken finished his writings and stood from his place on the stair, something caught his attention. The light which poured in to the Totem's entrance had moved! It now stretched its way deeper in to the anteroom that comprised the first story and had begun to creep up the back wall. When shadows and beams of light are as stationary as they were in the recent past, they become permanent fixtures, almost landmarks, as if part of nature or the architecture of buildings. Wynken would have been no more surprised had the door or the staircase moved to an opposite place within the Totem. Stil
  24. I enjoy bringing this up because it puts closed minded atheists off balance, but anyone who would argue in favor of modern physics must concede that the supernatural exists. By definition, supernatural pertains to anything beyond nature, and nature defines only what is within our universe. By virtue of the Big Bang theory, the universe had a beginning, which means that we must conclude that something existed and very likely still exists beyond our universe. It's basically the cosmological argument...but certainly proves the existence of the "supernatural". Also, another point that's
  25. [quote name='Frosty' post='18439' date='Oct 14 2008, 03:36 PM']Ok if you want to have a debate, start another topic. Otherwise I will be forced to lock this one[/quote] I don't want to debate here...I wanted another forum created in the university so that we could have a proper place to debate.
  • Create New...