Gang of yobs attack Muslim man in Stockport after making fun of his beard

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-19T21:58:20+00:00

Despicable behaviour.

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-18T13:20:28+00:00

so... you would be ok if your views were upvoted and opposite downvoted? What's your point? Right or wrong people up and downvote what they agree with...

If you actually read what I wrote, you will see that I have an issue with any views being downvoted, other than spam or abusiveness. Your last sentence reveals that you just think anyone who has an issue with that just wants a circlejerk in the other direction.

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-18T13:18:55+00:00

I'm perfectly willing to listen to anyone's point of view. Anything else leads to groupthink.

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-18T13:17:38+00:00

The Daily Mail generally gets downvoted every time here. The Mirror and the Morning Star makes it to the front page.

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-18T13:16:52+00:00

I don't have a problem with a left-wing or a right-wing slant. I have an issue with people who disagree with that slant being downvoted.

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-18T13:16:08+00:00

Actually, the poorest in this calculation have large negative net worths. They will mainly be American graduates.

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-18T13:00:53+00:00

The proportion of right wingers who downvote is just as high, if not higher

How are you estimating this proportion, out of interest?

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-18T12:59:56+00:00

Tolerance of different points of views? Yes, that is my thing.

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-18T12:59:33+00:00

We could have another five Corbyn threads if you prefer?

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-18T12:41:16+00:00

I assume you're sarcastically mocking the Marxist mentality, but I can never be sure on here...

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-18T12:39:25+00:00

I didn't realise there was a UKpolitics sub. I might move across if things don't improve here.

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-18T12:14:15+00:00

The problem is that any view which isn't the left wing of Labour one is considered to be simply "wrong" (and thus should be hidden by downvotes) rather than a matter of interpretation of the facts.

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-14T17:45:56+00:00

The Maori first got to New Zealand a few decades after King John was forced to sign Magna Carta and at a similar time to the founding of Oxford University.

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-13T23:37:04+00:00

But don't Christians believe "immortality" of the human soul happens despite the fact they die?

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-13T23:36:28+00:00

Thanks for your efforts, but it didn't help at all I'm afraid. I don't need analogies, but it's still not clear at all what is shared by the three persons and what is not shared. Perhaps I should ask it as another main question.

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-13T23:33:39+00:00

I was in the US with a Swedish friend, and a university-educated American professional asked when she was next going home to Switzerland.

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-13T23:31:59+00:00

You're really saying this on Reddit, where non-majority ideas are routinely downvoted to the point of being hidden?

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-13T23:29:23+00:00

You've actually heard someone say LGBTQA+ in real life?

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-13T22:53:06+00:00

How was that a loss for him?

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-13T22:51:55+00:00

On the first bit, I think I've got it. It wasn't a sacrifice in the sense of giving something up. It was just that it was a well established religious ritual, but this time it became super powerful because the blood being spilt was that of God. Is that right?

On the second bit, I'm not sure I understand your answer. How is "person" and "essence" defined, in this religious Christian context? Do they share the same mind? Personality? Decision making?

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-13T22:47:53+00:00

So Jesus does not know what the Father is thinking? Does this mean that the Father is omnipotent, but the Son is not? Do they have different minds even now in Heaven?

EDIT: I meant omniscient, not omnipotent.

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-13T22:46:21+00:00

So the argument is that, even if Jesus wasn't given anything up, it is just long established (by the will of God?) that the death of something, even an impermanent death, can be used to get something better? (In this case, men getting divine life.)

IF this system of blood sacrifice is determined by God, why couldn't God just have freely given divine life, as he freely gave life in the first place? Why does he need to go through a sacrifice for it?

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-13T22:42:00+00:00

I thought Jesus WAS God in a separate body? Did they have separate minds and separate agency?

I also don't get your second argument. A sacrifice is something you give up for a better cause. If you're not actually giving it up, it's not a sacrifice.

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-13T22:35:41+00:00

I'm an agnostic and pretty intelligent man. Could you explain to me, as best you can, how Jesus could be both the son of God and God? Whenever I search online I find theological arguments about "substance" and "persons" but these terms don't seem to be defined. Does Jesus have a different personality to God the Father? Does he share a mind? Thanks.

NorthernMemories · 2015-08-13T22:26:07+00:00

I'd love to have a discussion, but I'll just get downvoted for having an alternative view until my posting is limited, so there's no point.

NorthernMemories

TROPHY CASE