Why The Christian's Laughter Is Full Of Pain

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:35 am

spot;495524 wrote: James, does "obscene predatory pig of cosmic proportions within whose endless fatty folds and rancid recesses" come solely from a cerebral consideration of the nature of the world, or are you reacting to past events in your own life? I've asked before but you invariably tune out the question.
Yup. I called it his fear, and got the same reaction, but we're definitely on the same wavelength here.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:36 am

Diuretic;495606 wrote: It was the flowery insult koan, put me in mind of dear old AC himself. However your point is taken.

Who're you callin' old?? :yh_frustr

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 10:50 am

koan;495605 wrote: Crowley advanced metaphysics by Superman proportions

Could you give an example of how Crowley advanced metaphysics, koan?

koan · Post by **koan** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 10:55 am

Glaswegian;495753 wrote: Could you give an example of how Crowley advanced metaphysics, koan?

Yep. Go read all the literature from the OTO.

I get so tired of people asking me to do their work for them. :rolleyes:

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 12:46 pm

Glaswegian wrote: Could you give an example of how Crowley advanced metaphysics, koan?
koan;495756 wrote: Yep. Go read all the literature from the OTO.

I have read a range of literature of the Ordo Templi Orientis and there is nothing in it which can be construed as having advanced metaphysics in any way. But perhaps I hold this view because I haven't read all the literature produced by the O.T.O. Maybe you have, koan? In that case, it must be very easy for you to provide an example of how the literature produced by this occult society has contributed to the advancement of metaphysics. Surely you can provide just one example from Crowley's writings to back up the claim you made about him in your earlier post, koan?

koan · Post by **koan** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 12:48 pm

Glaswegian;495875 wrote: I have read a range of literature of the Ordo Templi Orientis and there is nothing in it which can be construed as having advanced metaphysics in any way. But perhaps I hold this view because I haven't read all the literature produced by the O.T.O. Maybe you have, koan? In that case, it must be very easy for you to provide an example of how the literature produced by this occult society has contributed to the advancement of metaphysics. Surely you can provide just one example from Crowley's writings to back up the claim you made about him in your earlier post, koan?

Correcting the order of the major arcana.

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:01 pm

koan;495877 wrote: Correcting the order of the major arcana.
Oh please stop it, koan! Now you're being absolutely hilarious. You just kill me. You really are too much.

koan · Post by **koan** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:05 pm

Glaswegian;495891 wrote: Oh please stop it, koan! Now you're being absolutely hilarious. You just kill me. You really are too much.

That's a pleasant thought. :-6

koan · Post by **koan** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:08 pm

Glaswegian;495875 wrote: I have read a range of literature of the Ordo Templi Orientis and there is nothing in it which can be construed as having advanced metaphysics in any way. But perhaps I hold this view because I haven't read all the literature produced by the O.T.O.

You sound as though you know what you are talking about. How many paths have you traveled?

Surely, if you were working the qabbalah, you'd understand why the assignations are important.

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:34 pm

koan;495899 wrote: You sound as though you know what you are talking about. How many paths have you traveled?

Surely, if you were working the qabbalah, you'd understand why the assignations are important.

I bet you have a tatoo of Shirley MacLaine on your left buttock (next to the one of Charlton Heston). Right, koan?

koan · Post by **koan** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:36 pm

Glaswegian;495927 wrote: I bet you have a tatoo of Shirley MacLaine on your left buttock (next to the one of Charlton Heston). Right, koan?

I'm not surprised you wondered. :rolleyes:

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:44 pm

If Christian laughter is full of pain it is so because we feel pain for all those who are among the needy, downtrodden, impoverished in both spirit and body. The pain is not for us but for them. As Christians when we see anyone in pain we too feel the pain.

Other than that Christians are a happy and contented lot.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 2:22 pm

Ted;495934 wrote: If Christian laughter is full of pain it is so because we feel pain for all those who are among the needy, downtrodden, impoverished in both spirit and body. The pain is not for us but for them. As Christians when we see anyone in pain we too feel the pain.

Other than that Christians are a happy and contented lot.

Shalom

Ted:-6
Are you saying you feel for ol' Glassy?

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 3:14 pm

Accountable:-6

If any human is in pain Christians feel that pain as well. Right now, even though I don't agree with Castro, I am sorry that he is so ill. Ol Glassy would appear to be in pain and for that I am sorry.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 3:16 pm

Merry Christmas, Ted. :-6

koan · Post by **koan** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 3:17 pm

This thread needs a few good laughs

Now - which ones are the Christians?... who cares? Laughter is contagious.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 3:22 pm

koan:-6

You are so correct on that one.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Dec 24, 2006 3:28 pm

As part of the Christmas spirit I wish everyone here and their families a very merry Christmas and a happy new year.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 3:26 am

Diuretic;496278 wrote: I think I was right the first time, sounds like something old Aleister might ask

You are probably aware, Diuretic, that Aleister Crowley took great pleasure in flouting various moral and social conventions. For example, when Crowley visited the home of an acquaintance (or even a complete stranger) it was not unknown for him to drop his trousers and proceed to defecate onto the living-room carpet in full view of whoever happened to be present. He did this without any compunction or shame whatsoever. Regarding this kind of crass behaviour, it should be fairly obvious to an impartial observer in the Forum Garden that Crowley was produced from the same mould as Ted.

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 5:51 am

Diuretic;496397 wrote: Ted has manners and is not a nutter

No, Diuretic. You couldn't be more wrong. You only think that about Ted because he has fooled you (and many others in this forum). But I will reveal the true face of Ted to the world very shortly....

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 6:28 am

Glaswegian;496370 wrote: Regarding this kind of crass behaviour, it should be fairly obvious to an impartial observer in the Forum Garden that Crowley was produced from the same mould as Ted.
And just where is this impartial observer you've been corresponding with?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 6:31 am

Glaswegian;496409 wrote: No, Diuretic. You couldn't be more wrong. You only think that about Ted because he has fooled you (and many others in this forum). But I will reveal the true face of Ted to the world very shortly....
OOOooooo ! Such drama! :yh_eyerol :yh_eyebro

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 6:35 am

Diuretic;496397 wrote: Au contraire mon ami G - Ted has manners and is not a nutter

Yup. Ted & I have had disagreements in the past, but he is definitely well-mannered.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 6:40 am

Allow me to wish everyone here a very Merry Christmas.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 6:41 am

Christmas, the traditional day to celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ, the Messiah.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 6:45 am

... and allowed us to laugh painfully all the way to Heaven. :yh_rotfl :yh_dance

koan · Post by **koan** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 6:48 am

I'd have to say that, in the case of this thread, the reason Christians have pained laughter is because of Glaswegian and his ilk.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 7:46 am

The search engine doesn't do phrases, only keywords. Start a new thread!

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Mon Dec 25, 2006 2:03 pm

Diuretic;496478 wrote: On edit: - Apologies that just occurred to me and I gave way to impulse. It's just that koan's last post made me think of that.

I know, I know - jeez you should have seen my Rohrsach results.....

What did you edit out of your post, Diuretic?

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Tue Dec 26, 2006 11:48 am

Having not read Ol Glassyeyes comments concerning myself all I have to say to him is:

:-6 :-6 :-6

The comments of others are interesting though.

I do hope that satisfies the rules about images. LOL

Shalom

Ted:-6

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Tue Dec 26, 2006 3:15 pm

Ted;497390 wrote: Having not read Ol Glassyeyes comments concerning myself all I have to say to him is:

:-6 :-6 :-6
Nervous are you, Ted? I know. I can feel the worm turning in you as well....

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Dec 26, 2006 6:17 pm

Glaswegian;497478 wrote: Nervous are you, Ted? I know. I can feel the worm turning in you as well....
Time to step back, Glas. We don't cotton to personal attacks in these here parts. *spit* *ting!*

guppy · Post by **guppy** » Tue Dec 26, 2006 6:20 pm

Accountable;497662 wrote: Time to step back, Glas. We don't cotton to personal attacks in these here parts. *spit* *ting!*

i second this....no personal attacks....play nice......or go play somewhere else......

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Tue Dec 26, 2006 7:05 pm

guppy;497666 wrote: i second this....no personal attacks....play nice......or go play somewhere else......
I have to be cruel to be kind, guppy.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Tue Dec 26, 2006 7:12 pm

Glaswegian;497692 wrote: I have to be cruel to be kind, guppy.
We've had enough .... kindness ... for awhile.

Glaswegian · Post by **Glaswegian** » Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:45 pm

Ted;495934 wrote: If Christian laughter is full of pain it is so because we feel pain for all those who are among the needy, downtrodden, impoverished in both spirit and body. The pain is not for us but for them. As Christians when we see anyone in pain we too feel the pain.
The above is a typical example of the sterile religious hum-bug which you routinely post in this forum, Ted. The use of the word 'sterile' in the preceding sentence is appropriate because your posts are so sanitised, aren't they? I have always been struck by how carefully washed your posts are. But here's the odd thing I find about reading your well-scrubbed posts. Whenever I read them tiny alarm bells start ringing inside of me. (I refer to these invaluable little bells in the opening post of this thread. But you wouldn't know that since you claim not to have read the OP. And you wouldn't lie about not having read it, Ted, would you? Being a Christian and all that.)

Perhaps there are other members of this forum who, like me, have wondered why your posts are so carefully washed, sanitised and well-scrubbed and why it is so important for you to come across in your posts as ever so innocuous, ever so genial, ever so considerate and oh so, so, so selfless and nice. It is important for you to come across in this way, isn't it Ted? After all, why else would you devote so much care and attention to ensuring that your posts appear so consistently and conspicuously sweet?

Perhaps, like me, other forum members have found that there is something about your posts - and you in them - which is discordant. Something which doesn't ring quite true, something which doesn't quite meet the eye, something which doesn't seem quite right...something suspect. Perhaps these individuals banish the feeling of suspicion that they have about you on reading your posts the moment they become aware of it because it makes them slightly uncomfortable. Perhaps they do this because recognising this suspicion fully for what it is would mean having to admit something painful about themselves as well. Perhaps they're content just to let the feeling of suspicion they have about you lurk quietly in the remotest corner of their bones where it won't bother them too much. Perhaps those members of the forum who are honest enough to clearly acknowledge the feeling of suspicion they have about you are unwilling to express it publicly because they fear that in doing so they might upset the cosy little atmosphere of the forum and thereby meet with disapproval from other members. Perhaps in these and other ways it is more convenient for them to overlook the uneasy presentiment they have about you, Ted.

If there are, indeed, others here who think as I do that the image of yourself which you present to this forum is a false image - that there is something phony and contrived about it, that it is just too obsequious and sugary sweet to be true, that it is actually a mask which you have devised in order to conceal something unwholesome about yourself - then they are completely right to think this. Before I set out the reasons why this is the case - why the persona which you present to this forum is a thoroughly dishonest one and why you are driven to hide behind it - let me first ask you a question....

(Post Continued Below)

Post by **spot** » Wed Dec 27, 2006 12:35 am

Glaswegian;497478 wrote: Nervous are you, Ted? I know. I can feel the worm turning in you as well....It's just occurred to me for the first time in weeks, reading this, that James actually thinks some of us sit and read the bolded-underlined-italicized posts. James, it doesn't work like that. Either you write in English and rely on punctuation for emphatics, or you get skipped. Either you write interesting material or, after several failed posts, you get skipped anyway on the grounds that a page of boredom isn't worth the effort. Either you write politely or, after several failed posts, you get skipped anyway on the grounds that a page of nastiness is just depressing. You're the only three-way failure on ForumGarden, at least I stick to punctuation.