The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
While I was browsing the site you can find if you [URL]http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14510&page=2&pp=15[/URL] , I came across this interesting story.
Some people were arguing over which version of Taoism was the best (Taoism was an alternative to Buddhism in China) and also what was best out of Buddhism and Taoism (which was silly considering that they're both so similar and a proper Taoist/Buddhist wouldn't be bothered by who's belief is best...) and a guy came out with this analogy:
It's like in the old story of the blind guys all grabbing an elephant on a different part and then trying to describe to each other what an elephant really is based on the one part they have in their hands. One guy has an ear, one guy has the tail, one guy has the torso, one guy has a leg, another guy has a tusk. They all have a real part of the elephant, but they also all have completely different descriptions and end up getting mad and yelling at each other about what an elephant is really like. It isn't because they are stupid or wrong, it is because they can't see the rest of the elephant.
Taoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Judaism, you name it, they all have dozens, if not hundreds, of sects just because of "blindness" regarding their other parts. If you dig into the roots of the traditions you'll see that most of the founders of different religions all warned against this happening. But, people being who they are, everyone wants their part of the elephant to be the best one and don't give a monkey's (or an elephant's) butt about the other parts (if they even admit that other parts exist) and spend all day yelling about their own.
Do you think that God has revealed EVERYTHING there is to know about him in your Bible?
Even if you were to be right, that would not necessarily make over religions and beliefs wrong?
What do you think? :-)
Some people were arguing over which version of Taoism was the best (Taoism was an alternative to Buddhism in China) and also what was best out of Buddhism and Taoism (which was silly considering that they're both so similar and a proper Taoist/Buddhist wouldn't be bothered by who's belief is best...) and a guy came out with this analogy:
It's like in the old story of the blind guys all grabbing an elephant on a different part and then trying to describe to each other what an elephant really is based on the one part they have in their hands. One guy has an ear, one guy has the tail, one guy has the torso, one guy has a leg, another guy has a tusk. They all have a real part of the elephant, but they also all have completely different descriptions and end up getting mad and yelling at each other about what an elephant is really like. It isn't because they are stupid or wrong, it is because they can't see the rest of the elephant.
Taoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Judaism, you name it, they all have dozens, if not hundreds, of sects just because of "blindness" regarding their other parts. If you dig into the roots of the traditions you'll see that most of the founders of different religions all warned against this happening. But, people being who they are, everyone wants their part of the elephant to be the best one and don't give a monkey's (or an elephant's) butt about the other parts (if they even admit that other parts exist) and spend all day yelling about their own.
Do you think that God has revealed EVERYTHING there is to know about him in your Bible?
Even if you were to be right, that would not necessarily make over religions and beliefs wrong?
What do you think? :-)
Page:
Forest Fan wrote:
> Of course not Light, age difference is just a foreign concept to you.
Yup. Just as concepts such as "truth", "factual evidence", "courage", and "intelligence" are completely foreign to you dear boy.
Gonna answer the questions, or just continue to show what an arrogant and stupid little me-monkey you are?
> Of course not Light, age difference is just a foreign concept to you.
Yup. Just as concepts such as "truth", "factual evidence", "courage", and "intelligence" are completely foreign to you dear boy.
Gonna answer the questions, or just continue to show what an arrogant and stupid little me-monkey you are?
Pandaemonium wrote:
> Did it take you a long time to come up with such a wittily
> nonsensical retort?
Wouldn't quite call it 'witty', but I'll take it as a compliment.
> Did it take you a long time to come up with such a wittily
> nonsensical retort?
Wouldn't quite call it 'witty', but I'll take it as a compliment.
Forest Fan wrote:
> Of course not Light, age difference is just a foreign concept to you.
Did it take you a long time to come up with such a wittily nonsensical retort?
> Of course not Light, age difference is just a foreign concept to you.
Did it take you a long time to come up with such a wittily nonsensical retort?
Light wrote:
> Forest Fan wrote:
> Well, my 30 year old 'friend', I'll have to see how curious you've
> gotten today.
>
> Mwah ha ha ha haaaa! Unlike you dear boy, I'm not overly fussed about
> the age thing. So I'm afraid that, as an attempted insult, it falls
> flat.
Of course not Light, age difference is just a foreign concept to you.
> Forest Fan wrote:
> Well, my 30 year old 'friend', I'll have to see how curious you've
> gotten today.
>
> Mwah ha ha ha haaaa! Unlike you dear boy, I'm not overly fussed about
> the age thing. So I'm afraid that, as an attempted insult, it falls
> flat.
Of course not Light, age difference is just a foreign concept to you.
It's true though, because he's consistently failed to back up what he says with anything bar quotes from the actual book in question... which helps in no way at all.
Ah well.
Ah well.
Azul wrote:
> This whole thing has gone from "argue religion because it's
> rubbish" to "mock FF in as many ways as possible".
Well...kinda. In my case, I genuinely enjoy discussing religion. However, FF clearly knows next to nothing about religion outside of the bits and pieces he's collated to create a religion with a membership of 1 that makes him feel special. And I'm not a nice person, so I'm enjoying making it clear to him just how ignorant and egocentric he is.
>
> And it's quite funny.
Heh. Yeah, it is isn't it?
> This whole thing has gone from "argue religion because it's
> rubbish" to "mock FF in as many ways as possible".
Well...kinda. In my case, I genuinely enjoy discussing religion. However, FF clearly knows next to nothing about religion outside of the bits and pieces he's collated to create a religion with a membership of 1 that makes him feel special. And I'm not a nice person, so I'm enjoying making it clear to him just how ignorant and egocentric he is.
>
> And it's quite funny.
Heh. Yeah, it is isn't it?
Azul wrote:
> This whole thing has gone from "argue religion because it's
> rubbish" to "mock FF in as many ways as possible".
"mock FF in as many ways as possible"?
True, but only because he's started posting incredibly silly conspiracy theories as opposed to religion.
Regardless of who'd posted these theories, I'd point and laugh...........
> This whole thing has gone from "argue religion because it's
> rubbish" to "mock FF in as many ways as possible".
"mock FF in as many ways as possible"?
True, but only because he's started posting incredibly silly conspiracy theories as opposed to religion.
Regardless of who'd posted these theories, I'd point and laugh...........
This whole thing has gone from "argue religion because it's rubbish" to "mock FF in as many ways as possible".
And it's quite funny.
And it's quite funny.
Forest Fan wrote:
> Well, my 30 year old 'friend', I'll have to see how curious you've
> gotten today.
Mwah ha ha ha haaaa! Unlike you dear boy, I'm not overly fussed about the age thing. So I'm afraid that, as an attempted insult, it falls flat.
Stick with it if you like though; it's funny watching you degenerate from being a pious, holier than thou ignoramus to being a tetchy, arrogant, self-important prig with the attention span and IQ of the average mayfly.
C'mon you small and gutless whinger; I'd like you to start answering some questions.
> Well, my 30 year old 'friend', I'll have to see how curious you've
> gotten today.
Mwah ha ha ha haaaa! Unlike you dear boy, I'm not overly fussed about the age thing. So I'm afraid that, as an attempted insult, it falls flat.
Stick with it if you like though; it's funny watching you degenerate from being a pious, holier than thou ignoramus to being a tetchy, arrogant, self-important prig with the attention span and IQ of the average mayfly.
C'mon you small and gutless whinger; I'd like you to start answering some questions.
Well, my 30 year old 'friend', I'll have to see how curious you've gotten today.
Page: