Archive for nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Nglreturns is a forum to discuss religion, philosophy, ethics etc...

NGLReturns Daily Quiz - Play here!
 



       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Atheist chat
Judders Lady...

Rules for an atheist forum...

Do you think anything could be changed?

Quote:

(A).This is in essence a Mythicists forum and members here do not necessarily agree that a man or personage as Jesus Christ ever existed as personified by the Christian Bible.
(B). We do not hold the Bible as the inerrant word of God. Nor do we hold it infallible or without contradiction.
GENERAL RULES
(1). No flaming or personal attacks. Please refrain from name calling. If you have nothing of substance to add say nothing.
(2). Do not start post and abandon them. If the thread starter does not respond in a thread that he or she as created within 3 days the thread will be removed without warning.
(3). No one word responses. These will be removed with out warning.
(4). Back up your claims with sources primary or otherwise or don't expect any one to take you seriously.
(5). No great walls of text! Copying and pasting large amounts of text will be considered spamming and they will be removed. If your going to paste large amounts do it in separate posts! Most people will not take time to read a large amount of text and will only pick out what they feel they can defend.
(6). No preaching. Enough said.
(7). No hate related posts or comments or links to such material.
(8). No racial comments or slurs or links to racial related sites.
(9). NO TROLLS! Members are allowed only one account. You get caught you will cease to be a member of this board. You have been warned.
(10). OBEY COPYRIGHT!
(11). No warez, no links to illegal downloads.
(12). All spam will be dealt with quickly. Spam posts will be removed along with the spammer. You have been warned.


Love Lynne.xx
Dave B

Is this of your own invention or have you copied it from another place without honest attribution Judders?

If the former: you are qualified to your opinion but not to write any rules.
Dave B

PS

Is it the Judderman that we must look to the East for?
Judders Lady...

Dave B wrote:
Is this of your own invention or have you copied it from another place without honest attribution Judders?

If the former: you are qualified to your opinion but not to write any rules.


The title says "Rules for an atheist forum..." could it be rules for an atheist forum if no atheist forum existed?

Does it not appear as a quote in the post?


So what is your problem? The title says it is Rules for an atheist forum and the passage is quoted as a quote.

As for the writer he is an atheist and his forum is new.
Do not intend to give the name because I have peace and quiet there like my other forums. So hence the reason there is no forum name or the guy who wrote it. It is a new forum and I think he wants to keep it friendly. No offence meant but they can hardly behave themselves on this forum, can they?    

Love Lynne.xx

Dave B

Judders Lady... wrote:
Dave B wrote:
Is this of your own invention or have you copied it from another place without honest attribution Judders?

If the former: you are qualified to your opinion but not to write any rules.


The title says "Rules for an atheist forum..." could it be rules for an atheist forum if no atheist forum existed?

Does it not appear as a quote in the post?


So what is your problem? The title says it is Rules for an atheist forum and the passage is quoted as a quote.

As for the writer he is an atheist and his forum is new.
Do not intend to give the name because I have peace and quiet there like my other forums. So hence the reason there is no forum name or the guy who wrote it. It is a new forum and I think he wants to keep it friendly. No offence meant but they can hardly behave themselves on this forum, can they?    

Love Lynne.xx

Honest quotes have an attribution, the author or originating organisation deserves to be given the credit - basic good manners it seems to me. This also helps give it some credence - or otherwise.

As I intimated a God botherer would no more be qualified to create an atheist forum rules book (other than the common rules of good practice and manners in any forum) than I would be qualified to run a Bible class.
Judders Lady...

Dave B wrote:
PS

Is it the Judderman that we must look to the East for?


You choose!  
Judders Lady...

Dave B wrote:
Judders Lady... wrote:
Dave B wrote:
Is this of your own invention or have you copied it from another place without honest attribution Judders?

If the former: you are qualified to your opinion but not to write any rules.


The title says "Rules for an atheist forum..." could it be rules for an atheist forum if no atheist forum existed?

Does it not appear as a quote in the post?


So what is your problem? The title says it is Rules for an atheist forum and the passage is quoted as a quote.

As for the writer he is an atheist and his forum is new.
Do not intend to give the name because I have peace and quiet there like my other forums. So hence the reason there is no forum name or the guy who wrote it. It is a new forum and I think he wants to keep it friendly. No offence meant but they can hardly behave themselves on this forum, can they?    

Love Lynne.xx

Honest quotes have an attribution, the author or originating organisation deserves to be given the credit - basic good manners it seems to me. This also helps give it some credence - or otherwise.


I don't know if he did create it or borrowed it.
So how can I give him the credit?
Seems when you open a can of worms you need think about all the possibilities. There are so many forums and even Steve borrowed from Open House when he created this forum for his rules and regulations.
So I simply 'quoted' because I did not intend and was not interested in it's original writer. It is the rules themselves, I am referring to. The contents and not the poster. Seems easy enough to me.

Quote:

As I intimated a God botherer would no more be qualified to create an atheist forum rules book (other than the common rules of good practice and manners in any forum) than I would be qualified to run a Bible class.


But neither that forum or it's creator is being discussed here.
Neither is the author because we do not know who the author is?
So please keep on topic.

Love Lynne.xx
Dave B

To reiterate what you said to me on re: "What are you listening to..."

You are suppose to offer a link.

Or was this really all your own work ?
Judders Lady...

Dave B wrote:
To reiterate what you said to me on re: "What are you listening to..."

You are suppose to offer a link.

Or was this really all your own work ?


Question already answered. At least have the decency to actually read the posts.  

It is like singing WUM WUM WUM WUM to the Skol advert.

And you saying... I forgot the words, what are they again...                    
Dave B

Quote:
Question already answered.
Untrue, you imply that you lifted this off another site, what was the URL of that site please?
Judders Lady...

Judders Lady... wrote:
Dave B wrote:
Is this of your own invention or have you copied it from another place without honest attribution Judders?

If the former: you are qualified to your opinion but not to write any rules.


The title says "Rules for an atheist forum..." could it be rules for an atheist forum if no atheist forum existed?

Does it not appear as a quote in the post?


So what is your problem? The title says it is Rules for an atheist forum and the passage is quoted as a quote.

As for the writer he is an atheist and his forum is new.
Do not intend to give the name because I have peace and quiet there like my other forums. So hence the reason there is no forum name or the guy who wrote it. It is a new forum and I think he wants to keep it friendly. No offence meant but they can hardly behave themselves on this forum, can they?  
 

Love Lynne.xx



Already answered at 10.18am this morning...
As I said, read the forum posts.
Dave B

"Already answered at 10.18am this morning..."

Strange, I have posts at 1009 and 1134 with nothing between and no mention of a URL or link in any other post on this thread.
Judders Lady...

Quote:
Judders Lady...



Joined: 31 Mar 2009
Posts: 2814




PostPosted: Sun Apr 18, 2010 10:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post
Dave B wrote:
Is this of your own invention or have you copied it from another place without honest attribution Judders?

If the former: you are qualified to your opinion but not to write any rules.


The title says "Rules for an atheist forum..." could it be rules for an atheist forum if no atheist forum existed?

Does it not appear as a quote in the post?


So what is your problem? The title says it is Rules for an atheist forum and the passage is quoted as a quote.

As for the writer he is an atheist and his forum is new.
Do not intend to give the name because I have peace and quiet there like my other forums. So hence the reason there is no forum name or the guy who wrote it. It is a new forum and I think he wants to keep it friendly. No offence meant but they can hardly behave themselves on this forum, can they?    

Love Lynne.xx


_________________
Beware of the Judderman my dear, when the moon is fat. Especially when he has been tripping on LSD or his paranoid imagination... LOL"Look to my coming. At first light of the fifth day at dawn, look to the East."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message


I wrote it at 10.18 am and posted it at 10.40 here.
Had the 10.18 stuck in brain from copy.
However does not remove the fact you were answered and the post is there. Now for your next failed WUM...
Dave B

OK, I have the thread up on the other screen now, so I can refer to that and relay the info to this post without all the switching between

(Got a USB doofer that allows me to have another screen connected to the laptop and the ability to move or cut and paste between them - great for searching on or pasting from one whilst whilst writing on the other!)

Anyway:

Sat Apr 17, 2010 11:57 pm    Post subject: Rules for an atheist forum... - no link

Sun Apr 18, 2010 9:40 am - no link

Sun Apr 18, 2010 10:00 am - no link

Sun Apr 18, 2010 10:06 am - no link (you suggest this was because you were not interested in the original writer - hmmm, the authority of such things depends very much on the author; if it was so uninteresting to you why did you quote it? WUMming?

Sun Apr 18, 2010 11:34 am - no link, despite repeated request.

Sun Apr 18, 2010 11:54 am - no link

Sun Apr 18, 2010 1:00 pm - no link.
Quote:
I wrote it at 10.18 am and posted it at 10.40 here.
Er, 10.00, 10.06, 11.34? Nothing close to 10.40 - or were you quoting BST and you clock is a bit fast? I believe this forum runs on GMT, according to the little note bottomish right anyway - never bothered to check before myself.

Regardless, it is still good protocol and manners to offer the origin of any quotations, regardless of the purpose to which you put them. Otherwise how are we going to verify what you say is not an invention of your mind?
Dave B

(A).This is in essence a Mythicists forum and members here do not necessarily agree that a man or personage as Jesus Christ ever existed as personified by the Christian Bible.

Bit gobbledegookish, pretentious - you describe it as "atheist" Judders, looks more "Achristian" or "Abiblican" not the same thing as "atheist" - myths allow for gods.

(B). We do not hold the Bible as the inerrant word of God. Nor do we hold it infallible or without contradiction.

OK, Bible could be the errant word of God then.

GENERAL RULES
(1). No flaming or personal attacks. Please refrain from name calling. If you have nothing of substance to add say nothing.

This is OK providing there is enough collective intelligence there to have a good philosophical discussion - there are few like that that I have found, and most of them are almost purely academic rather than quotidian in their terms.

(2). Do not start post and abandon them. If the thread starter does not respond in a thread that he or she as created within 3 days the thread will be removed without warning.

Fair dos.


(3). No one word responses. These will be removed with out warning.

Hmm, if no qualification is required to answer some questions, "Yes" or "No" is perfectly adequate.

(4). Back up your claims with sources primary or otherwise or don't expect any one to take you seriously.

Take note

(5). No great walls of text! Copying and pasting large amounts of text will be considered spamming and they will be removed. If your going to paste large amounts do it in separate posts! Most people will not take time to read a large amount of text and will only pick out what they feel they can defend.

Yeah, great slabs of oft repeated blurb, ill-constructed or illiterate text and masses of quotation get really boring!

(6). No preaching. Enough said.

Hallelujah!

(7). No hate related posts or comments or links to such material.

Allowing for the use of such as examples?

(8). No racial comments or slurs or links to racial related sites.

As above?

(9). NO TROLLS! Members are allowed only one account. You get caught you will cease to be a member of this board. You have been warned.

Ditto sock puppets and clones.


(10). OBEY COPYRIGHT!

Yup

(11). No warez, no links to illegal downloads.

Don't be naughty!


(12). All spam will be dealt with quickly. Spam posts will be removed along with the spammer. You have been warned.

Fair enough again.
Judders Lady...

Judders Lady... wrote:
Dave B wrote:
Is this of your own invention or have you copied it from another place without honest attribution Judders?

If the former: you are qualified to your opinion but not to write any rules.


The title says "Rules for an atheist forum..." could it be rules for an atheist forum if no atheist forum existed?

Does it not appear as a quote in the post?


So what is your problem? The title says it is Rules for an atheist forum and the passage is quoted as a quote.

As for the writer he is an atheist and his forum is new.
Do not intend to give the name because I have peace and quiet there like my other forums. So hence the reason there is no forum name or the guy who wrote it. It is a new forum and I think he wants to keep it friendly. No offence meant but they can hardly behave themselves on this forum, can they?    

Love Lynne.xx



4th post down first page on this thread. So read it...
Dave B

OK, the specified post:

Quote:
The title says "Rules for an atheist forum..." could it be rules for an atheist forum if no atheist forum existed?
Your saying such is not proof in terms of any kind of debate.

Quote:
Does it not appear as a quote in the post?
Yes, but is that proof of its verity?


Quote:
So what is your problem? The title says it is Rules for an atheist forum and the passage is quoted as a quote.

See above.

Quote:
As for the writer he is an atheist and his forum is new.
Do not intend to give the name because I have peace and quiet there like my other forums.


Ah so you are posting on an atheist, sort of, forum? And is this the same "peace and quiet" you spread as "Sassy" on another forums, and was there not mention of you getting banned from yet another?

Quote:
So hence the reason there is no forum name or the guy who wrote it. It is a new forum and I think he wants to keep it friendly.
So, you project yet another persona on that platform then?

Quote:
No offence meant but they can hardly behave themselves on this forum, can they?
 They?


Chat rooms are for chat, forums can be for debate, discussion, argument even - which can be fun if done well. Nothing like a bit of controversy, contradiction and contention to get the old brain cells zinging! ("Old" being appropriate in my case.)
Dave B

Should have done this at the very beginning, but . . .

A Web dictionary offers this for "mythicism" (it does not appear in the Oxford word list):
Quote:
the attribution of supernatural events to mythological causes.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/mythicism

If you define an atheist, as all atheists I have ever met or read do, as one who does not believe in any form of supernatural force or agency but in the physical laws that determine the nature of the universe, then this site has nothing to do with atheism.

Thus this person has either a private definition (not a lot of use to the rest of the human race), is not an atheist and is running a forum for believers in the supernatural or does not know what he/she is talking about - in a private fantasy world of their own.

So, not rules for an atheist site then.
Pukon_the_Treen

Quote:
If you define an atheist, as all atheists I have ever met or read do, as one who does not believe in any form of supernatural force or agency but in the physical laws that determine the nature of the universe, then this site has nothing to do with atheism.


I think you are extrapolating too much from the word 'atheism' and implying a materialistic, naturalist world-view as well.  While this may generally be a safe bet, as far as I understand it, atheism just means you don't believe in god(s). Some types of Neopaganism and Buddhism do not have an idea of god(s) as part of their religion, but they still go in for stuff we would think of as mystical.
Dave B

This is the problem with the word "atheism" itself, even the ODoE defines the word as: "the theory or belief that God does not exist."

This is correct in the history of the way that the term has been used, the capitalisation of the deity implying only the Judeo-Christian-Islamic God in my mind.

However the Greek origin surely means "without gods", plural.

Perhaps one can ponder the nature of mysticism, some of it is "ritualisation" and that can be a practical method of setting down purely practical rules. The Japanese master sword makers have complex rituals, involving mystical elements, that are part of the "procedure" for getting the process of the making of the sword correct.

Ritual and ceremony can be very useful in this way. Though there was no apparent mysticism involved one of the analystical chemists at work was meticulous, even obsessive,  in his methodology. Every day his samples and reagents had to be placed exactly SO on the bench. He would mumble his "incantations" under his breath as he carried out the same test for the hundredth time on a slightly different formulation - itself prepared with much ceremony.

Thus this chap retained the "purity" of his work, ensured that the result, every single time, would be as accurate as the human mind and body can make it.

As I said, from my observations of forums and reading a few books over the years, "atheism", as interpreted by most is a label for those who do not believe in the supernatural. Whether such a belief and the acceptance of the spiritual or mystical is a subject for years of (often cyclic) debate!

Perhaps "atheism" has become a bit of a misnomer - I declare my self a "physicalist"! A true believer that the laws of physics, and only the laws of physics, determine the nature of the Universe (and of the life within it).

I will have to qualify this by saying that chemistry, biology etc. are only special sub-applications of physics in the respect that the physics of the atoms and molecules are involved with all such processes.
Judders Lady...

Dave B wrote:
Should have done this at the very beginning, but . . .

A Web dictionary offers this for "mythicism" (it does not appear in the Oxford word list):
Quote:
the attribution of supernatural events to mythological causes.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/mythicism

If you define an atheist, as all atheists I have ever met or read do, as one who does not believe in any form of supernatural force or agency but in the physical laws that determine the nature of the universe, then this site has nothing to do with atheism.

Thus this person has either a private definition (not a lot of use to the rest of the human race), is not an atheist and is running a forum for believers in the supernatural or does not know what he/she is talking about - in a private fantasy world of their own.

So, not rules for an atheist site then.


Dave B,

Can you explain what mythicism has to do with the rules for an atheists forum?

I see nothing about mythicism in them?

Also atheists refer to mythcisim as a reason not to believe.
So I am unable to see the logical reason given the posts on this thread
as to why you make the above statement.

Would you elaborate on your reasons...

Love Lynne.xx  
Dave B

From your original post:
Quote:
(A).This is in essence a Mythicists forum and members here do not necessarily agree that a man or personage as Jesus Christ ever existed as personified by the Christian Bible.


As I have said before, even as an atheist, I have no problem with accepting that a special kind of person lived and taught during the 1st century CE. In this I can agree with the above in that the Bible account, NT, is a good job of PR tailored to the belief systems and the understanding of the world as it existed then.

Mythicists, as in Rule A above, so far as I can find out, from what definitions and descriptions there are, happily accept the supernatural.

Looking further at that rule it would seem that the forum is also open to those who do believe in the Biblical account of Jesus' life and attributes - thus it is more of an "open" forum, within any limits implied by the acceptance of the supernatural. It may be an "atheist" forum if it denies the existence of the Abrahamic God, the very narrowest use of the word not allowing for its original meaning.
Judders Lady...

[quote="Dave B"]From your original post:
Quote:
(A).This is in essence a Mythicists forum and members here do not necessarily agree that a man or personage as Jesus Christ ever existed as personified by the Christian Bible.


What does it mean to be 'in essence' someone who believes all religions came down from myths and not supernatural powers and beings?
In fact he gives his type of mythicist in essence being this belief that Jesus Christ was not real. So the rules can be seen as those of an atheist forum. Why? They do not believe in any god, supernatural power or beings. But believe all faiths came for myths.
Quote:

As I have said before, even as an atheist, I have no problem with accepting that a special kind of person lived and taught during the 1st century CE. In this I can agree with the above in that the Bible account, NT, is a good job of PR tailored to the belief systems and the understanding of the world as it existed then.


Again, is religion or mythicism about one religion or god?
Quote:


Mythicists, as in Rule A above, so far as I can find out, from what definitions and descriptions there are, happily accept the supernatural.


As they deny any truth in the supernatural birth, death, resurrection or even person of Jesus Christ. What supernatural belief would they believe in?

Quote:


Looking further at that rule it would seem that the forum is also open to those who do believe in the Biblical account of Jesus' life and attributes - thus it is more of an "open" forum, within any limits implied by the acceptance of the supernatural. It may be an "atheist" forum if it denies the existence of the Abrahamic God, the very narrowest use of the word not allowing for its original meaning.


Again, if it was an open forum they would hardly be saying " No Preaching" would they? People would not be able to discuss the things of Christ. "I am happy as long as Christ is preached."

Love Lynne.xx
Dave B

[quote="Judders Lady..."][quote="Dave B"]From your original post:
Quote:
(A).This is in essence a Mythicists forum and members here do not necessarily agree that a man or personage as Jesus Christ ever existed as personified by the Christian Bible.


Judders Lady... wrote:
What does it mean to be 'in essence' someone who believes all religions came down from myths and not supernatural powers and beings?


As I said before, this rule is a bit gobbledegookish, if the author has a private meaning for "mythicist" that does not appear to be available elsewhere then he/she should define the word in this rule. Thus all potential members will know what they are getting into.

Judders Lady... wrote:
In fact he gives his type of mythicist in essence being this belief that Jesus Christ was not real.


He offers "members here do not necessarily agree that a man or personage as Jesus Christ ever existed as personified by the Christian Bible". OK, this is Jesus Christ and I was talking of Jesus - there is a difference. He could be implying that Jesus did exist, but not (necessarily) Jesus Christ - I will go along with that.

Judders Lady... wrote:
So the rules can be seen as those of an atheist forum. Why? They do not believe in any god, supernatural power or beings. But believe all faiths came for myths.


We come down to what "mythicism" means then, once again he/she needs to define this if it is not meant to comply with the definitions available. Or, even better, stop using pretentious words and just explain things in everyday terms so that there can be no misunderstanding.

Quote:

As I have said before, even as an atheist, I have no problem with accepting that a special kind of person lived and taught during the 1st century CE. In this I can agree with the above in that the Bible account, NT, is a good job of PR tailored to the belief systems and the understanding of the world as it existed then.


Again, is religion or mythicism about one religion or god? What has that to do with what I said above? Of course it is not, but that religion includes a plethora of gods and myths over the whole of history and the geographical world just goes to show that the chances are that not one of them has any real meaning.

Quote:

Mythicists, as in Rule A above, so far as I can find out, from what definitions and descriptions there are, happily accept the supernatural.


Judders Lady... wrote:
As they deny any truth in the supernatural birth, death, resurrection or even person of Jesus Christ. What supernatural belief would they believe in?


Here we go again: by the available definitions of "mythicism" belief in the supernatural is implicit. Is the originator of this site using that private definition, in a fantasy world of his.her own or just partially illiterate?

Quote:
Looking further at that rule it would seem that the forum is also open to those who do believe in the Biblical account of Jesus' life and attributes - thus it is more of an "open" forum, within any limits implied by the acceptance of the supernatural. It may be an "atheist" forum if it denies the existence of the Abrahamic God, the very narrowest use of the word not allowing for its original meaning.


Judders Lady... wrote:
Again, if it was an open forum they would hardly be saying " No Preaching" would they? People would not be able to discuss the things of Christ. "I am happy as long as Christ is preached."


OK, he/she seems to accept that some may believe in Christ and others not - but all seem welcome. Thus - "open" in that limited sense; not restricted to those who completely deny the existence of God ("atheists") and, therefore, the impossibility of "Christ" as a son of that deity.

       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Atheist chat
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum