Lockjaw Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 You can practice meditation without the religious aspect. Buddhism is a path to a particular goal, meditation is one element of that path and can be easily utilized independently from it (obviously I would say the 'whole package' is more beneficial though). I would be more than happy to meet up with you, could make a night of it and take a couple of guitars and intermingle chat with a bit of a jam. Defo. Sometime over the summer holiday would be ideal for me... Now then, could you do me a little favour and stick and r in "particularly" in the quote of my post in yours? (Sad, I know!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Defo. Sometime over the summer holiday would be ideal for me... Now then, could you do me a little favour and stick and r in "particularly" in the quote of my post in yours? (Sad, I know!) Done, on both counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 What made you come to that conclusion? Don't hold your breath Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 Ah Fisky my old friend. On a different thread I asked you some questions which you avoided, and avoided, and then claimed you didn't have much time and this was the reason you hadn't addressed them and you would do so in the future. Well seen as you're back, and as it's a totally appropriate thread to repost the questions on would you mind answering these little gems for me? PR- I did give explanations that I could and feel my answers were sufficient- if these were not to your satisfaction, then so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted May 11, 2013 Share Posted May 11, 2013 PR- I did give explanations that I could and feel my answers were sufficient- if these were not to your satisfaction, then so be it. Actually I owe you an apology, you did answer. What you said you didn't have time to answer were not the questions but my response to them, which you said you would reply to at a later date. So as this is said later date would you mind replying to the points I made? Btw I am genuinely sorry for my mistake, I know I push people but I equally like to acknowledge where I am in the wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vague_Boy Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 Canadian mine may host 2.6-billion-year-old ecosystem Surely it's only 6,000 years old? Another "test of faith" put there by god? Got to love that prankster god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 Actually I owe you an apology, you did answer. What you said you didn't have time to answer were not the questions but my response to them, which you said you would reply to at a later date. So as this is said later date would you mind replying to the points I made? Btw I am genuinely sorry for my mistake, I know I push people but I equally like to acknowledge where I am in the wrong. He gave a response, just not an answer. Happens a lot in these threads Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chorba Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 (edited) ................... Edited August 26, 2013 by chorba Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 Nothing. It's a valid conclusion that doesn't need any back up. What validates it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 He gave a response, just not an answer. Happens a lot in these threads I'm still waiting for the Christians (let's bear in mind here that it was my old friend borderline who challenged me to put my analysis up) to show me where I am wrong in my interpretation of the Garden of Eden scenario. It seems that despite at least two members getting miffed about its content none of them have accepted my invitation to show me where my reading of Genesis is flawed. The very fact that the absolute cornerstone of their faith lies on this account might have something to do with their hesitation in bringing to light that actually, in context there is no original sin. There's no wonder they went quiet ---------- Post added 17-05-2013 at 18:26 ---------- Nothing. It's a valid conclusion that doesn't need any back up. Why is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now