|  | | always improving
Jan 15 2004 on content The Gift of God |
Pretty :-) I love the light effects!!
The text style doesn't seem to fit with the art, but I can't quite articulate why...maybe if it glowed like the "gift" it would match better. After all, the Son and the Word are one, right? :-)
For "whosoever" :-) Nice play on the text. |
| | | it's OK, but...
Jan 15 2004 on content god vs thedevil |
I don't like the text.
The art is very neat. I'm not a Dualist myself, but the art portrays the concept in a great way.
Overall, well done. Where'd you get the clip of Carter the Magician? |
| | | gone but back
Jan 14 2004 on content Formless and Void |
Hey Tim, great piece from you, thanks. I've been gone for a little bit, but I'm back now. Good to see you still here. |
| | | not a music reader..
Jan 7 2004 on content Psalm 150:3 |
What is it? I can't read notes :-) |
| | | another round...
Jan 5 2004 on content Embrace the Son |
*I noticed that one and you are right I didn't comment on that one. I gave up commenting on those multiple posts since it is not effective.*
Hypocrite. You haven't. You're just selective, as are the others.
Tim, exactly my observation. If he gave up commenting on these multi-posts, then why did he bother commenting on yours? He IS selective and so it seems are the other 5 or 6 usual flamers (I haven't counted), which demonstrates the false nature of his statement, "There is no persecution as you seem to imply.
Now to Flanders:
Quite a lot of others have observed Tim's tendency to keep his wallpapers on the frontpage in the past and mentioned it so I don't know whether you can call those assumptions unfounded.
And I don't know that you can quanitfy those assumptions. Is it your position that Tim would not update his wallpapers if they were not bumped up to the front page again? If so, how do you quantify that? You have to admit that it's assumption on your part, and since you are negatively biased in your opinion of his character, what would you accept as evidence that this is not the case?
What hatred are you talking about? Once again I can only speak for myself and can tell you there is no hatred involved here.
Ahh, but there is. There is a hatred of Christianity, which is what Tim seems to stand for. This is only too well evidenced in your (and others) selective flames of him.
Then how do you explain so many people commenting on the wallpapers and his behaviour in the past months?
I just did above.
So...it was purely coincidental that you used an abreviation made up from three K's? You didn't mean to link to the "other" KKK?
I did indeed intend a correlation, just not a religious one. But I wasn't correlating every aspect of thier beliefs to yours... I was only refering to thier bigotted behavior and the similarity of yours to it. Not just yours, of course. Of course I brought it up first, but you got off track talking about thier Christain beliefs, which was not the subject of my correlation. That is why your comment wasn't an issue, and why I wasn't dodging it.
Whoops. The last time I looked the Catholic church was definately Christian. Or maybe that statue of Jesus Christ above the altar got there accidently?
No, it's just that you misunderstand what constitutes Biblical Christianity as opposed to apostate herecy. For Zark's sake, occultists cast spells by the power of the name of Jesus Christ (see writings by Eliphas Levi), but that doesn't make them Christians. Do you even know enough about the Bible to recognize the difference between Biblical and Gnostic theology? Roman Catholics get most of thier dogmatic traditions from Gnostic writings, and anathematize us who follow Sola Scriptura.
I noticed there are many different interpretations and different versions of the Bible. The KKK may choose a different interpretation, but that doesn't mean they aren't Christians.
Again, a misunderstanding on your part. They did not follow the the teachings of Christ nor believed the first book of Moses. Jesus himself said, if you don't believe what Moses said, how can you believe me...? The Aryan heritics of the KKK believed in naturalistic Darwinism instead of the Hebraic Creation account, and therefore killed what they believed to be "less evolved", cursed humans to help purify the races. This is not a Christain paradigm! And since this was the distiguishing charactarsitic of thier beliefs, they were not Christians. They may have claimed the name of Jesus, but as Jesus himself said, Not all that say to me 'Lord Lord' will enter into the Kindom. In fact, Jesus said that his response to them will be, "I never knew you."
Anyway..I don't get the impression they comment because of Tim is Christian.
That is indeed the common thread that binds all of those you mentioned. How convenient for you to deny this. Sure, they may have come up with other reasons to veil thier distaste for Tim's beliefs behind, but they have all at one point or another expressed thier common distain for Christianity, and that is what keeps them coming back, selectively hunting down Tim's (and other's) wallpapers down and posting flames. Your very nick here demonstrates it. Try and deny it... |
| | | Re: Aw, come on.
Jan 4 2004 on content Vine and Branches |
All this person asked was that no flames were posted on the sole basis that there is a biblical text in the image.
You've been told time and again that if you don't like the image, all you have to do is move on.
But your past and continual behavior is quantifiable as flames. There's plenty of evidence from your past posts, even by your own admition "some of my comments were a little more rude than necessary..."
I loathe biblical texts, thus I loathe this wallpaper. Does that count as 'flaming'?
Umm, loathing isn't flaming, no. But seeing as you consistantly post rude comments towards artist of Christain persuation...yeah, that's flaming!
Believe whatever you want, but I can't stand this 'If you don't agree with me, shut up!' sort of crap. If I got you wrong, I'm honestly sorry..
I guess you're sorry then since this obviously wasn't what was said. It was a simple request not to be flamed.
...but this kind of remark sounds to me like anyone who writes anything that opposes your beliefs is a flamer in your eyes.
Hmm, if they had any objections with substance to them, and posted them in a proper context, that really wouldn't fall in the definition of a flame...but this really doesn't apply to you, does it? (hmm, I seem to remember a laugh you had with yourself asking if God was a schizo recently)
We've seen the flames come before and this person just nicely asked not to be bullyed. Just can't help yourself can you? Too much entertainment for ya, isn't it? |
| | | Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: hypo
Jan 4 2004 on content Embrace the Son |
I'm not sure it is posse-like behaviour.There just quite a few people who seem to have a problem with Tim's wallpapers and behaviour and those people choose to respond on their own accord. That's not ganging-up is it?
Oh, of course not! *sarcasm* It's only that there a particular constistant group that almost always flames Tim and seem to ditto each other's posts all the time.
And if I remember correctly most of those people agreed that this wallpaper is an improvement on Tim's previous works and even complimented him on it. (I did anyway) If they were out to lynch Tim they wouldn't do that would they?
Well, congratulations... you're able to recongnize improvement. That doesn't cover the fact that a certain group of individuals USUALLY picks on every little thing he does. This lastest gripe about him double posting being the latest lynch. You're really not expecting to convince anyone you haven't been flaming Tim in groups, are you?? They'd only need to go through his past posts and see for themselves what's been going on. Again, you're not fooling anyone... |
| | | Re: Re: Re: Re: hypocrit
Jan 4 2004 on content Embrace the Son |
Well..okay. I don't know about the others but I did comment on others who posted multiple versions of wallpapers seperately .
I don't see any comments in the aqua pengin post that's all over the front page right now. I don't remember who put you in charge of the multi-post police force, but you sure are inconsistant.
I think Tim gets a bit more flak on this issue because some get the impression that he just makes minor updates etc. to keep the wallpapers in the spotlight.
Ahh, so you do give Tim "more flak" flames and claim your behavior is based on unfounded assumtions. I think this high horse of the attention-seekers police force is a veil to hide your hatred behind. I think others can see it as well. This is evident from my comment above about your inconsistancy.
Is he seeking attention? I could possibly see this behavior in a teen boy, but not a man who's half a century old.
Tim emails me all the time with wallpapers for me to view, and actually restrains himself from posting as much as he could because he doesn't want to be percieved in the wrong light. Unlike you, he cares about keeping his behavior in check.
By the way..you seem to be dodging the KKK being Chrisians issue.....
Well, aren't you the master of cheap debating tricks? But for the clarity of others who might read this (cuz you already know) I wasn't dodging your "issue" cuz it wasn't an issue. First of all it didn't have anything to do with my original post. I wasn't talking about the KKK you refered to. I was talking about the posse-like behavior here. Second, the KKK you refer to was about as christain as the roman catholic church. They held to an apostate Aryan theory which was anything but Biblical, so since your post mentioned thier religion, I ignored it as the obvious attempt to take the light off you that it was.
But for the record, you and the rest of the Kde Klux Klan seem to be just as bigotted as the former KKK because you'd like nother better than to see Tim's membership here "hung" so that you don't have to deal with his likes anymore, and all because you don't like the way his skins look. (get the pun?)
If you're motives for giving him "more flak" weren't so transparent, it might pass off as boyish bullying, but even then it would still be bad form. |
| | | Re: Re: Re: hypocrites
Jan 4 2004 on content Embrace the Son |
It was your posse-like behavior that I was making the KKK reference from, but you know that... |
| | | Re: Re: hypocrites
Jan 4 2004 on content Embrace the Son |
Yeah, nice way to dodge the real substance of my post :) |
| |
Search people
Current visitors
New users
Birthdays
Most active users
Back
|
|
| |
|
