What REALLY happened to the wealth of Knights Templar

[Oroblanco]

HOLA amigos,

Lamar wrote

Dear oroblanco;
You stated: <Oroblanco wrote>
I have not taken such a vow, do you expect my every utterance to be held to your standard of truth?
Yes I do. If you do not feel the same then perhaps you should then re-examine your moral state, my friend. Please note that I can not be expected to act as your conscious.

I see no reason to re-examine my moral state, I am perfectly at ease with it as it is. I would also point out to you that I have not asked nor expected you to act in any capacity as my conscious, there is no need. I must apologize if I gave you the impression that I was asking you in any way to become my "moral conscious" externally or internally, for that was not my purpose or intent.

Lamar also wrote

<Oroblanco wrote>Complete truth is not always the best course, for would you tell a very fat woman that she IS very fat?
If she asked me, yes. If a fat lady walked up to me and asked me, point blank "Lamar, do you think I am fat?" I would be morally bound to state "Yes, I think you are fat." most likely followed by her slapping me upside the head. But sometimes that is the price we must pay, my friend.

Have you not considered what further effect such raw honesty might have upon the psyche and ego of those who receive it? Suppose the poor woman of my example were having self doubts, even a deep depression - for someone to tell her she was "very fat" especially someone of high social status, such a "revelation" might well be the "straw the broke the camels back" - and convince her that she ought to commit suicide. Would you want to be responsible for having added to her emotional burden, simply for the vanity of being able to say you always under every circumstance, told the un-varnished truth? I would hope not, face slapping notwithstanding, in my view perfect honesty is NOT the best course under ALL circumstances, so I respectfully disagree with your position on this issue.

Lamar also responded,

<Oroblanco wrote>Sometimes your logic and bias baffles me Lamar. Care to explain further?
No.

Hmm then you leave me no choice but to speculate as to your reasoning and logic, which could lead to considerable errors. I had hoped you could enlighten me on your position and reason, but will "fill in the blanks" as best I can without your explanation. Perhaps I will arrive at a better understanding even so.

Good luck and good hunting Lamar and everyone, I hope you all find the treasures that you seek.
your friend,
Oroblanco

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[lamar]

Dear oroblanco;
You stated:
I see no reason to re-examine my moral state, I am perfectly at ease with it as it is. I would also point out to you that I have not asked nor expected you to act in any capacity as my conscious, there is no need. I must apologize if I gave you the impression that I was asking you in any way to become my "moral conscious" externally or internally, for that was not my purpose or intent.
You asked me a question, my friend and I did my best to answer it. At least you did not ask me if I thought you were fat...

Have you not considered what further effect such raw honesty might have upon the psyche and ego of those who receive it? Suppose the poor woman of my example were having self doubts, even a deep depression - for someone to tell her she was "very fat" especially someone of high social status, such a "revelation" might well be the "straw the broke the camels back" - and convince her that she ought to commit suicide. Would you want to be responsible for having added to her emotional burden, simply for the vanity of being able to say you always under every circumstance, told the un-varnished truth? I would hope not, face slapping notwithstanding, in my view perfect honesty is NOT the best course under ALL circumstances, so I respectfully disagree with your position on this issue.

Once again, I am not obliged to thoroughly examine all possible reprecussions of my responses to questions my friend. I am only obligated to speak the truth, no matter the cost. If that means that the lady commits suicide, then so be it. After all, she did not need to ask me, but once asked I must speak the truth. There exists no valid reason to tell a lie, my friend. Nowhere in the Bible will you find that telling a lie is acceptable in certain circumstances. There is no politically correct response, there is only truths and lies.

Hmm then you leave me no choice but to speculate as to your reasoning and logic,
Please speculate as you see fit, my friend.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Oroblanco]

HOLA amigos,

Lamar wrote

At least you did not ask me if I thought you were fat...

Heh heh that is quite a different case, since my own "ego" is not wavering on the point of suicidal thoughts, it would hardly raise an eye whisker should someone (even of very high social standing) state the obvious to me!

Lamar also wrote

Once again, I am not obliged to thoroughly examine all possible reprecussions of my responses to questions my friend. I am only obligated to speak the truth, no matter the cost.

Regardless of the cost to the hearer of such blunt truths? Your vow of utter honesty may be admirable, but is hardly sympathetic to other people. I remain in complete (and respectful) disagreement with your position viz honesty at all costs and in all cases.

Oh and I assure you, I am speculating!
your friend,
Oroblanco

 

[whitt459]

lamar! seams to me like your friends are hard to find on this forum

 

[lamar]

Dear whitt459;
I see that you have an amazing grasp for that which is plainly obvious, my friend. Would you be my friend?
Your friend:
LAMAR

 

[Oroblanco]

HOLA amigos,
Lamar wrote

Nowhere in the Bible will you find that telling a lie is acceptable in certain circumstances.

I must respectfully disagree once again my friend, or have you forgotten about Jacob and Esau? In that case being dishonest appears to have been the will of God, in order to bring about His plan. I don't wish to derail this thread into a religious debate, but you are mistaken on this point amigo but there are other instances as well I could point to. (Read the account of the taking of Jericho by Joshua, what the spies instructed Rahab etc).

Whitt wrote

lamar! seams to me like your friends are hard to find on this forum

Whitt I must respectfully disagree with your observation, for we are all friends here - as far as I know, none of us are "enemies" with anyone here. Why should we be enemies, when we have so many common interests, especially our love of history? Please don't mistake our (sometimes heated) disagreements as a form of dislike, at least from my point of view it is nothing of that kind. For that matter, if I truly did not like someone, I would simply not waste a moment of my time talking to them.

Oroblanco

 

[JakefaePa]

Ill 2nd that Oroblanco

 

[Kentucky Kache]

I dunno... I think if you look past your perceptions SWR's opinions are solid and knowing. I rather enjoy his questions and his banter. He threatens a lot of folks here who can not back up their assertions.

SWR keeps it real and keeps some posts from turning into comic book tales IMO.

I think someone needs a hero.
I don't know anyone on here that is threatened by those who don't have the ability to believe anything that they didn't read in a text book. How in the world would that be threatening?

 

[Kentucky Kache]

Okay, so answer the question. How are YOU threatening?
I'll speak for myself only. You don't make yourself look intelligent, as you seem to think. What you show me is a sign of weakness. Please tell us how you know, with absolute certainty, that almost everything posted here is nothing but fabrications? Much of it probably is, but how do you KNOW? If there's NO proof, then something cannot be PROVED wrong. You don't know everything, SWR. Please understand that.

 

[Kentucky Kache]

Also, SWR, please READ the posts. I said, I DON'T KNOW anyone who is threatened by you...nothing there for me to prove. But if you want to look at it, you haven't stopped people from posting, so, I must be correct. Is that proof enough?

 

[ClonedSIM]

Okay, so answer the question. How are YOU threatening?
I'll speak for myself only. You don't make yourself look intelligent, as you seem to think. What you show me is a sign of weakness. Please tell us how you know, with absolute certainty, that almost everything posted here is nothing but fabrications? Much of it probably is, but how do you KNOW? If there's NO proof, then something cannot be PROVED wrong. You don't know everything, SWR. Please understand that.

I don't think SWR referred to himself as threatening. That was the opinion of another well-respected member of T'Net. What's the point of asking him what someone else is thinking?

And this statement "If there's NO proof, then something cannot be PROVED wrong" is ludicrious at best. Try this on for size.
"If there is no proof, then there is nothing to be proven wrong."
These two statements are very different, so be sure you understand them before replying.

 

[lamar]

Dear group;
I agree wholeheartedly with SWR. I didn't even read his reply, my friends, because I don't need to in order to know that he is correct.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Kentucky Kache]

Okay, so answer the question. How are YOU threatening?
I'll speak for myself only. You don't make yourself look intelligent, as you seem to think. What you show me is a sign of weakness. Please tell us how you know, with absolute certainty, that almost everything posted here is nothing but fabrications? Much of it probably is, but how do you KNOW? If there's NO proof, then something cannot be PROVED wrong. You don't know everything, SWR. Please understand that.

I don't think SWR referred to himself as threatening. That was the opinion of another well-respected member of T'Net. What's the point of asking him what someone else is thinking?

And this statement "If there's NO proof, then something cannot be PROVED wrong" is ludicrious at best. Try this on for size.
"If there is no proof, then there is nothing to be proven wrong."
These two statements are very different, so be sure you understand them before replying.

Af, we can count on you to say something ridiculous. Do you think the earth was flat before it was proved to be round? You see, there WAS something there to prove.

"well respected" is a relative term.

 

[Kentucky Kache]

Okay, so answer the question. How are YOU threatening?
I'll speak for myself only. You don't make yourself look intelligent, as you seem to think. What you show me is a sign of weakness. Please tell us how you know, with absolute certainty, that almost everything posted here is nothing but fabrications? Much of it probably is, but how do you KNOW? If there's NO proof, then something cannot be PROVED wrong. You don't know everything, SWR. Please understand that.

However, we just whittled down your assertions due to the lack of reliable references and credibility.

I made no assertions. I didn't say you weren't a threat to anyone. I said I DON'T KNOW ANYONE WHO HAS BENN THREATENED...

Dude, if you can't even read, pleas don't call anyone a lunatic.

 

[ClonedSIM]

Okay, so answer the question. How are YOU threatening?
I'll speak for myself only. You don't make yourself look intelligent, as you seem to think. What you show me is a sign of weakness. Please tell us how you know, with absolute certainty, that almost everything posted here is nothing but fabrications? Much of it probably is, but how do you KNOW? If there's NO proof, then something cannot be PROVED wrong. You don't know everything, SWR. Please understand that.

I don't think SWR referred to himself as threatening. That was the opinion of another well-respected member of T'Net. What's the point of asking him what someone else is thinking?

And this statement "If there's NO proof, then something cannot be PROVED wrong" is ludicrious at best. Try this on for size.
"If there is no proof, then there is nothing to be proven wrong."
These two statements are very different, so be sure you understand them before replying.

Af, we can count on you to say something ridiculous. Do you think the earth was flat before it was proved to be round? You see, there WAS something there to prove.

"well respected" is a relative term.

Well, I did ask you to make sure you understood the difference in those two statements before responding.

"If there is no proof, then there is nothing to be proven wrong."
You tell me that you can fly. You cannot produce proof of this statement, so there's nothing for me to prove wrong, but neither have you proven your statement correct.

Let's apply your statement.

"If there's NO proof, then something cannot be PROVED wrong"
I tell you I can fly. I cannot produce proof of this statement, so according to you I must actually be able to fly, and you must believe this without proof since you can't prove me wrong.

Understand now?

 

[Kentucky Kache]

You have made some hateful accusations that you cannot backup.

Where?

 

[lamar]

Cache crazy;
You wrote:
Dude, if you can't even read, pleas don't call anyone a lunatic.

Welllllllll, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck.............
LAMAR

 

[Kentucky Kache]

Okay, so answer the question. How are YOU threatening?
I'll speak for myself only. You don't make yourself look intelligent, as you seem to think. What you show me is a sign of weakness. Please tell us how you know, with absolute certainty, that almost everything posted here is nothing but fabrications? Much of it probably is, but how do you KNOW? If there's NO proof, then something cannot be PROVED wrong. You don't know everything, SWR. Please understand that.

I don't think SWR referred to himself as threatening. That was the opinion of another well-respected member of T'Net. What's the point of asking him what someone else is thinking?

And this statement "If there's NO proof, then something cannot be PROVED wrong" is ludicrious at best. Try this on for size.
"If there is no proof, then there is nothing to be proven wrong."
These two statements are very different, so be sure you understand them before replying.

Af, we can count on you to say something ridiculous. Do you think the earth was flat before it was proved to be round? You see, there WAS something there to prove.

"well respected" is a relative term.

Well, I did ask you to make sure you understood the difference in those two statements before responding.

"If there is no proof, then there is nothing to be proven wrong."
You tell me that you can fly. You cannot produce proof of this statement, so there's nothing for me to prove wrong, but neither have you proven your statement correct.

Let's apply your statement.

"If there's NO proof, then something cannot be PROVED wrong"
I tell you I can fly. I cannot produce proof of this statement, so according to you I must actually be able to fly, and you must believe this without proof since you can't prove me wrong.

Understand now?

Good example. Now, suppose I am Wilbur Wright and this is the early 1900's. Are you getting what I'm trying to say? No, I guess you're not. BEFORE FLIGHT WAS PROVED, IT WAS POSSIBLE. BUT MANY DOUBTERS WOULD NOT BELIEVE IT WITHOUT THE PROOF. IN THE MIDDLE AGES THERE WAS NO PROOF THE EARTH WAS ROUND. WAS THE EARTH ROUND IN THE MIDDLE AGES, AF?
Now do you see that before proof exists, thruth exists? I'll bet you still don't see it.

 

[Kentucky Kache]

Cache crazy;
You wrote:
Dude, if you can't even read, pleas don't call anyone a lunatic.

Welllllllll, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck.............
LAMAR

And if it looks like a hypocrite, sounds like a hypocrite, walks like a hypocrite, it must be a catholic, methodist, baptist, Presbyterian, or any other denomination.

 

[lamar]

Cache Crazy;
Dood! You are a lunatic!!! A stark raving, drooling all over yourself, dirty pajama wearing, tinfoil hat donning, Prozac popping LUNATIC!
LAMAR