Sociopath Community

What about an entire angelic or demonic dictionary?  What about it being english in particular is the noteworthy part?

Theholyspirit said: 

He has many names

This is true. In person when I'm acquainted with others, I let them pick between 3 names. ( The most common one being a nickname I've had since childhood. ) And this is only the 3 I present to new faces.

In truth no one calls me Tony, except here, and Tony is STILL the short form of one my many names.

In here if we take away the multiple aliases I've given myself, I STILL have 7 names and nicknames given to me by various members here. 

He is basically like a clone of satan

Satan is said to be the most beautiful angel.

that yahweh made as a replacement to satan

I wouldn't let Yahweh down if that were true.

I am not an angel. I'm a man, the envy of angels, and why Satan hates us while wanting to be us. Defying God grants him a way to taste being anything like us and God, and it's so good for him, it's worth what'll become of him.

he is an antichrist 

by my analyse of my memories

felix/spatial/eric/edd/donald/pewdiepie is roughly the 2nd or 3rd antichrist to ever exist

where sarah is satan daughter that she is the 1st antichrist to exist

where depending on timeline

jim/james/aj/mrbeast was 2nd or 3rd from spencer or yahweh (both)

felix/spatial/eric/edd/donald/pewdiepie is the 1st or 2nd antichrist that yahweh had ever made as some reason to copy that satan had done it before him and yahweh had some shit attitude about his devil child satan doing it before he him

around the same time spatial/eric/edd/donald/felix/pewdiepie began to exist

i was in the localised heaven while felix and satan were below

i was questioning and testing yahweh by saying “i am an entire english dictionary” where yahweh denied that either himself is able to be every word in the dictionary of english or that he was still rebeling against me where he denied i could judge my self to be an entire english dictionary

this lead to a moment where i was sent to hell then saran took me out of the fire

then i went back to heaven and made a chrome orb angry at yahweh and i slapped the orb saying “come on jump in you love messing with the weathe”

but my memory of the events of which cane first is a bit hazzy

anyways spatial mind is pewdiepie (most likely)

everytime i read spatial texts it’s matching the personality is felix that matches donald and eric northman and felix pewdiepie

 Funny, but Real talk though...

I'm aware of how I'll appear to people based on how they are.

Some will think I'm evil because they and I are certain I'd like to deliver them an uppercut. They'll call it violence. I'll call it justice, and I'd tell them, we're both right. 

In reality I won't beat people. I won't have to.

But I will, if I have to.

Failure to fix someone after beating them would come at a price, while I'd take pleasure in repairing a dumb ass with righteous fury.

I appear good to good people, and bad to bad people.

What makes me bad to bad people, it's over some shameful reason they have difficulty bringing up. I hit them like a mirror and they feel seen. 

.......This next part is important.......

IF....YOU....Joshua. See me as Satan or the Antichrist, or even entertain this, It's a reflection of yourself and the shit I told you about you, being blasphemous among atheists, as you're securing the damned.

That last paragraph felt like it was written for me, and it could be a message to you from, Thee, Holy Spirit.

You begin by joking about the claim, then use it as an opportunity to construct another grandiose mythology around yourself. Calling yourself “the envy of angels” does not answer anything. It only replaces Joshua’s fantasy with your own.

Your position on violence is also contradictory. You say you will not beat people because you will not have to, then immediately say you will if you have to. “Have to” is doing all the work without any criterion for when violence becomes necessary. Calling an uppercut “justice” does not make violence and justice equally valid descriptions. Violence identifies an action. “Justice” is your evaluation of it.

The claim that beating someone can “repair” them is unsupported. Violence may produce fear, compliance, injury, resentment, or retaliation. None of those establishes that the person has been repaired, especially when the standard of repair is apparently becoming more agreeable to you.

“I appear good to good people and bad to bad people” is circular. You classify anyone who approves of you as good and anyone who reacts negatively as bad, then use their reaction as proof of the classification. The mirror claim is equally unfalsifiable. Agreement proves you are good, disagreement proves you exposed something shameful, and suspicion proves the accuser is really describing himself. No possible response can count against you.

Your final appeal to the Holy Spirit is just your own paragraph feeling personally significant to you. A thought seeming directed at you does not make it an external message. It is one brain assigning cosmic importance to its own interpretation.

You are not demonstrating that you are an angelic object of envy, a moral mirror, or someone capable of repairing people through “righteous fury.” You are describing yourself in terms designed to make every reaction confirm the identity you already assigned yourself.

I legit had an account named Donald but it was on the old forum. I can only see DonaldTrump here.

Im happy to see that it's Spatial being accused of having secret sockpuppets instead of me. 

I confirm that those are all Spatial.

Dragoonback said: 

You begin by joking about the claim, then use it as an opportunity to construct another grandiose mythology around yourself. Calling yourself “the envy of angels” does not answer anything. It only replaces Joshua’s fantasy with your own.

No. I began by agreeing that I have many names here and in person.

God created us in his image and likeness. Because of this man has higher status than angles. Angels serve and protect us. Some angels, Satan, did not like this, rebelled, war broke out and some angels, the fallen were cast out of heaven.

Yes the fallen envy us.

I did not make this up, it's just you're not educated about this.

Your position on violence is also contradictory. You say you will not beat people because you will not have to, then immediately say you will if you have to. “Have to” is doing all the work without any criterion for when violence becomes necessary.

It's true that I don't have to beat people. It's also true that I will beat people IF I have to.

This isn't a contradiction.

Calling an uppercut “justice” does not make violence and justice equally valid descriptions. Violence identifies an action. “Justice” is your evaluation of it.

I won't adopt your opinion nor do I care if you keep it. It's yours.

The claim that beating someone can “repair” them is unsupported.

Consequence prevents us from stumbling. Makes life better.

Violence may produce fear, compliance, injury, resentment, or retaliation.

Immediate compliance. Other day we visited a friend of a friend and those people were begging their 7 year old to behave. Kid wouldn't listen. No incentive for discipline. Boy will grow up and overstep boundaries.

I thought to myself how my parents would've broke my ass. No fencing with who the master is. I'm greatful for having parents that never let me be foolish and drove it away.

You won't understand this cause you never knew your parents. People were paid to keep you. Probably something about you had potential adoptors avoid taking you. No discipline. Now you're foolish and prone to misery. Not me.

None of those establishes that the person has been repaired, especially when the standard of repair is apparently becoming more agreeable to you.

True. Some people will carry on making the same mistakes and end up with the same consequences.

I mentioned failure to fix someone can backfire and comes at a price.

“I appear good to good people and bad to bad people” is circular. You classify anyone who approves of you as good and anyone who reacts negatively as bad, then use their reaction as proof of the classification.

Your assumption is false.

The mirror claim is equally unfalsifiable. Agreement proves you are good, disagreement proves you exposed something shameful, and suspicion proves the accuser is really describing himself. No possible response can count against you.

More assumption.

Your final appeal to the Holy Spirit is just your own paragraph feeling personally significant to you. A thought seeming directed at you does not make it an external message. It is one brain assigning cosmic importance to its own interpretation.

When you know you know.

You are not demonstrating that you are an angelic object of envy, a moral mirror, or someone capable of repairing people through “righteous fury.”

I specifically stated that I'm not an Angel. I am a man. 

I also reserve the right to tell the mentally ill that I'm not Satan, who is a rebellious fallen angel that envies man. And so I did.

You are describing yourself in terms designed to make every reaction confirm the identity you already assigned yourself.

 There are reasons why you get triggered when you see me Dragoon. I never had to do much. You don't ask questions, you make assumptions. 

As for what I said about myself. All true.

My experiences. True.

It upsets you for a reason. I can see that, and can see why.

You wish you knew me better than I know myself, so you'll carry on like you do, while dismissing what I said to someone calling me a Satan clone. You're carrying on as if I agreeed with Joshua.

Yes, you're on display. Making my claims about what I am to good and bad people plausable to observers.

Spatial Mind said:

God created us in his image and likeness. Because of this, man has a higher status than angels. Angels serve and protect us. Some angels, including Satan, did not like this, rebelled, and were cast out of heaven. Yes, the fallen envy us.

It’s true that I don’t have to beat people. It’s also true that I will beat people if I have to. Consequences prevent us from stumbling, make life better, and encourage immediate compliance.

I appear good to good people and bad to bad people. When you know, you know. There are reasons why you get triggered when you see me. You’re on display, making my claims about what I am to good and bad people plausible to observers.

Your reply still confirms the structure I criticized. You use Christian mythology to describe humanity as superior to and envied by fallen angels, reserve the right to beat people whenever you decide that you “have to,” and treat immediate compliance as evidence that violence repairs them. But fear-based compliance does not establish improved judgment or long-term psychological benefit.

You also still claim that good people perceive you as good, bad people perceive you as bad, and my criticism places me “on display” as evidence for that claim. That is self-sealing reasoning. A positive reaction confirms you, while a negative reaction is reinterpreted as proof that something is wrong with the critic.

“Your assumption is false,” “when you know, you know,” and speculation about my childhood or emotional state do not answer the argument. They replace evidence with denial, certainty, and personal attacks. You have created a framework in which every reaction confirms what you already believe about yourself.

Dragoonback said: 

Spatial Mind said:

God created us in his image and likeness. Because of this, man has a higher status than angels. Angels serve and protect us. Some angels, including Satan, did not like this, rebelled, and were cast out of heaven. Yes, the fallen envy us.

It’s true that I don’t have to beat people. It’s also true that I will beat people if I have to. Consequences prevent us from stumbling, make life better, and encourage immediate compliance.

I appear good to good people and bad to bad people. When you know, you know. There are reasons why you get triggered when you see me. You’re on display, making my claims about what I am to good and bad people plausible to observers.

Your reply still confirms the structure I criticized...

Yes. But it's not out of spite.

You use Christian mythology to describe.....

Okay.

You also still claim that....

Yes I still claim.

You have created a framework in which every reaction confirms what you already believe about yourself.

 Never created anything here tbh. Everything I wrote here can be researched.

.

.

.

Remember that time when I said you need to have a higher degree of intelligence when dealing with me ? 

Not putting you down, but I'm seeking a forward conversation in the same way a grade 1 student is no good to a university professor. 

Maninist said:

Yes. But it's not out of spite. Okay. Yes I still claim. Never created anything here tbh. Everything I wrote here can be researched. Remember that time when I said you need to have a higher degree of intelligence when dealing with me? Not putting you down, but I'm seeking a forward conversation in the same way a grade one student is no good to a university professor.

Whether it comes from spite is irrelevant. I criticized the reasoning, not your emotional motive. Saying that your claims “can be researched” is also not evidence. You would need to provide the evidence and explain how it supports the specific conclusions that humanity outranks angels, violence improves people, and negative reactions to you reveal moral defects in the critic.

You then repeat the same self-sealing structure. When I criticize you, you treat that criticism as proof that I lack the intelligence required to understand you. That protects your position from examination because disagreement can always be reclassified as inferiority. Comparing yourself to a university professor and me to a first-grade student does not create a “forward conversation.” It is an unsupported claim of authority used in place of an answer.

Theholyspirit said: 

He has many names

 

He is basically like a clone of satan

that yahweh made as a replacement to satan

 

he is an antichrist 

 

by my analyse of my memories

felix/spatial/eric/edd/donald/pewdiepie is roughly the 2nd or 3rd antichrist to ever exist

where sarah is satan daughter that she is the 1st antichrist to exist

 

where depending on timeline

jim/james/aj/mrbeast was 2nd or 3rd from spencer or yahweh (both)

 

felix/spatial/eric/edd/donald/pewdiepie is the 1st or 2nd antichrist that yahweh had ever made as some reason to copy that satan had done it before him and yahweh had some shit attitude about his devil child satan doing it before he him

 

around the same time spatial/eric/edd/donald/felix/pewdiepie began to exist

 

i was in the localised heaven while felix and satan were below

 

i was questioning and testing yahweh by saying “i am an entire english dictionary” where yahweh denied that either himself is able to be every word in the dictionary of english or that he was still rebeling against me where he denied i could judge my self to be an entire english dictionary

 

this lead to a moment where i was sent to hell then saran took me out of the fire

then i went back to heaven and made a chrome orb angry at yahweh and i slapped the orb saying “come on jump in you love messing with the weathe”

but my memory of the events of which cane first is a bit hazzy

 

anyways spatial mind is pewdiepie (most likely)

everytime i read spatial texts it’s matching the personality is felix that matches donald and eric northman and felix pewdiepie

 

 

 Fuck you, fuck your god, fuck Satan.