Subject:
|
Re: Does God have a name for God?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:11:23 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
q_harlequin_p@hotmailSTOPSPAMMERS.com
|
Viewed:
|
3688 times
|
| |
|
|
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 15:11:06 GMT, "Dave Schuler" <orrex@excite.com>
wrote:
> > > More specifically, I have understood it to mean that man has the capacity
> > > for Grace, and in this way we are created in His image.
> Hey whatever blows yer hair back. Interpretation is really the mother
> > of all invention, not necessity.
> Fair enough, but if you're going to criticize a view, you would be
> well-advised to learn what that view is.
Fair enough, but if you're going to accuse me of criticizing a view
without knowing what that view is, you would be well-advised to make
absolutely certain that I don't, otherwise you're just making another
assumption (as if that comes as any surprise).
> > > Aaron is actually citing well-established medieval doctrine in which God
> > > was considered to be unlike any other creature, since, among other reasons,
> > > He thinks (and sees, etc.) with the whole of His being, whereas lesser (ie:
> > > all other) creatures think with only a portion of themselves.
> > Oh gee, what was I thinking poking fun at this "well-established
> > medieval doctrine"? I mean, after all, were are talking about
> > something designed during the days when everybody knew the world was
> > flat and a solar eclipse meant a bad year for crops.
> You're committing a basic falacy of reason, in that you are assuming that,
> since some of their views were incorrect, *all* were necessarily incorrect.
Dost thou accuse me of poisoning the well?! He, he, he, well perhaps
a little, however there's a lot of truth in what I said regardless. I
mean when you really get down to it not that many ideals and everyday
practices of the dark ages are still carried out. Oh sure we still
have some of the old holidays and such, but we sure as heck don't
celebrate them like they did in the olden days.
> > > There's no reason to accuse Aaron of succumbing to some New Age sales
> > > pitch simply because one finds his position untenable.
> > Cause gosh knows that's what I did. Tell me, are you consciously
> > attempting to be an instigator of something here, or is there some
> > other explanation that perhaps I've overlooked? : )
> If, somewhere within your sarcasm, there hide a few points, I'm sure they
> might be worth reading, but if you come off as a loudmouth with nothing to
> contribute, who's going to bother?
You will, trust me. Sarcasm goes a long way and can initiate all
sorts of intrigue and debate. If you want proof look no further than
my own actions. I start posting here, and the post count jumps nearly
70%.
> And what benefit is it to you?
There are many benefits that you would probably not be able to
understand, even if I explained them to you.
> You can call me an instigator if you'd like, but I think my style of
> debate, has been established here since long before your arrival or
> delurking.
Quite the oldbie are you then? He, he, he... `, )
> I'm not interested in making someone look personally foolish; I
> would much rather debate the issues. If you want to poke fun at me, by all
> means, do so.
Perhaps you just want to think I'm poking fun at you? I mean seeing
as how that isn't my intention I don't see any other plausible
explanation, do you? I find this to be a rather intriguing game of
wit and intelligence. : )
Robert
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Does God have a name for God?
|
| (...) Fair enough, but if you're going to criticize a view, you would be well-advised to learn what that view is. (...) You're committing a basic falacy of reason, in that you are assuming that, since some of their views were incorrect, *all* were (...) (23 years ago, 30-Mar-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
137 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
