To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
To LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / *53263 (-10)
  Re: What are your axiomatic religious beliefs and why?
 
(...) Hmm, this is a really good question, Brendan. It's hard to answer this truthfully, because I was raised in a Christian setting. So there are many things I believe that probably at their root go back to what I learned in Sunday School as a (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Problems with the Bloks Forum
 
Hyperboards is getting pounded by spambots, and the bogus traffic is making it hard to view the forums, much less post to them. When I was last able to get into the site, there were a few dozen crap-posts, hawking all kinds of products wholesome and (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.clone-brands)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) I don't know that it's arrogant or naive, though it might be unjustifiably optimistic at the moment to call it "simple." Gould isn't saying that Hawking/Penrose will, like God, be magically able to terminate the regress; their intent is to (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) I like this part: First, most of the traditional arguments for God's existence, from Aquinas on, are easily demolished. Several of them, such as the First Cause argument, work by setting up an infinite regress which God is wheeled out to (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) jumping in here again with this brief blurb-- (URL) are apt to quote the late Stephen Jay Gould's 'NOMA' - 'non-overlapping magisteria'. Gould claimed that science and true (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) Here's how: The omniscient, omnipotent being always was, by definition. Irrational? You bet. (...) Are you suggesting that this stuff is in some way simple? (...) Though we've met a few times, you don't really know me that well because I'm (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) I hear that! I'm going to do some snipping to clean up a bit around the thread. (...) <snip> (...) Not at all. I'm just seeing common ground. (...) But you will probably always be irrational though you strive to be rational. You are a closet (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  This is a new test
 
Here is a test with a link to (URL) Google's website> in it. (20 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.test)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) Actually, it didn't really happen in a point in time, AFAIAC. Time began at that point. In fact, there's a good chance that "time" didn't "begin" (or stabilize) for "eons" (read in femto- or pico- seconds), just as our physics framework (as we (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) Occam's Razor - the onus is on YOU to explain how an omniscient being just came into being, then created the universe. And if that being was created by another, who created *that* being (ad nauseum)?... Why must you insist on making things (...) (20 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more
Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR