 | | Re: The Nam-shub of Enki (was Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament)
|
|
Oooo... Well done! You really like 'Snow Crash' by Neal Stephenson? If you haven't read it, you should. The entire book is about Nam-Shubs and 'neurolinguistic hacking'. Very cyber.. "richard marchetti" <blueofnoon@aol.com> wrote in message (...) (23 years ago, 15-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Herein lies the dilemma. The appeal of science (particularly mathematics) is that it doesn't change. Did science change when Einstein theorized that time wasn't constant? Nope. Only our understanding of reality changed. To posit Christianity (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) Learning, common sense, reason, faith, and experience, all in good measure, are the best approach to ascertaining Christianity's *validity*. Since we can't absolutely prove it to be true using empirical methods--nor can we prove it to be (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) But that puts us squarely back in the "is it all true or not" debate, and how does one distinguish biblical truth from biblical falsehood? I'm not putting this forth as an all-or-nothing question, and I'm delighted to accept the assertion that (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Customs question...
|
|
(...) Actually, strike that. I still don't agree with Larry. Just because someone is dishonest (read 'lacking integrity' / 'deceptive' / 'unfair' / 'untruthful' / 'insincere' / 'unreputable' / 'with affectation' / 'unvirtouous') to you, doesn't mean (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Nam-shub of Enki (was Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament)
|
|
(...) Well, that's just not inflammatory enough for me! (...) I'll try re-sending the reply just to verify that we're able to communicate. I didn't offer any great insights, but I don't want you to think I'm snubbing you, either. (...) Ah, I recall (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Nam-shub of Enki (was Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament)
|
|
(...) Ah, then you fell for the misleading opening comments -- if you get to the end, it's all about how there is no god. Instead, there is just a story to describe a human experience that may have to do with evolution. (...) Nope, which sucks. Try (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament
|
|
(...) I'd offer that one shouldn't read a great deal of Old Testament history with a literal eye. Much of the ancient work has a very folklorish quality from which we are meant to learn certain truths (such as the folly of pride in the case of (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Nam-shub of Enki (was Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament)
|
|
(...) Post? What post? Actually, I was responding not to your post directly but to a point that resonated from what you wrote. To that end, I should have been more specific in identifying that your point was not really what I was addressing, and I (...) (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Nam-shub of Enki (was Re: One of my issues with the god of the old testament)
|
|
Dave! Did you even read my post? -- Hop-Frog (23 years ago, 14-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
