 | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
So, ok. I have absolutely no issues other than personal preference when it comes to the answers that Nathan's given-- They all make perfect sense. However, they ONLY make sense accepting what we (or at least I) would consider to be *IMPERFECTIONS* (...) (22 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) We haven't met yet... (...) Apology accepted. (22 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
First off, since the primary issue here seems to be God's love. I will write with assurance he exists. (It is just a waste to debate the character of someone while debating their existence in the same post). So I am skipping over a long argument (...) (22 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) Just to clarify, read any post by me in .castle and see if you can find one without God Bless on the end (OK there may be a few). I tagged the other bit on to show where I would be coming from in this debate... Not to be snide. Of all the (...) (22 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) Pretty much. I was away for the holiday and only logged in briefly on Saturday. So I new my site had been picked, but I wasn't really in the forums at all. I wanted to get something new up during my reign, but I didn't get a chance to (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) And I completely concur--if someone made a law in which folks would have to pledge 'there is no God', I would protest. If you have a constitutional ammendment saying no religion in official state stuff, then remove 'God-talk'. These zealotous (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) Well, "force" might have been too strong a word for me to choose, and the "black magic" angle was meant to be somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but you ask a good question. When someone says it to me I repond on two levels. The primary meaning is (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) And how many people realize they are invoking God's blessing when they say "goodbye" which originally was "God be with ye." I know a lot of folks now just say "Bless you." Frank (stirring the pot...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes: Either way it's not cool to force a blessing (...) Even in the middle of composing another post, I was struck by your words, because they echo a similar ascertain you made which I didn't understand in (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) Although The Rev has already addressed a lot of this very capably (and with remarkably polite restraint!), I wanted to add a few thoughts here, since the debate has taken a bit of a turn... That's an interesting point, but if we remove the (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) And I have no problem with the 'refusal' of a blessing, and i do concur with your take on the, "Oh, you're an Athiest so I'm just going to throw that 'God Bless' at *you* to tweak your nose, 'cause I'm right and you're wrong not to believe". (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) Besides, there's plenty of places you could mail off to and get all the official documentation you need in the US to be a reverend and conduct weddings... (This is one of the things which really highlights that the religious definition of (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) This was not intended as a harsh comment. It's just that when someone says "God bless" to me, and then specifies that the God who they are asking to bless me is the God of Christianity, it has as much meaning to me as my imploring Maury the (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) From post (URL) the first tweaking began... " (...) May Maury the Talking Kangaroo watch over you in the night! -Rev. Smith " In this discussion you have used the spaceship/kangaroo scenario as an *example* as to how ludicrous you believe (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) Explain? -Rev. Smith (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) This is part of my point-- it has been there all along. (I am still composing, Brendan) -John (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Brendan Powell Smith writes: <snip> You had me right up until the facetiousness. (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) Lob is only revealing his divine mysteries to me a little at a time, but I will pass on more Rooist theology as the occasion warrants. (...) Careful, Tom, you're bordering on blasphemy here. Rooism is a wholly unique religion with a unique (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) Were you away during your whole reign as Cool Site of the Week? Congratulations, by the way. @8^) -Rev. Smith (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
Rev, I think you need to get working on fleshing out the Good Book of Maury. Sounds like a hoot. Then again, all you'd have to do is change a few words/names/phrases across the Bible, and it would probably work well enough. But if you take some real (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) Sure, jump in! There's a reason we're debating in a public forum and not just over e-mail. (...) OK, so would you say his first covenant, that of the Old Testament, could be accurately summed up by "Israelites, do what I say, or I will kill (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
I can answer much of this, including your examples, (though you may call it my opinion), but I wanted to ask before I interrupt someone else's debate. It may be of interest that like many christians I stand by the *whole* old testemant and of (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) Hey all. Huge long thread here that sprang up while I was away. I'm tempted to respond to about every other post, but fear it's a fruitless quagmire. Rather than hit any of the theological points of issue, I just wanted to address this one, (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Also seen on CNN
|
|
(...) It's the cream of the jest. -->Bruce<-- (22 years ago, 3-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Also seen on CNN
|
|
(...) Now, now...lets not lock horns over the issue (22 years ago, 3-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Also seen on CNN
|
|
(...) If you have to ask... you can't afford it. :-) (22 years ago, 3-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Also seen on CNN
|
|
(...) Bruce, thanks for saddling us with that foal image-- I don't like it one bit. Topping such behavior is my mane concern, not to stirrup more trouble-- I wouldn't want you to barn in hell. -John (22 years ago, 3-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.pun)
|
| |
| | Re: Also seen on CNN
|
|
(...) I understand the pony but what's the Cool Whip for? Dave K -who wants to be 'in the know' as well (22 years ago, 3-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Also seen on CNN
|
|
(...) Whew! It doesn't say anything about a Shetland Pony and three tons of Cool Whip. I thought I was in trouble there for a moment. -->Bruce<-- ;-) (22 years ago, 3-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) Good choice, God. <snip> (...) That is a very bizarre way for an all-powerful being to go about getting across a message when it would be far simpler, and presumably far more effective for him to just give it to people directly without some (...) (22 years ago, 3-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Also seen on CNN
|
|
(...) If one enjoys it? ;) I liked this [from OutSmart] (URL) I think the most absurd holding in the opinion is the majority’s conclusion that the Anti-Sodomy Statute does not distinguish persons by their sexual orientation. Indeed, the majority (...) (22 years ago, 3-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Also seen on CNN
|
|
(...) Here's yet another piece of progressive action from our Texas-based administration: (URL) the important bit, in case the article's been moved to a members-only pay archive: Critics Say Government Deleted Web Site Material to Push Abstinence (...) (22 years ago, 3-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Also seen on CNN
|
|
(...) And didn't I hear an interesting tid-bit on the radio this weekend, that judges in Taiwan (or somewhere) have ruled that oral sex is *not* considered sex at all--I believe this was in regard to 'committing adultery'. As it stands, if your (...) (22 years ago, 3-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Also seen on CNN
|
|
(...) I read this as well, and I couldn't agree with Larry more--the gov't should stay out of the bedrooms(1) of consenting adults. Dave K (1) euphemism for 'lives' in this particular case (22 years ago, 3-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Also seen on CNN
|
|
(...) That's just plain medieval. I particularly like the fact that progressive Texas forbids "deviate sexual intercourse with another individual of the same sex." What, according to Texas law, would constitute non-deviant sexual intercourse with (...) (22 years ago, 3-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Also seen on CNN
|
|
(URL) hope the Supremes reverse their 1986 thinking... government has no business legislating behaviour between/among consenting adults. (22 years ago, 3-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | An unfortunate typo
|
|
I almost shudder to mention this, since the underlying debate is serious and highly charged, but a CNN article about race and affirmative action included a really inopportune misprint, in grand Amos-n-Andy style: "At issue is whether race be used as (...) (22 years ago, 3-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Hey you Yanks! Catch up with the "World's Mistake"
|
|
(...) Even the 'uncivilized world' has went metric ;) The USA remains the only developed nation not to use the metric system. The costs of this are quite high as it means that any exported products have to be dual labelled. However, one should not (...) (22 years ago, 3-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) I agree-- it *can* give your life meaning to hope. But how about hoping in Santa Claus? Should we? Better yet, let's hope for some *NON* christian afterlife! If the ends justify the means (fulfillment of life justified by being Christian), (...) (22 years ago, 2-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
|
(...) Which brings up the very discussion my friends and I have had for years at around wvery election-time--who do you vote for? Do you vote for the guy who is going to be good for your society, but not probaby good for you 'cause he'll tax you (...) (22 years ago, 2-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
