To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *22431 (-40)
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Cool! Between "Secular Humanism" and "Nontheist," we have you 50% of the way to reason! 8^) Dave! (21 years ago, 17-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Oh, great. Now I have to watch it twice. Thanks, guys. Dave! (21 years ago, 17-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy Crap! Sacred Cow Makes the Best Hamburger!
 
I suppose one could also analyze this from the standpoint of death... Most Likely to Get Roaring Drunk in Valhalla -->Bruce<-- Most Likely to Go to Heaven JOHN Most Likely to Be Reincarnated - Mike Most Likely to Achieve Nirvana -->Bruce<-- (which (...) (21 years ago, 17-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy Crap! Sacred Cow Makes the Best Hamburger!
 
Where we find out some odd things about ourselves: Smorgasboard Approach to Religion Award (highest overall percentage of compatiblity) -->Bruce<-- 60% Bah Humbug Award (lowest overall percentage) -- Hop-Frog 45% Most Likely to Sacrifice a Virgin to (...) (21 years ago, 17-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) John, I tried to follow this debate as close as possible...forgive me if I’ve missed something. I agree with your general position that God is unchanging, however as far as I read, you’ve only reffered to the God of the Bible as a God of love. (...) (21 years ago, 17-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) My score, as if it is any surprise. No wonder I have trouble seeing eye to eye with y'all Neo-Pagans;-) 1. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (100%) 2. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (96%) 3. Orthodox Quaker (93%) 4. (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Wow, I out Scientologied you with 39%. How weird is that. -Mike Petrucelli (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) That's pretty funny. I consider you largely irrelevant to my life and strong feelings. And indeed, as I thought you might, you are backpedalling -- just not in a way that I find socially acceptable or redeeming. I don't have anything else to (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  In The Neolithic Age
 
Then I stripped them, scalp from skull, and my hunting dogs fed full, And their teeth I threaded neatly on a thong; And I wiped my mouth and said, "It is well that they are dead, (URL) For I know my work is right and theirs was wrong."> But my Totem (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
 
(...) But the key difference is that I am saying "I accept that the universe may always have existed," rather than "I believe that God has always existed." I offer and accept the universe's existence as a possibility, but I don't put faith in that (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
 
(...) Hmmm, sounds convenient (point 2 from point 1) and complicated:-) (...) Yes, I am conceding this from the beginning. (...) My point is that if you hold that the universe always existed, that is a faith statement as much as any about God having (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
 
(...) Well, let's disclaim once again that science isn't in the business of proving anything as 100% fact, so I reserve the statement that science will always permit modification to existing theory. Science hasn't yet produced a supernova in the (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
 
(...) I have to admit that I am surprised we are even debating this because I thought that there was consensus here. WRT to the origin of the universe, you say that "...we don't have the tools to verify our hypotheses. All in good time." Are those (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Have you ever heard of Marcion, Richard? He was an early heretic who held that the God of Jesus and Yahweh were indeed different Gods entirely. Now, I am no Marcionite, but if I were, wouldn't it be rather intolerant of you to question my (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
 
(...) That's called special pleading, and it's a fallacy. It's a double-standard based in circular reasoning and cannot be used in any logically sound argument. (...) Well, that's as much a statement of faith as anything I've heard you make, and it (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
 
(...) What I am saying is that this particular question is unique and cannot, by definition, be answered by Science. (...) Science will never come up with the answer period. Any speculation about the origin of the universe is pure flattery. Even if (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Here are my results: 1. Secular Humanism (100%) 2. Unitarian Universalism (96%) 3. Liberal Quakers (83%) 4. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (83%) 5. Nontheist (76%) 6. Theravada Buddhism (67%) 7. Neo-Pagan (64%) 8. Christian Science (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Let me phrase it this way: Do you ask questions that, if answered, could cause you to reject your faith as invalid? That is, do you ask the kinds of questions that may require you to abandon your current worldview? If the answer is no, then I (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! And Hoppy thought he was the chief pagan :-)
 
(...) LOL Not I, McDuff... Maybe I'll try Taoism. 1. Unitarian Universalism (100%) 2. Secular Humanism (95%) 3. Liberal Quakers (92%) 4. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (86%) 5. Neo-Pagan (79%) 6. Theravada Buddhism (78%) 7. Nontheist (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) That test is certainly interesting: 1. Bahá'í Faith (100%) 2. Islam (96%) 3. Orthodox Judaism (96%) 4. Sikhism (94%) 5. Jainism (84%) 6. Reform Judaism (76%) 7. Hinduism (69%) 8. Orthodox Quaker (57%) 9. Mahayana Buddhism (57%) 10. Liberal (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! And Hoppy thought he was the chief pagan :-)
 
(...) Haha! That was a great test. I out-neo-paganed the neo-pagan! I see the religion I was initially exposed to (inflicted with?) way down near the bottom. Interesting results. The religion I was initially raised in (inflicted with) is way down (...) (21 years ago, 16-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) I second that. -Mike Petrucelli (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Read, learn... again. (URL) -Mike Petrucelli (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) This one? 01. Unitarian Universalism (100%) 02. Secular Humanism (96%) 03. Liberal Quakers (88%) 04. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (74%) 05. Nontheist (69%) 06. Theravada Buddhism (69%) 07. Neo-Pagan (62%) 08. Bahá'í Faith (59%) (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: God's Nature
 
Well done, Droog! You have slooshed the meaning of my slovos. If you had the cutter and I some pretty polly, we could make a very pleasant nochy of it. The Korova, klootches for a Durango 95, some young devotchkas -- it could be real horrorshow. A (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) I don't see the disagreement here. I think you are saying that you DO allow questions to enter into your faith-schema, and that your faith has so far "survived" (I couldn't think of a better word here) these challenges. I don't think anyone (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
 
(...) Science does not pretend to have the answer to the origin of the universe. It has speculation, to be sure, and some ideas on how the creation of the universe progressed. It's one of those questions that we don't see the answer to now, but from (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) I know that you have to believe this, but I have to believe that I have sufficient gas in the tank to make it to the next fueling station. Saying that I have to believe something is basically equivalent to saying I really really really want to (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
 
(...) I know this is ploughed ground; I was specifically referring to the creation of the universe. Either God started it, or it simply started itself (neither theory is "scientific") (...) That's 5-0 Vikings to you my friend! Now I must go and (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! Four out of five scientists claim....
 
(...) We've been down that road before. Science specifically places no faith in much of anything - not even results, which is why experiments are duplicated to see if the same results are obtained by a different set of senses. New information can (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Slander. I bleed (and bleed, and bleed) Dodger Blue. None of this Angel stuff for me - especially with those red uniforms and "Edison" field. It's The Big A or nothing! (...) Each person must find their own path to God (the truth, philosophy, (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Perhaps I was too light in my characterization. While I think that brother/sister unions are deeply taboo, I also believe that they are pathological, and that their "wrongness" possibly stems from genetics. (...) I have to believe that God is (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) And on this we disagree. Up until now I've been on the side of angels--I mean Bruce and Hoppy. However, faith does not exclude questions. I question everything I am able, and have become quite disenfranchised with 'Religion'. This does not, in (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Good point--let it be thus stipulated. Dave! (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) I must take exception to this hypothetical. It has in no way been shown that atheists have any special attraction towards genocide; whereas by contrast, I have elsewhere shown that people of the many Jewish or Xtian faiths must at least admit (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! Yggdrasil's taproots...
 
(...) Noooo, incorrect! The Vikings that migrated to Minnesota have set up a new religion that was formally worshipped every Sunday, but due to various schismatic cults (ESPN, FOX, CBS, ABC) now worship occasionally on Saturday, Thursday, and Monday (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: God's Nature
 
(...) Whoa! I likewise made reference to A Clockwork Orange just minutes ago. Are we droogs or what?!? Dave! (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) And what are those cultural values based on? The reality of genetic inbreeding, so it kinda loops back on itself. Saying cultural values is saying that it is genetic issues, which is not in the "aside from" column. I think you need to be more (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: God's Nature
 
(...) Let's make things nice and sparkling clear shall we? You said: "Our God is not the same God of people who murder women and children in His name. If you call that close-minded, so be it." (URL) I showed that the first statement is false on it's (...) (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Holy crap! Yggdrasil's taproots...
 
(...) lol Really? Then you should visit Minnesota sometime;-) Actually, I meant the post Russian revolution USSR (as I'm sure you gathered) JOHN (21 years ago, 15-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more | 40 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

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