|
|
 | | Re: Shocking! What Do You Make of This?
|
| (...) So, I assume you think nothing of it then (other than high fashion)? I happen to think that it is good evidence to support the idea of the innate differences between men and women. JOHN (19 years ago, 20-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Does God Have A Name For God?
|
| (...) Now this IS intriquing. What were you doing in the belly of the beast? I think it's HIGH time YOU come clean and confess to the heinous crime of worship;-) (...) Hey, it could be canon for the Emergynts... {:^D JOHN (19 years ago, 20-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Does God Have A Name For God?
|
| (...) Yeah, somehow I don't suspect that Jesus was talking about Vulcans or Wookies in that passage, but in the original thread I posed the question about "other lands" in a sort of tongue-in-cheek way, and Ryan Farrington suggested that my source (...) (19 years ago, 20-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Shocking! What Do You Make of This?
|
| (...) Mmmmm. I guess if I printed it out, I could make a nice hat? Richard Still baldly going... (19 years ago, 20-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Does God Have A Name For God?
|
| (...) Very astute. Indeed, I think the 'pen' thingie is very telling. What is a planet, if not a pen for the lifeforms on it. We might imagine other pens. And nothing of which I am aware suggest that ours is the first pen to which the shepherd has (...) (19 years ago, 20-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Does God Have A Name For God?
|
| (...) First let me say that you are not crazy if you talk to yourself, Dave! (But you are if you listen;-) I think Jesus is clearly referring to Jews and Gentiles here. The sheep in the pen are God's chosen people, the Jews. But Jesus is obviously (...) (19 years ago, 19-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | RE: Does God Have A Name For God?
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler (URL) wrote:> (...) Hi Dave! Glad to see that your prose is as eloquent now as it was five long years ago. You should get paid by the word, if you ask me. And how did you get to be such exquisite fashion (...) (19 years ago, 19-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Shocking! What Do You Make of This?
|
| (URL) Shocking!> JOHN (19 years ago, 18-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Heads up, atheists
|
| (...) Look, maybe some of the people in a PA town deserve God's wrath! :-) JOHN (19 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Heads up, atheists
|
| (...) Now that's what I call feigned praise! JOHN (19 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Heads up, atheists
|
| (...) Bravo, I say. In so doing, Pat demonstrated loud and clear that "Intelligent Design" is in fact the fundamentalist Christian notion of creationism, thereby ending the argument espoused by ID-proponents that it's a "non-theistic" "scientific" (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Heads up, atheists
|
| (...) Admitting he was wrong after universal outcry against him. Pat Robertson has said to many crazy things lately for me to take him seriously as a Christian. Threatening God's wrath on the people of a PA town for teaching evolution? Calling for (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Heads up, atheists
|
| (...) Okay, now I have to give him props for admitting that he was (URL) wrrr...rrr>. JOHN (19 years ago, 12-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Heads up, atheists
|
| (...) Sorry to disappoint. The subject line was a kind of joke-- it was (URL) recycled> for comedic effect. It was just my friendly way of tweaking some non-believing friends around here. As a Christian, I, of course, am vulnerable to the same type (...) (19 years ago, 8-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Heads up, atheists
|
| (...) <<chuckle>> I have been away for a while. So I kinda walked into this one on the strength of the subject. Silly me. Can't imagine why atheists would care whether there was some bloke called Jesus padding about 2,000 years ago. Must remember to (...) (19 years ago, 8-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Heads up, atheists
|
| (...) I suspect that Jason Robards won't be starring in the film version of this one, though. (...) That's not always unreasonable, except when the necessary disproof is so burdensome that it becomes practically impossible. If I asserted that my (...) (19 years ago, 6-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Heads up, atheists
|
| (...) Agreed. Kinda like the Scopes trial in reverse;-) (...) He sets up a classic error-- he has so-called proofs that he has written about that Jesus didn't exist-- he claims it is up to the other side to prove him wrong. (...) Even moreso the (...) (19 years ago, 6-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Heads up, atheists
|
| (...) I'm surprised that this is going to court, honestly. How can you prove that someone didn't exist ~2000 years ago? The best you can do, IMO, is show that the evidence doesn't support the conclusion that he existed. AFAIC, the Gospels are (...) (19 years ago, 6-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Heads up, atheists
|
| (URL) Finally we shall soon learn the Truth> JOHN (19 years ago, 6-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Excellenter news!
|
| (...) Really? We were so famous, they did a (URL) about us (the handsome one is me) JOHN (19 years ago, 6-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
