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 / *27736 (-10)
  Re: The God Game!
 
(...) Yeah. It's a massively flawed argument IMO. (...) I'm making the point that atheism is as much of a leap of (not)faith as religion is a leap of faith. Thus although I know that agnosticism is logical (as there is nor proof for or against) I (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The God Game!
 
(...) Thanks for the parenthetical presumably, Dave! ;-) Fellow 1 bullet biter, JOHN (19 years ago, 25-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The God Game!
 
(...) I agree-- I had the same thoughts when I took the Loch Ness "hit". BTW, when you say you are a "devout atheist", what exactly does that mean? Are you asserting that there definitely ISN'T a God somehow? Just wondering, JOHN (19 years ago, 25-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The God Game!
 
(...) Cute! I "bit one bullet," but otherwise my worldview is pretty consistent, according to this test. Sure it's somewhat flawed, but (presumably) it's not as though St. Peter's standing at the Pearly Gates with this test in hand, waiting to snag (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The God Game!
 
I agree, the reasoning behind "contradictions" I ran into was from a flawed basis for the questions. (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The God Game!
 
(...) Hmmm. Their is one notable flaws of logic in this test. They compare the burden of proof for the Loch Ness monster with that for the existence of God which, given that the LNM exists or does not within our sphere of discovery and God may not (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The God Game!
 
(...) Somewhat fun, but I agree that some questions were flawed. The used certain words like "rational" or "justified" to put you in forced choice dilemas. About halfway through I stopped trying to give my own beliefs and started trying to just make (...) (19 years ago, 25-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  The God Game!
 
This one's for you, Dave! (URL) it counted me as being contradictory several times, though I'll maintain that either I wasn't contradictory or (in at least one case) the questions are rather flawed. But cute, nonetheless. DaveE (19 years ago, 25-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Neat-o!
 
(...) Take it easy on yourself, Dave! At least here you didn't use "scourged", or worse yet, that you flatulented yourself. JOHN (19 years ago, 18-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Neat-o!
 
(...) Yeah, afterwards I scolded myself for writing that, but the damage was already posted! (...) Ironically, their failed lawsuit would likewise have been more convincing if they'd admitted that HBHG was fiction, too. Instead, they continue to (...) (19 years ago, 17-Apr-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

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