| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Yes, the medium is cumbersome, but at least it allows for a dialog with people with whom you might not normally engage. For me it is very time consuming, and many times I've left an interesting discussion because suddenly work pops up and I (...) (18 years ago, 13-Nov-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: Two questions for the Conservatives and/or Republicans out there
|
|
(...) I guess it is only an issue when democrats lose. JOHN (18 years ago, 13-Nov-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
Alright, where were we... let's see... (...) Ah, OK. It's silly how things can be taken the wrong way in a written debate that would be cleared up in an instant if we were speaking in person. But then again, I'm not much for debating in person. I (...) (18 years ago, 31-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
--snip-- (...) --snip-- (...) Bad example ;) It is very easy to explain pi in numerous simple and rational ways. eg. pi=4(1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7 + 1/9 etc.) pi=( 16((1/5) - 1/3(1/5)^3 + 1/5(1/5)^5 - 1/7(1/5)^5 + ...) - 4((1/239) - 1/3(1/239)^3 + (...) (18 years ago, 26-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
I never said the explanation would be "simple". I simply state that adding a Creator is making it *more complex* than it needs to be. (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) I wish I could help you out, Dave! But I don't know jack about phones. And I'd have to brush up on painting staircases; I hear it's rail difficult. Well, if they ever arrest the regress, it would appear that their work would be able to be used (...) (18 years ago, 26-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: What are your axiomatic religious beliefs and why?
|
|
(...) In appreciation of your recent efforts here of late, the least I can do is answer your question :-) Taking a simple definition of religion, being belief in the existence of a god and its consequences for human behaviour, I discover that I do (...) (18 years ago, 26-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: What are your axiomatic religious beliefs and why?
|
|
(...) Hmm, this is a really good question, Brendan. It's hard to answer this truthfully, because I was raised in a Christian setting. So there are many things I believe that probably at their root go back to what I learned in Sunday School as a (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) I don't know that it's arrogant or naive, though it might be unjustifiably optimistic at the moment to call it "simple." Gould isn't saying that Hawking/Penrose will, like God, be magically able to terminate the regress; their intent is to (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) I like this part: First, most of the traditional arguments for God's existence, from Aquinas on, are easily demolished. Several of them, such as the First Cause argument, work by setting up an infinite regress which God is wheeled out to (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) jumping in here again with this brief blurb-- (URL) are apt to quote the late Stephen Jay Gould's 'NOMA' - 'non-overlapping magisteria'. Gould claimed that science and true (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Here's how: The omniscient, omnipotent being always was, by definition. Irrational? You bet. (...) Are you suggesting that this stuff is in some way simple? (...) Though we've met a few times, you don't really know me that well because I'm (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) I hear that! I'm going to do some snipping to clean up a bit around the thread. (...) <snip> (...) Not at all. I'm just seeing common ground. (...) But you will probably always be irrational though you strive to be rational. You are a closet (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Actually, it didn't really happen in a point in time, AFAIAC. Time began at that point. In fact, there's a good chance that "time" didn't "begin" (or stabilize) for "eons" (read in femto- or pico- seconds), just as our physics framework (as we (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Occam's Razor - the onus is on YOU to explain how an omniscient being just came into being, then created the universe. And if that being was created by another, who created *that* being (ad nauseum)?... Why must you insist on making things (...) (18 years ago, 25-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) I'm not sure that it will be forever outside the scope of science. The more we learn, the more we discover. Take Brendan's sealed-closet example. And let's suppose we can walk around the closet. Well, we know whatever's in the closet has to (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Now that's unfair:-) I am NOT arguing for creationism. Science is about explaining things. All I'm saying is that what happened pre Big Bang is inexplicable. (...) Agreed. (...) Thank you. That is entirely my point. Therefore any explanation (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) I have avoided using the word "proved" for that very good reason. (...) However in the absence of the alternate theory then the evidence supports the one theory. Which is why the Big Bang Theory is now commonly named as such whereas it used to (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
(...) Well, I'm trying to be strictly accurate there. It's not that the evidence proves the conclusion, it's that the evidence doesn't contradict the conclusion. If we had (for example) two conflicting ideas about the origin of the universe (the Big (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton wrote: --snip-- (...) --snip-- (...) I believe that many predictions of the Big Bang theory have been verified which is why I say there is an overwhelming body of evidence for it. There is admittedly far more (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|