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 / *28031 (-40)
  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)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) Well, that's pretty unfair. That's like saying we NEED an answer, and if we can't come up with one, creationism is correct. If you go back to 500 BC and asked people why lightning happened, I'm sure they could come up with answers. But just (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Mini Hyperspace Transport Ring
 
(...) I hadn't but it makes an uncanny amount of sense. (...) Indeed it is. I try to keep one on the go at any given time. Sorry Eric but you've been superseded. (...) Not incompatible. I'm also increasing the meta-MOC reviews which is sort of like (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
In the interest of brevity, nonredundancy, and my own sanity, I am going to skip responding to some of John's comments that have been taken up by Tim and DaveE. I also want to take a moment to note that I began this discussion by asking John to (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) Tim, (URL) this> touches on what I was talking about. JOHN (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, Timothy Gould wrote: <snip> (...) That may be. I seem to remember reading something about the topic; perhaps I can do some digging around. (...) Yeah, I meant to address this elsewhere and forgot: I'm not talking about (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) But in that case, science will really never know. My belief in God can be viewed as a "best guess" scenario as well-- given the choice of believing that the universe spontaneously came into being, or a Creator causing it to happen (whose (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  What are your axiomatic religious beliefs and why?
 
This is an off-shoot from a (URL) discussion> John Neal and I were having on OT.debate, but I'd like to open up the following question to any religious believers who feel like answering. What would you say are your axiomatic religious beliefs? Let's (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) I'd rather not know than get my answers from a pulp paperback from 2000 years ago ;) (...) I think you'll find you're quite mistaken there. I know plenty of scientists who are Christian and I've never noticed their views to be taken better or (...) (18 years ago, 24-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) In the fullness of time (ie the end of our lives) we'll either all know or it won't matter anyway;-) This sounds like the time to mention Pascal's wager! (...) I think you missed my meaning. I meant scientists who are Christian, not "Christian (...) (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Mech Bay 11
 
(...) Yes. Tim (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) Well, I think the issue is that the Bible gets treated differently than most other written works. I find that your (John's) particular take on Christianity is something closer to "inspired from the Bible" rather than "based on the Bible". The (...) (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: Mech Bay 11
 
(...) Is this really necessary? -- Tony Hafner www.hafhead.com (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
Hi John, I've taken the liberty of only responding to those points which relate to what I believe to be your misunderstanding of science. Here is an (URL) article> on the scientific method for further reading. (...) This occurs in much the same way (...) (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) Really? At what point during a rational evaluation process do you decide something? How can two scientists who evaluate the same evidence draw different conclusions? Do you know for sure from where "ideas" that "pop into your head" come? (...) (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) If, by "ignorant," you mean "lacking knowledge," then the answer is yes. Science definitely accepts "we don't know," but it doesn't posit that as a final explanation, either. The correct framing is "we don't know/we think it's like this/here's (...) (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) Agreed. But I for one appreciate it. And sometimes there is value in the struggle, even if it seems insurmountable unlikely to succeed. Someone needs to remind us all of this from time to time, and the Rev does it better than anyone I know. (...) (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) I'm surprised you entered this one then. Religious debates are rarely worth participating in. Doubly so if bold John's involved. (18 years ago, 23-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
Hi, Dave. (...) Heh, glad somebody is enjoying it. (...) You make a good point, Dave, and reading over what I wrote I can see why you've brought this up. In the Kirk case, Kirk has listed several independent arguments for why he should be be in (...) (18 years ago, 22-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Brendan Powell Smith wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) Great Googly Moogly this debate is great! Anyway, I just wanted to pop up at this one point--it's best described, for me anyway, as the 'Decker Arguement' See, here's (...) (18 years ago, 22-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)  
 
  Re: The Brick Testament - More Teachings of Jesus
 
(...) No, they need not be mutually exclusive, but I don't see that that is more than a trivial point to make. I suppose someone could, for instance, be rationally convinced that nautral selection accounts for the diversity of life on Earth because (...) (18 years ago, 22-Oct-06, 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