 | | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Well, it isn't official in that the phrase is a translation of the Arabic, but it does come from translating the Koran to English. I think Mohamed also used this term in inviting some visiting Christians to worship in a mosque at one time. (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 4x2ReVu: 4950 Loader Dozer
|
|
(...) I find that somewhat surprising. In Norway, the "correct" term is "homofil", which is viewed as being somewhat clinical and hence is not prefered. "Homo", as a short version of "homofil", on the other hand, is commonly the prefered term in the (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) It's not pretty much do what you want. There is even nothing like that since good behavior is a good behavior and I can distinguish it without the help of any book written centuries before and looks very stupid today. Even if it would be as (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Yes, it is something like the first amendment "La ilahe illallah and Muhemmedun resulullah" or something like in Arabic. Islam also states that Isa (Jesus) Musa (Moses) and Davud (David?) are all prophets like Muhammed (Mohammed) and so, they (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Hmm...since TLC wasn't around yet to call them studs, I guess God just called them "cubits" instead. 300 long, 50 wide and 30 high... Yep, that should just about hold every pair of animals that they make. And that whole "take it down and (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) You might have to settle for "Western monotheistic tradition" or a neologism "Abrahamic". Acknowledging our Islamic heritage with an all-inclusive term would have been too painful for Christian cultures which could barely come to acknowledge (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) AcK! I wasn't going to get into timestream cotemporality. But I see that apparently tomorrow night I will...;) Have we just changed history by having this conversation? I wanted to see that, but it went in and out of theatres so (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Like? (...) Anti-logic. Evolution and biblical Special Creation aren't the only two choices. And evolution does not "like" or "dislike" the fossil record (although we all can dream of having every creature that ever lived preserved somehow, (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
ObLego follows. (...) It's murky enough. Too bad God is not actually out there to explain himself. Modern religion retroactively rules on these loopholes to say what's OK. The ambiguous hints at what the OT people believed about other deities (and (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) It's strange. Islam stressed on so much that the god is ONE and ONLY (...) Selçuk (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
