 | | You're off topic, and wrong.
|
|
(...) Actually, everyone that is posting on the thread is part of the "Lugnet group", so I don't know how it would please them. (...) Ha! This thread isn't even 100 articles yet! Ben Roller (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Please, just end the entire thing! ( was: Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?)
|
|
(...) You are off-topic here. If you want to discuss Lego, please do not post on off-topic.debate. :-) Bruce (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) in (...) no (...) Muslims would force people to convert by the sword, but not Jews and Christians inasmuch as they were "followers of the Book." Whether that is solely a reference to the Old Testament only I'm curious to know. I can't think of (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) The Vikings didn't seem to have a problem with gods from other religions existing. The God of the Jews, Christians and Mohammad is the one and only, as far as I understand their collective faiths. Hindus I don't know - they shouldn't have a (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) I seem to remember that Isaiah is one of the major source of messianic prophecy. Sounds like the friend was carefully trying to provoke the father of the groom. Steve (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Many scientists have no problem with God achieving his goals through evolution. My mother was a physical anthropologist and firmly believed in God. However, others feel it is necessary to prove God exists, and evolution neither confirms or (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Ah, to this I would refer again to the scripture which says "A thousand years is but a day to the Lord." If this is literal, then God was truthful. No human after Adam has lived to be 1000, eh? =) Aaron (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
Ah, after hearing the classic creation vs. evolution debate, I'd like to make a few points, both scientific and religious: Evolution, in the purest sense, does occur. Life adapts to its surroundings all the time. I remember the example of a white (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) lacks. (...) before (...) and (...) the (...) And they have in fact found intermediary forms that predate Archaeopteryx recently in China (or was it Mongolia, sorry, I forget). A more definite mix of dinosaur and bird. There are plenty of (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) believed (...) A valid oservation. You may well be right, but then they were pretty messed up to do what they did. Logical thought doesn't seem to have been their long suit. I do think it indicates that they weren't raised in a religious (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: 4x2ReVu: 4950 Loader Dozer
|
|
(...) It's all a matter of usage. "homosexual" is the clinical term here, and I wouldn't be offended by that, but the shortened term "homo" has been used for so many years as a term of abuse that I think most N American gays would find it offensive. (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) They finally figured out that "banned in Boston" made the book they were banning a bestseller. :-) Bruce (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) One that always does get me a bit of a laugh is that Massachusetts had the "blue laws" longer than the south. They didn't START to be dismantled totally until the 70s (in the late to mid 70s they broke down and allowed stores to open on Sunday (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Aren't the New Testament and Old Testament versions of the Ten Comandments slightly different? (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
