 | | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Christians (...) I'm not sure what the Crusades has to do with my statement. Oh, wait, I think you are reading it as two seperate statements. The Muslims converted all those except Jews and Christians by the sword because they were followers (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Love your line of thought! I've never heard of this before but that's very reasonable... After all, God killed him after about a few minutes... ;-) -Shiri (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) - (...) to (...) See what I mean? If you mean the proto-birds, that's not true (your source, please). If you mean something else, you'll have to clue me in since I mention no other specific example and neither do you. Bruce (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) An MP reference... :) --Todd (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Hey, that's also what happened with Mark Twain's _Adventures of Huckleberry Finn_, from what I heard on a PBS program... --Todd (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) "ibid" is a bibliographical term that means, roughly "same book, but from this page instead". I don't know offhand the entymological background, but I bet Mirriam-Webster does... <hunt hunt> Yep. "ib" or "ibid" is an abbreviation of ibedum, (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Actually the ten commandments are strictly a part of judaism. The are reiterated in the New Testament as moral principles and are summed in Jesus' statement that all the Law and the Prophets are summed up in two: love the Lord and love your (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gods Monopoly
|
|
(...) I know. I just look at all the posts to see if I spot anything interesting. (...) I can see it now. Angels and the devil as board pieces, Go To Hell cards, Limbo instead of Free Parking, etc. (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) No no no. There was the tree of Knowledge and the Tree of Life. They at from the first one, and were kicked out so that they wouldn't eat from the second one and become immortal. They weren't kicked out for becoming knowledgeable as we usually (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) reproduce (...) the (...) before (...) These were also admitted to be a hoax shortly after being released. Bill (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gods Monopoly
|
|
(...) If don't read lugnet.off-topic.debate, then God's monopoly of Lugnet will magically disappear. Neat how that works. James (URL) an aside: When I first saw the message title, I thought: "Neat idea, but would Hasbro ever dare?" ;) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Right... although IANAM (1) either, I did live in Israel in which Islam is the second most popular religion. I remember learning about Islam two years ago and taking a field trip to the near Misgad (temple, name in english = ?). That sentence (...) (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?)
|
|
(...) Are you kidding? This is the most exciting God talk I've read. There's alot of perspective I've never seen before. Maybe Lego minds are of "a different spirit." Anyhoo, I degress from off topic. Er... God Bless Markus (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) What must be clear is that at the time, many deities were worshipped by all of the Jew's neighbors. What the 1st commandment says is basically (my interpretation) that you shan't believe in these so called 'gods' and worship them. So he (...) (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?)
|
|
(...) Hmm. Erin, while I can understand some frustration about vast threads of controversy, it's relevant to note that this conversation is happening exactly where it's supposed to: lugnet.OFF-TOPIC.debate (emphasis mine). Quoting relevant text: (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.council)
|
| |
| | Gods Monopoly
|
|
I dunno/don't care. He apparently does have a monopoly on LUGNET at the moment. Someone please wake me when it gets back to Lego topics. Oh yeah, Thanks to everyone that checked out my Eiffel tower and signed my guestbook! (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Both of you got it about half right (about the Muslims, that is). The Muslims did force people to convert, but only people who believed in dieties and/or held polytheistic beliefs. They DID NOT force Jews or Christians to convert, in fact they (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Yes, but where do you draw the distinction between Jewish by heritage and Jewish by religion? I'm Jewish by lineage, but I am not Jewish by religion. Are all heritage-Jewish people in Isreal automatically assumed to be religion-Jewish? If not, (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) ?!? What were the Crusades about, then? Historically speaking, Muslims have invariably been better neighbors than Christians, at least in terms of religious co-existance. Cheers, - jsproat (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) No no no no no... :-, God basically told Adam and Eve, "eat of any of the fruit in the garden, except for the fruit of *that* tree over there, or you'll die, so don't even touch it" (i.e. eating the forbidden fruit made them mortal.) To which (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Consider this: Lucifer was an angel before his fall, and one of the brightest. Literally, the son of the morning. (1) After his fall, he has been working diligently towards thwarting all that is good, promoting politics, etc. But even after (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) this is one of my biggest issues with a "god" thingum: if there's such a "god", and she's so all powerful and all knowing, why would should she even care what we puny humans do-think-worship? :) Dan (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) in the bible, (old testament) it is admitted and disallowed. (...) splunge? help me out here? :) Dan (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
On Fri, 3 Mar 2000 02:58:58 GMT "Shiri Dori" <shirid@hotmail.com> wrote concerning 'Re: Mormon bashing again': (...) exactly, I agree. I was never tought that "I should believe in the bible", not even by the part of my family that _is_ religious. (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
On Fri, 3 Mar 2000 02:52:01 GMT "Shiri Dori" <shirid@hotmail.com> wrote concerning 'Re: Mormon bashing again': (...) sad, but true. On the other hand, Israel is, and was always defined, as a JEWISH state. So total and complete seperation was never (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Lindsay Frederick Braun writes: nor the theory I just came up with now that a giant pink bunny made (...) That's the stuff that makes my brain hurt. I guess that's why I liked the movie Dark City so much. For those who (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) I think I spoke too soon, and you are right, but my point was just that there are many kinds of Christians. Again though, I think you're right. (snipping here, sorry if I cut too much) (...) And that "whoever is not against you is for you" so (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) I've seen "people of the Book" used, but I doubt if it's an official term. Kevin (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) And also... sounds like it's OK to have other Gods "after me" - ie Himself as chief god and then a load of minor ones? I don't remember that being OK <g> Kevin (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) It always confuses people when they ask what I "am" and I try to explain it, because the above is almost exactly what I have to say (save the religious part--ask me again when I'm over 30 and I'm sure I'll have that in there too). Sometimes (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Getting picky here! (...) Why not? I agree that an "Anglican" Christian such as myself may have differing views on issues than a "Baptist" or "Mormon" Christian, but on this issue I think we're all pretty universally in agreement. (...) I (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) IANAM(1), but I believe that one of the basic beliefs is that "That there is no god but God and that Mohammad is His messenger". Though, they mean the same God, so maybe that doesn't count. This leads me to wonder: Is there a term to describe (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Yes they are, in the book of Exodus is where we see them first. The Jewish Bible is basically the Old Testament only, whereas the Christian Bible has both the Old and New Testament. A freind of mine recounts an interesting story. He went to a (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) I think it's safe to go ahead and say "not in the picture". If not then I ask where exactly were they walking? That is unless you mean the creation of Earth and are suggesting that man came from elsewhere (not my personal belief but I could (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) OK, so that would be (b) then? How about other non-God deities (from other religions)? Do those gods deny the existance of other gods? (Obviously the Greek gods, for instance, don't fall into that category.) That is, is Christianity the only (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) He says many times that there are no other gods beside Him. All other gods are fabrications. Bill (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) I'm voting for "splunge" both here and in the presidential election. ^_- (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) I disagree, creationism can stand quite aptly on it's own two feet. It doesn't get it's validation from disproving evolution. There is quite a lot of geological and biological evidence to support the bible. The fossil record is not as the (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) My bad ^^; Though, technically, aren't the 10C included in the Old Testiment? I can't remember for certain. (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) No, they would be favouring Judeism, as the 10 Commandments were given to Moses, who at the time was leading the Israelites out of Egypt. They were Jews. Christianity is based on Judeism with one fundamental difference - we believe that Jesus (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
On Fri, 3 Mar 2000 01:34:14 GMT, Sproaticus <jsproat@io.com> wrote: First I'll say this... this thread is making me homesick!!!! (...) Man, they'd just just have to see my music collection to freak out about me. ^_^; Oh well. (it's that naughty (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) ... (...) Maybe they thought that life was so terrible that death was better than the hell that was their life. For some people nowhere is a better place. Not that I think they were non-religious, I just don't think that their statement (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) The Plagues, I guess. I think that's a great way to teach religious things in school. If you want to believe that a higher power caused them, knowing how the power did it should only reinforce your belief in the power (by saying that not only (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) The question of whether God exists or not for me is clear cut. He does. This whole Creationist v Evolutionist argument has pointed towards a Great Creator of the Universe, and that is God. Man certainly had nothing to do with the original (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) An extreme example of this would be walking into a government building and seeing a swastika mounted on the wall. Now, I don't know about you, but I would very quickly get the impression that which ever government agency was housed in said (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) That's a great question! But more than that, what I wanna know is whether God (THE God): (a) admits that other deities exist and disallows their worship, or (b) disavows the existance of other deities, or (c) whether His answer to that would (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Yes, but what about whether or not this 'deity', aka God, exists? -Shiri (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) What it means is that whatever is primary in our lives is our god. For some people it is money, or power, property, sex, popularity, image, relationships, ........., even LEGO. It could be a combination of any of these things or a different (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Err, just to make myself clear - I don't mind teaching the bible, as long as it is taught as a foundation to our country (Israel) and not as a practice we should all believe in. I also believe that it should not be enforced after grade school (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Or me either. You Americans don't know how lucky you are to at least have SOME degree of separation between the two. In Israel the two are totally mixed, wisted and intertwined to a horrible and utterly disgusting mess. The orthodox Jews have (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) ^^^...^^^ Urrp, I mean the "DOJ vs. MS" case! --Todd (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Hmm, I never thought about this one too much before the MS vs. DOJ case, but does this mean that there are in fact other gods besides "God" and that He desires to cultivate and maintain a monopoly in His target market? --Todd (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message ... (...) this, I (...) Although many would argue that I am not a Christian (including myself, though I acknowledge that I am a product of a Christian culture), but that may not have been what you were saying. I do (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
Bill Farkas wrote in message ... (...) in (...) similar (...) endorsing or (...) that (...) not (...) merely (...) which is (...) Ah, but the Ten Commandments are MORE than an example of the basic principles, here they are for reference: 1 - Thou (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | L. Ron Hubbard urban legend (was: Mormon bashing again)
|
|
(...) I have to agree with James Brown's guess. I've heard the same story, except that the two writers were L. Ron Hubbard and Frank Herbert. Herbert, of course, wrote _Dune_, the SF classic with generous helpings of Islam. When you have multiple (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Well, BYU is a private school. But like any big school they get all kinds of financial kickbacks from the state and the city of Provo, as well as outright funding. So while they don't have the force of law behind them, they do have the force (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Ahhh, yes, you referenced pilgrims and after reading that section I forgot and thought you said Puritans. My mistake. (...) far (...) categorize (...) It cuts both ways - they were religions that decided they needed to compete and have (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
Wow, I think this is my first post to .debate... <snipped a bunch of stuff> (...) Well said. :) I've enjoyed reading your responses; keep up the good work. Joel (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) I agree and have said nothing to the contrary. (...) Very true, but not all "pilgrims" were puritans. (...) It was far more than that, and the greek bible had little to do with Greek Orthodoxy at this point in time. The ante-nicene and (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(I hope this formats OK when I submit it) Toto, I think we're in Kansas... (...) I've read most of the supposedly "scientific" Creationist literature, and nowhere is the necessary connection between belief in a director or architect ("theistic (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Morality again...(was Re: Mormon bashing again)
|
|
(...) <major, almost indiscriminate snippage> (...) That is as distorted and inaccurate a phrase as saying the christian code of behaviour is "do what the priest says". (...) If morality is not objective, then it is subjective, and only as (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) I don't see that interpretation. He says nothing of endorsing, he mentions observing moral precepts accepted by all religions - which I also mentioned in my original comments: (...) The ten commandments are a concise example of these basic (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) total laugh out loud!! my kids have practically memorized the script for all three of the wallace and gromit vids. ..joseph g (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Major snippage fore and aft. Which is not to say the other things you had to say weren't interesting, or whether I agree with them or not, it's just that this is the only one I wanted to comment on. The Roman Empire started with high ideals - (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Creationism is actually very scientific. Many secular scientists have become christians precisely because their findings lead them to the conclusion that everything is too complex to be accidental. I have a few books I could mail to you that (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Do it here among friends. :-) That's what we're here for. I read your post but not all the replies. I'll try to be brief but know this, I wish more christians were like you (and Frank). (...) Would that the Christian Reformed(1) church (or (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) men, (...) fled (...) anything. (...) I think Frank has answered succinctly about the founding fathers' views on religion. No particular religion is to be advanced over another. The Puritans were doing their best to persecute other religions, (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
I suggest anyone who wants more insight into what the founding fathers intended, check out this site: (URL) particular reference to the posting of the Ten Comandments, here is one little quote from the article on relion: (...) To me this suggests (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Hear, hear. Creationism isn't science, it's a tool for making converts to Christianity. Similarly, posting the Ten Commandments in schools proclaims that authority comes from god ("thou shalt have no other gods before me"). I just want to make (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Yep, that's the one. I've never thought about it as near Harrod's, but I guess it is! (...) You're not kidding! I suppose they figure that if you come rolling down the hill, you oughta be able to just aim and shoot up the ramp. Nice to think (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) I'm a Mormon as well, but a "bad" one, in that I don't attend church and have serious issues with some of their policies and beliefs. However, I see nothing wrong with : (1) a Legislature that accurately reflects the majority of the populace (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) steps (...) Well spoken Jeremy, there is no such thing as Constitutional separation of church and state. The Constitution merely states that the government cannot restrict the free exercise of religion. Now this does have its limits, the (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
I somehow feel obligated to chime on this topic. I too am a "Mormon" and am never surprised at the level of ignorance that often surfaces as evidenced on slashdot. Generally speaking, most "Mormons" have pretty thick skin when it comes to criticism (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) I've heard that as well... I suspect it's an urban legend (or whatever the SF equivalent is?), but only they know for sure, and I don't think they're telling. (...) The Church of $cientology, as Hubbard set it up, is (also IMHO) seriously (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) Actually, at least one large room, the chapel, is required for Sunday services. In this room (which can vary in size depending upon the local membership) the Sacrament meeting is performed, and typically there are a small handful of (...) (25 years ago, 2-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
