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 / *4811 (-20)
  Re: Intolerance and property rights
 
(...) This came up before and I don't have a satisfactory answer. I think one is out there, I just haven't taken the time to catalog all the stakeholders and determine their rights. My knee jerk was that IP *is* property. So you have the right not (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
 
(...) Agreed. (...) Also agreed. But in order for X to actually matter, X has to have some effect on reality, or it's just ornamentation on a perfectly valid theory that explains things without X. In this case, the christian god has no effect (in (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
 
Good point (...) But is it a dichotomy or a trichotomy. (rational/irrational vs. rational/not rational/irrational)... I'd say the latter. As I was alluding to in a different portion of the thread, I can have and enjoy emotions without letting them (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
 
(...) At last, something I can agree with. This is most certainly true. (reminder, accepting the truth of "If A then B" does NOT imply the truth of A) Bill, there isn't much common ground between us, though, as other posters have explained quite (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
 
(...) I thought the anti-religion stance states that the last refuge of religion is to convert people by the sword. But again, quite sarcastically, I digress... (...) But that's still subjective, isn't it? The interpretation of this data is still (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
 
(...) OK, total grokkage now. Cool, man!! --Todd (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
 
(...) evidences. (...) I have only maintained that the Bible is authoritative for those who put themselves under it's authority. It is, in my opinion however, true regardless of whether a particular individual finds it to be so. Assuming that God is (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
 
(...) I'm sorry, I didn't glean that. Maybe I'm reading too quickly, or have been adversely influenced by too many bible proponents in the past. I didn't realize you were intending your statements to be taken that they apply personally to you and (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
 
(...) How do you talk with your tongue stuck in your cheek all the time? You sure have the gift of sarcasm. I never said any of those things either. Each time I have referenced a bible verse it was to clarify the meaning of said verse which may or (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
 
(...) a (...) here. (...) A lot of it is more like a court transcript in the sense that they were official documents (O.T. historical books). Much of the Bible is didactic in nature and therefore doesn't fit your argument. As for the (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
 
The last refuge of religion is to turn rabid and claim that nobody can be objective, therefore you need God's revelation. Objectivity isn't an unattainable ideal. It includes using the sum total of your experiences to come to a conclusion! When you (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
 
(...) Aha! OK, thanks for clarifying. I wasn't aware, prior to your pointing it out, that the good book was truly objective. I mean, I always knew it was completely factual, accurate, and consistent, but I never knew that it was truly objective. (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
 
(...) to (...) If that's the case (and I'm not debating that point...I happen to agree) then the Bible is even less of an objective source than our own minds... After all, the content of the Bible is purportedly eyewitness testimony, right? So it (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
 
(...) Thanks Todd, that one gave me a huge chuckle. :~) I wasn't saying that we shouldn't think. What I meant was that our own minds are incapable of true objectivity. We all translate experiences according to a sum total of all our previous (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Papal support of evolution
 
(...) The Catholic Church accepted the possibility of evolution back in the 1960s. (I think it may have been earlier, with Vatican II.) The only requirement of a Christian, said the Catholic clergy, was that they understand that at some point God (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Papal support of evolution
 
(...) I remember the incident, but I got the impression (wrongly perhaps) at the time that he was refering more to a church position than his own opinion. A quack? He's a phony doctor?!? He should be down on Wilshire in L.A. working the Miracle (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Papal support of evolution
 
(...) Hehheh...I meant to say, "Was he misunderstood or misquoted?" (...) Well, the amazing thing (IMHO) is this: Because PJP2 is the official head of the RCC, it is the official position of the RCC that DE isn't rubbish. That's a very open-minded (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Papal support of evolution
 
(...) Hmm...misquoted or misquoted... do I have another choice? ;) Nope, JP II did indeed say that (or similar). As to him being a quack or closer to God than the rest of us - I'm not qualified to judge that. I don't think he's a quack, but (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
 
(...) Ok, did some digging of my own, and find myself hoist on a petard, presumably my own. My example died, but the point is still extant. Simply because science (objective rational evidence) does not provide for somethings existance does not mean (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
 
Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <38C9898F.27C595B8@v...er.net>... (...) I guess it really depends on one's definition of Christian. By my definition of Christian, I see people who were quite devout who have done good for the world, and continue to (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR