 | | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
To the reader, in the below quote Selçuk changed my words in a way that I don't agree with. He did it to make a point, I'm not mad that he did it or anything and no apology or retraction is necessary (to forestall any). (...) I don't agree. I think (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) $ (the sign of the dollar) <... and grins> (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) I tried to make it more clear and more universal, as being a former Muslim...:-) Selçuk (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Wow wow wow! Just as me..:-) The thing that I first realized when I started to go down to the atheistic path was "it doesn't matter if it exist or not, I will be as same, and continue to live as same either way." Sorry the believers, but, (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Ayn Rand's philosophy is not a derivation, or long list of concepts implying one another out of thin air with "Logic" hopefully proved true at some point in the chain. If you have to refer to Godel for supplemental reading, you don't get (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) well, I was only considering the arena of ideas... (...) Objectivity is usually taken to mean "independent of the observer." Since it's impossible to NOT be an observer of the universe, therefore, objectivity is impossible, goes the argument. (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Mormon bashing again
|
|
(...) No, no, no, no. The "H" stands for "Howard". Reference the Lord's Prayer: "Our Father, who art in heaven, Howard be thy name." (-; John (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Who's John Galt? <ducks> ;) --Karim (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pope Apologies for occasional squiffiness of Catholic Church
|
|
(...) Yeah - reading on from some of those links, you start to see all the things he hasn't apologised for (collusion with Hitler (oops, I've lost), etc). Although it's a good move away from the self-righteous-can't...o-no-wrong feeling I've always (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
Typically, when a person says "don't take this personally" it means that there is indeed something there that might be taken personally, and when a person says "no offense" they are about to say something offensive. Sproat gave you some good advice. (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) I'd still go with Shrugged. Go buy it and if you're really pressed for time, just read Galt's speech, which is only 100 pages or so (quite a bit much for a radio speech but what the heck...). It starts around page 700 or so IIRC (I'd go look (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) ROFL!! Hey, I resemble that remark! Kevin (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) That's a Lazarus Long quote... probably appears in all of the books he shows up in (ie lots). Kevin (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) I think that it is a general RAH-type comment that has found its way into several of his books... Like Larry, I'm not 100% sure., but I seem to remember it from more than one book... however, since RAH developed the "Myth as Reality" (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pope Apologies for occasional squiffiness of Catholic Church
|
|
Yes, it took a Polish pope to make this happen. A good start anyway although far from comprehensive :-) (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) It's an old RAH reference. I actually forget if it was from Stranger, Job, Farnhams Freehold or what. (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Hmm, well, agnostic is the closest widely-known word that I can think of, but Richard's new coined word pegs it even better, I think. (apathetic) + [atheist] = (ap[athe)ist] I don't think agnostic quite pegs it for me. I'd say I definitely was (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
Richard Franks <spontificus@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:FrBz4J.Dun@lugnet.com... (...) or (...) Try agnostic. That's what my husband, who is a Philosopher, says. sheree (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) Splendid!!! It's perfect! --Todd (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
|
(...) An Apatheist? ;-) Richard (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
