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 / *8221 (-20)
  Re: Nature of man (was Re: Problems with Christianity)
 
(...) Well, I can't speak for others, but here is one take on it. (and I haven't thought this through overly much, so it may have holes...) I don't see a contradiction. If I choose to (X), or to not (X), how does God knowing ahead of time which I (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uselessness of .debate
 
(...) Ask Suz why -- she was the one who put them there. --Todd (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Nature of man (was Re: Problems with Christianity)
 
But according to others in this group, man doesn't HAVE free will - God knows everything anyone will do from cradle to grave - where is the free will in that? (...) -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please do not (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Nature of man (was Re: Problems with Christianity)
 
(...) This view is both aesthetically pleasing and consistent with much medieval doctrine. That is, man is capable of embracing salvation or damnation by his own actions. An infant starts as neither good nor evil but able to succumb to temptation (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Nature of man (was Re: Problems with Christianity)
 
(...) <snippage for the purpose of emphasis, also because I'm coming in late, and am (bluntly) too lazy to hunt up the argument to date and comment in a forward-moving way> I'm not sure about other flavours of christianity, but I know that the RC (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Problems with Christianity
 
(...) And I ask, which is a better view of humankind? Personally, I would tend to think that Christianity is a pessimist's view, if it says man is essentially evil. No thanks. -- | Tom Stangl, Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | Please (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Problems with Christianity
 
(...) Interesting - I was thinking of using the same analogy. :-) Two big differences though - Murder is a crime giving death, and O.J. denied it. Christ's resurrection gives life to whomever accepts him, and not only did he "admit it" afterwards, (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Arguing about nature, Nature, and ethics
 
In response to "Kevin Wilson" <kwilson_tccs@compuserve.com> in message news:G5sE42.BEG@lugnet.com... Kevin, (...) I appreciate your effort at understanding my position. That's a tall order. I'll try to be as clear as possible, but to do that I'll (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uselessness of .debate
 
You forgot one moderating method: Use the password checker, and only accept messages which passes a certain limit of security (or a modified version of the checker, with a specialized dictionary). Seriously, if you have a group with 'free speech', (...) (24 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Problems with Christianity
 
(...) I understand your intent and accept your apology, but you must recognize that a person who does not share your views of Christianity is apt to feel insulted at being called blind. Many among us have duly considered the questions of Faith and (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Problems with Christianity
 
(...) We can't say which is more important, because Christ and His message are integral parts of each other. If I say God is love and you ask me which is more important, God or love, how can I answer? Can an atheist lead a moral life? Certainly. (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Problems with Christianity
 
(...) And there are many people who argue how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Just as valueless an argument. (...) These are your interpretations. (...) Well they interpret it differently, go argue that with them. (...) Not according to (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uselessness of .debate
 
(...) I think there is some overflow from .debate into other groups. I can't absolutely put my finger on it (in part because I realize that in part the Larry vs. Scott shouting match may have started outside of .debate, but I certainly see linkage (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Problems with Christianity
 
(...) I apologize if you were offended - my intent was not to be insulting. If I see someone walking into a nuclear reactor, I presume that they are doing so "blindly", and try to warn them of the danger - they can't see the radiation that's killing (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Change? Somewhat verbose...
 
There's been an informal moratorium on shouting the past couple of days during which we've examined the benefits and shortcomings of the .debate group. Generally, it seems, we're agreed that .debate should continue to exist, but we're unsure of the (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uselessness of .debate
 
(...) What is the added value to those of you who want .debate gone? I can completely understand not valuing the presense of debate, even I duck out now and then when I'm busy. But I don't get the motive behind the suggestion that it should be gone. (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
 
  Re: Problems with Christianity
 
(...) Thanx Tom, I see your point. I think sometimes it has to do with reading something in the "tone" in which it was written. I think we all sometimes assign a "tone" to a post, in our own minds as we read it, that might not accurately reflect the (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Polyamory
 
(...) I think the general truth is probably that it does both. You have open a richer body of choices and experiences, but you do also lose some things. That may include tougher compromises. Many were discussed, but they were hypothetical. The (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Polyamory
 
(...) OK Larry. I'll play your game again. Let's revist this message: (URL) this text: =+= The point I was making about rights concerned political freedoms. For example - here in the UK one could always choose to be, say, a communist. Can you say (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Uselessness of .debate
 
To all, I might as well thorw a comment into the fray here..... (...) I gave up on debate about a year ago now, simply because Icould not stand it anymore. There is a lot of hostile people around, that seem to thrive in debate, and not anywhere else (...) (24 years ago, 19-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

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