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 / *8991 (-20)
  Re: Why not Both?
 
(...) OK. So in the system you accept as a true, revealed system, your god exists forever and created the universe, but himself doesn't need a creator. In the one I accept as likely based on the evidence and observations so far (note the difference, (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Support for Creationism (was Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!")
 
(...) Do you understand what a theory is? Do you understand that gravity is a theory? Do you understand that science deals in theories all the time? (...) Man's best friend (dogs). Tested, observed, and demonstrable. Perhaps you may wish to be more (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Why not Both?
 
(...) You'll have to clarify here: your personal relationship has a historical basis, and is based on the evidence of your life and others'? Actually, I'll correct myself by saying I think you're adressing two topics-- both the personal connection, (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Evolution - Impossible!
 
(...) Here's what you said: How about another point of view? msnhomepages.talkcit...ssible.htm -Jon (I was being conservative with 10^50) Don't see any conditions, I don't see any call for refutation. Again, you have been challenged by several (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Why not Both?
 
(...) Here we come to what is seemingly an impossible thing to answer: HOWEVER: If you are already in a position where you say you believe the Bible the answer is simple - the Bible clearly states that God always was, is, and always will be (sorry, (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
 
(...) Not quite true... (...) NES/iWS do this automagically. -- | Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | iPlanet Support - (URL) A division of AOL Time Warner | Please do not associate my personal views with (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Why not Both?
 
(...) Hey, no fair, I was gonna ask that one. Did already, actually. :-) (URL) towards the bottom... :-) ++Lar (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Why not Both?
 
(...) Who created the creator? -- | Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support Netscape Communications Corp | iPlanet Support - (URL) A division of AOL Time Warner | Please do not associate my personal views with my employer (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Concerning Evolution vs. Creation
 
IMHO: Trying to convince anyone that Creation is the truth rather than Evolution is futile given that: (a) The Evolutionist does not believe in God in the first place OR (b) The Evolutionist does not believe in a literal interpretation of the (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Support for Creationism (was Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!")
 
Looks like Tims' running strongly - I may just need to sit back and watch. -Jon (...) that (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Why not Both?
 
(...) If you want to create a Christianity vs other religions discussion we could do that. Not sufficient time for me. Here too - I'm merely stating the literal biblical interpretation. I'm not comparing / contrasting it with other religions, I'll (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Why not Both?
 
(...) 2 things in particular come to mind. 1) personal relationship with God - difficult to explain. Outwardly could appear to be similar to your beliefs. Although there's more historical basis for mine... I also have the evidence of my life and (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Why not Both?
 
(...) Probably. That's not to say that, being humans, we can't mis-interpret the Bible. But philosophically, the literal interpretation says that the Bible is relatively easy to understand - at face value. Not everything, certainly, but most (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Why not Both?
 
(...) Biblically - no human has any rights. Just like the laptop that doesn't work (sin), God's righteousness (no sin) demands that we pay for our sin. The only sufficient payment is death. Where that "leaves us" - is destined for eternal separation (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
 
This is a small subtopic and it is to be hoped that this will be my last post on it. (...) Parser overload, too many negations! :-) (I parsed it by hand but it did throw an exception) (...) I think I believe it. I sincerely believe I've provided one (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Macro-Evolution - Impossible!
 
On the subject of Macro evolution: I present the following excerpt (again from (URL) understand, when I talk about evolution I am not referring to simple variations that occur in any species. Dogs produce a variety of puppies, but never will dogs (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
 
(...) Well, guess what. You suspect wrong. By the time my handler realizes that the page doesn't exist, it has already output the HTTP header. Thus, it can't easily go back and redirect the page at that point with a 'Location:' header. I'll figure (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
 
(...) You're so far off track, it's not even funny. --Todd (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Support for Creationism (was Re: Macro-Evolution - "Impossible!")
 
(...) Again I apologize if I'm re-hashing what has already been discussed due to my not following these discussions from the beginning but I assume by saying that (and I do agree with that statement) I can also state with the same implications that (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
 
(...) I didn't try hard enough not to be non-unemotional. Let me try again... (...) Obviously I disagree with that opinion. In fact, I don't even know if you seriously believe it yourself. I think what you perceive as an anti-MS "bias" is actually (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, 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