 | | Re: Does God have a name for God?
|
|
(...) call (...) I would have to first prove the necessity of the existence of God before I could address whether the Bible is true or not...but that's a long topic that I would be happy to discuss if you want. (...) them? (...) The Word of God (...) (24 years ago, 30-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a name for God?
|
|
(...) Well that's not what what's his name said, why is he wrong and why is it that you're right? Did he and I just miss some meeting or something? BTW this is your cue to say something about how the meeting was church and the head speaker was God, (...) (24 years ago, 30-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a name for God?
|
|
(...) Fair enough, but if you're going to criticize a view, you would be well-advised to learn what that view is. (...) You're committing a basic falacy of reason, in that you are assuming that, since some of their views were incorrect, *all* were (...) (24 years ago, 30-Mar-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a name for God? (was: 20 Years of TLC's Frustration with "LEGOS")
|
|
(...) I did not presume any such thing - the current debate concerns whether or not there is a God for God. Now, I could always have come along and said "Pah! Since God cannot be proven to exist, then this entire argument is pointless." However, It (...) (24 years ago, 30-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a name for God?
|
|
(...) When was this mythical period, precisely? Do you have a citation to share with us? (...) See the earlier million-post debate for why your statement is flatly incorrect, or at least grossly inaccurate. (...) Or a Postmodernist, if you really (...) (24 years ago, 30-Mar-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
