 | | Re: Geology from Outer Space
|
|
(...) Great site. (or is that cite?) Aside from the shredding of young earthliness, it's provided what may prove to be one of my favorite quotes: "Studying science doesn't make one a scientist any more than studying ethics makes one honest." James (24 years ago, 3-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Spy plane (was: Why is religion so hot?)
|
|
(...) You're right. It sucks. It's the easiest subject to fall into debating because there's always a good supply of whackos with way-out ideas to fire things up. Plus no-one's actually going to listen and change their views, and no-one's got any (...) (24 years ago, 3-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Essential nature of mankind
|
|
(...) That's...interesting. If I were busted for aggrivated attempted shoplifting and reckless driving, would my children be responsible for my actions? Would my great-great-grandchildren, then, have the task for paying my debt to society? Or is (...) (24 years ago, 3-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The play's the thing (was Re: Does God have a name for God have a name for God....)
|
|
(...) Hmmm again. So, if he's actually _trying_ to come across as a complete failure, and in that, he's a resounding success, which is he? Jason (24 years ago, 3-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geology from Outer Space
|
|
(...) Maybe this will help: (URL) Oops! My mistake; that site is a thorough refutation of Young Earth mythology. Dave! (24 years ago, 3-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Geology from Outer Space
|
|
(...) We've been through this all before. Quote me one established, reputable *scientific* journal (absolutely no spurious web sites, please) that agrees with your claim. This claim keeps popping up but there has never been an answer to my question. (...) (24 years ago, 3-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Essential nature of mankind
|
|
(...) make the moral choice not to commit evil? (...) us going to successfully fight our nature and become good?...what would be the point of creating a people who are inherently evil?" Here's what I believe, in light of the Bible. God did not (...) (24 years ago, 3-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a name for God? (was: 20 Years of TLC's Frustration with "LEGOS")
|
|
(...) While I am flattered by your attribution of devious directed obfuscation, unfortunately I must confess to not being as clever as all that in this matter - I've not knowingly changed the subject line in any of the messages I've replied to. That (...) (24 years ago, 3-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Alien races
|
|
(...) I believe the earth to be young, about six to ten thousand years old. There have been many scientists who have examined the fossil record and found it to fit just as well in the context of a young earth as in an old one. Also, there are (...) (24 years ago, 3-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The play's the thing (was Re: Does God have a name for God have a name for God....)
|
|
(...) At this point a general warning should be given that in the near future Robert will likely announce that he has been playing a game with us to see how we'd react. I, for one, feel greatly privileged to have been a part of this bold and (...) (24 years ago, 3-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a name for God? (was: 20 Years of TLC's Frustration with "LEGOS")
|
|
(...) [snip] (...) [snip] (...) [snip] (...) Hmmmm. Robert, you're really starting to sound like someone else who came around here temporarily a while back - what was his name? Matthew Boulton? I'd almost forgotten..... ROSCO (24 years ago, 3-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Is Robert Bevens exceedingly obnoxious? (was: Does God have a name for God? (was: 20 Years...))
|
|
In just a few days in lugnet.off-topic.debate, Robert Bevens: (...) Makes unwarranted assumptions about other posters' experience. (...) Is a smart-aleck about it. Also: Ignores substantive point on how annoying tit-for-tat arguments are. (...) (...) (24 years ago, 3-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is religion so hot?
|
|
(...) Good point about separating religious beliefs and the rest of one's being. While I don't think I have changed my religious views based on the direct religious debates, I have been convinced to change my views from a whole perspective. I am (...) (24 years ago, 2-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Why is religion so hot?
|
|
(...) At an offhand guess (because I don't usually partake in other online interfaces that are this open-ended [since we're lucky enough to have the off-topic newsgroup]), I think it's no more prevalant here than it would be elsewhere. Personally, I (...) (24 years ago, 2-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a name for God?
|
|
(...) Oh goody. This debate is over. Next debate please... (24 years ago, 2-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a name for God? (was: 20 Years of TLC's Frustration with "LEGOS")
|
|
(...) Uh, I hate to point out your hypocristy...but on the one hand you say it's easy to go back through the previous messages in the thread, and yet you add spaces to the subject line which as you know breaks the thread apart. Not only that but (...) (24 years ago, 2-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a name for God?
|
|
(...) Another thing here is competency. I mean take Hitler for example, was he evil? Maybe, maybe not. I would call Hitler evil he mercilessly had 6 million Jewish people slaughtered not because he actually thought they were the bane of the arian (...) (24 years ago, 2-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a name for God?
|
|
(...) Hmmm. Good point. Which raises the question: is a thing evil by nature or by action? If someone were evil by actions, then I could see the possibility of good. If someone were evil by nature, then that person has a heckuva lot of work to do to (...) (24 years ago, 2-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a name for God?
|
|
(...) If we're splitting hairs, couldn't something inherently (ie: predisposed to) evil still make the moral choice not to commit evil? Dave! (24 years ago, 2-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Does God have a name for God?
|
|
(...) Just a nit to pick: wouldn't being a sinner imply that you have some capacity for good? IOW, unless EVERY act and thought you commit is a sin, then you have some amount of good, right? How could something inherently evil have good in it? (...) (24 years ago, 2-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
