 | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —Brendan Powell Smith
|
| | | (...) Sure, jump in! There's a reason we're debating in a public forum and not just over e-mail. (...) OK, so would you say his first covenant, that of the Old Testament, could be accurately summed up by "Israelites, do what I say, or I will kill (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —Thomas Stangl
|
| | | | Rev, I think you need to get working on fleshing out the Good Book of Maury. Sounds like a hoot. Then again, all you'd have to do is change a few words/names/phrases across the Bible, and it would probably work well enough. But if you take some real (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —Brendan Powell Smith
|
| | | | (...) Lob is only revealing his divine mysteries to me a little at a time, but I will pass on more Rooist theology as the occasion warrants. (...) Careful, Tom, you're bordering on blasphemy here. Rooism is a wholly unique religion with a unique (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —David Koudys
|
| | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Brendan Powell Smith writes: <snip> You had me right up until the facetiousness. (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —John Neal
|
| | | | | (...) This is part of my point-- it has been there all along. (I am still composing, Brendan) -John (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —Brendan Powell Smith
|
| | | | (...) Explain? -Rev. Smith (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —David Koudys
|
| | | | (...) From post (URL) the first tweaking began... " (...) May Maury the Talking Kangaroo watch over you in the night! -Rev. Smith " In this discussion you have used the spaceship/kangaroo scenario as an *example* as to how ludicrous you believe (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —Brendan Powell Smith
|
| | | | | (...) This was not intended as a harsh comment. It's just that when someone says "God bless" to me, and then specifies that the God who they are asking to bless me is the God of Christianity, it has as much meaning to me as my imploring Maury the (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | | (...) Besides, there's plenty of places you could mail off to and get all the official documentation you need in the US to be a reverend and conduct weddings... (This is one of the things which really highlights that the religious definition of (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —David Koudys
|
| | | | | | | (...) And I have no problem with the 'refusal' of a blessing, and i do concur with your take on the, "Oh, you're an Athiest so I'm just going to throw that 'God Bless' at *you* to tweak your nose, 'cause I'm right and you're wrong not to believe". (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —Frank Filz
|
| | | | | | | | (...) And how many people realize they are invoking God's blessing when they say "goodbye" which originally was "God be with ye." I know a lot of folks now just say "Bless you." Frank (stirring the pot...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —Nathan Todd
|
| | | | | | (...) Just to clarify, read any post by me in .castle and see if you can find one without God Bless on the end (OK there may be a few). I tagged the other bit on to show where I would be coming from in this debate... Not to be snide. Of all the (...) (22 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) We haven't met yet... (...) Apology accepted. (22 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | (...) Although The Rev has already addressed a lot of this very capably (and with remarkably polite restraint!), I wanted to add a few thoughts here, since the debate has taken a bit of a turn... That's an interesting point, but if we remove the (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —John Neal
|
| | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes: Either way it's not cool to force a blessing (...) Even in the middle of composing another post, I was struck by your words, because they echo a similar ascertain you made which I didn't understand in (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | (...) Well, "force" might have been too strong a word for me to choose, and the "black magic" angle was meant to be somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but you ask a good question. When someone says it to me I repond on two levels. The primary meaning is (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea —David Koudys
|
| | | | (...) And I completely concur--if someone made a law in which folks would have to pledge 'there is no God', I would protest. If you have a constitutional ammendment saying no religion in official state stuff, then remove 'God-talk'. These zealotous (...) (22 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
