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 / 18527 (-40)
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) Nah, I won't take offense. I try not to let anything said in o-t-debate get to me-- it takes all the fun out of it :) (...) No, I don't believe in him, but for the sake of the argument at hand, I'm taking it as a given. Well, ok, that's not (...) (23 years ago, 6-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) I don't think it makes sense to speak of things being objectively significant or insignificant. I consider myself of extreme significance to me, though. (...) Sure, there could be, but if my finite mind can't begin to grasp it, then how can (...) (23 years ago, 6-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) Thanks for the correction! I seem to have gotten 'todd' a lot of my life. Also thanks for your involvement in this thread. God Bless, (Before I cause a fight this is meant for JOHN) Nathan (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) Wow, wish I could end a debate on that note! (This is a joke, please do not take offensce). (...) I assume from this you do not believe in God (particularly the God of christians). Please do not take it amiss if I refer to his existence in the (...) (23 years ago, 6-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Keeping it sane...
 
(...) <snip> Thanks for making me smile at the end of a very stressful day :) Dave K. (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Keeping it sane...
 
Although I agree with you whole-heartedly Dave K., I would argue that your post is debatably undebatable, and as such it does not belong on this message board. ...It is also very on-topic. Please submit this sort of thing to .on-topic.agreeable. (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Keeping it sane...
 
(...) The overall quality of character on LUGNET has always impressed me. Even while John Neal and I have been spitting fire at each other here in .debate, we've still exchanged good-natured japes in ot.pun. I recall a year or two ago Frank Filz and (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Keeping it sane...
 
I read a few message boards daily, and one that I often frequent has a policy in place-- No religious/political debate. They implemented that policy 'cause, invariably, the discussion would get, usually quite quickly, bogged down into a 'flame war'. (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) I can't resist a little self-promotion, since The Rev's views are so nicely compatible with mine (irrefutable proof of his brilliance, if you ask me). I voiced a similar question here a while back, but the thread was huge and I never got a (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Brendan Powell Smith writes: <snip lotsa good stuff!> (...) I agree with your stance on the 'thumbing of the nose' that the 'God bless you' and, as such, it really shouldn't be said in this thread, or directed at RBPS or (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
Since I generally agree with DaveE's comments, I will try to not to repeat his arguments too much here, assuming you will reply to his post. (...) Yes, we are debating God's character as presented in the Bible, so in this context it only makes sense (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) The way I see it, there's two schools of thought on the subject. Either God KNOWS what's going to happen or he doesn't. If he DOES know, then it's not really "free will". And as such, God CREATED me such that I'll never accept him. Punishing (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) That assertion hits upon a real dilemma for me. I should come clean and admit that I don't accept the argument that proof of God's existence would eliminate our free will to obey/disobey him; Adam and Eve certainly knew (in the context of the (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes: As for Todd's characterization of God; Sorry, I meant "Nathan":-/ -John (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) Nice can of worms. Actually, if you *really* want to get into it... God is omniscient (by definition). So God *knows* whether we will choose to acknowledge Him or not, and thus it is predetermined (Predestination). It seems to me to be of (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) Seriously. Consider for a moment that you may be referring to the entity that created you, and quadrillions of other living things that are/were but a speck on this insignificant planet in the course of time and history of the universe. Has (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
So, ok. I have absolutely no issues other than personal preference when it comes to the answers that Nathan's given-- They all make perfect sense. However, they ONLY make sense accepting what we (or at least I) would consider to be *IMPERFECTIONS* (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) We haven't met yet... (...) Apology accepted. (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
First off, since the primary issue here seems to be God's love. I will write with assurance he exists. (It is just a waste to debate the character of someone while debating their existence in the same post). So I am skipping over a long argument (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) 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 (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) Pretty much. I was away for the holiday and only logged in briefly on Saturday. So I new my site had been picked, but I wasn't really in the forums at all. I wanted to get something new up during my reign, but I didn't get a chance to (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) 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 (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) 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 (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) 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...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
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 (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) 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 (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) 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". (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) 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 (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) 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 (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) 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 (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) Explain? -Rev. Smith (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) This is part of my point-- it has been there all along. (I am still composing, Brendan) -John (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Brendan Powell Smith writes: <snip> You had me right up until the facetiousness. (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) 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 (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) Were you away during your whole reign as Cool Site of the Week? Congratulations, by the way. @8^) -Rev. Smith (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
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 (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) 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 (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
I can answer much of this, including your examples, (though you may call it my opinion), but I wanted to ask before I interrupt someone else's debate. It may be of interest that like many christians I stand by the *whole* old testemant and of (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
 
(...) Hey all. Huge long thread here that sprang up while I was away. I'm tempted to respond to about every other post, but fear it's a fruitless quagmire. Rather than hit any of the theological points of issue, I just wanted to address this one, (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Also seen on CNN
 
(...) It's the cream of the jest. -->Bruce<-- (23 years ago, 3-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more | 40 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

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