Debate : 4411


Off-Topic / Debate / 4411

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Consider this: Lucifer was an angel before his fall, and one of the brightest. Literally, the son of the morning. (1) After his fall, he has been working diligently towards thwarting all that is good, promoting politics, etc. But even after (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) Hmmmm, interesting. I'm one who feels that Lucifer has no power (over the living). None. Zip. Nada. All he can do is lie. Assuming there is a devil. Other than politicians. OOooo...ooo..... :-) Bruce (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —James Brown

(...) go (...) It's a neat debate. Nowhere that the war in heaven is described (which is not that many places), does it say that the fallen are stripped of power or status or title, just that they are cast from heaven. Neil Gaimen has some neat (...) (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Craig Hamilton

(...) hell management to open a piano bar) is being continued in an ongoing series by another great brit writer, mike carey. yours truly is getting ready to embark on the illustrations for a back-up feature or guest issue of the book. i just (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Neil Gaiman was (Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Kya Morden

(...) good "starter" Gaiman stuff be? I really liked 'Day of the Dead" that he did for Babylon 5 and I've read a few short stories in Sandman that I liked. (One was about a cat telling other cats how they used to rule the world and chased humans (as (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Neil Gaiman was (Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —John J. Ladasky, Jr.

(...) Not Gaiman by himself, but try _Good Omens_ by Gaiman with co-author Terry Pratchett. Pratchett should have written for Monty Python, but Python broke up before Pratchett's career began. I'm not familiar with Gaiman's solo works, so I don't (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Neil Gaiman was (Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Craig Hamilton

(...) i love this book too!! the hellhound, the four riders of the apocalypse, the unknown fifth rider ~"grievous bodily harm", the "nice and accurate" prophecies... i smile warmly and laugh just thinking of it. i've always thought it would make a (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Good Omens (was something less interesting) —James Brown

(...) The phrase that hooked me, and dragged me in was the description of Crowley - 'a demon who did not fall so much as saunter slowly downwards.' (paraprhased, because my copy is on loan(1) right now) Another of my favorites, which will often get (...) (25 years ago, 5-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Good Omens (was something less interesting) —Craig Hamilton

(...) hey, we better disagree on something soon or we may get kicked out of .debate. ;-) wonder who is cast as crowley in the elsewhere mentioned gilliam film? very splendid news that is! i'd think jeff goldblum maybe? johnny depp would be great, (...) (25 years ago, 6-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Re: Neil Gaiman was (Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Erik Olson

You said Pratchett came too late to write for the Pythons... well, Terry Gilliam is doing the movie of _Good Omens_. I can't wait (and I haven't even read the book! I guess I can wait) (25 years ago, 5-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Neil Gaiman was (Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Craig Hamilton

(...) kya ~ that was "dream of a thosand cats", one of my favorite sandman stories. if only a thousand cats could have that primal dream simultneously, it would become reality once again. this is impossible though. just try to get a mere three cats (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Neil Gaiman was (Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —James Brown

(...) "Dream of a 1000 Cats" IIRC. I would recommend the Sandman graphic novels, first off, partly because they're my first exposure to Gaiman, partly because they're *really* good. I constantly reccommend "Good Omens" whenever I can, to whoever (...) (25 years ago, 5-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) A lie spoken into the proper ears can destroy a world, ne? Cheers, - jsproat (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) devil. (...) Absolutely! But only if acted upon. Bruce (25 years ago, 3-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Peter Callaway

(...) And if the lie is "There is no God....."? Pete Callaway (25 years ago, 5-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Can God lie? (was: Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Todd Lehman

(...) I wonder what would happen if God came down today and said, "I don't really exist. I had you all fooled. Have a nice day." Would that be a lie? Or, since it came from God Himself, would it be a paradox? --Todd (25 years ago, 5-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Can God lie? (was: Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Dan Boger

(...) why would God not be able to lie? Are you saying that there's something that that said God cannot do??? :) Dan (25 years ago, 5-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Can God lie? (was: Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Todd Lehman

(...) Personally, I think God could lie if he wanted to. (...) Well, I thimk we established a few months back that God can make Himself reappear after making Himself permanently disappear beyond His abilities to make Himself reappear. Because, since (...) (25 years ago, 5-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Can God lie? —Dan Boger

(...) ahh - I see your point... If you can do anything, you can do something that you can't undo [1]. But once you did that, you could still undo it [2], therefor you faild to do it right the first time. (since you could undo it, even when you (...) (25 years ago, 5-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Can God lie? (was: Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Rick Kujawa

I think of course he could lie, but why would he have to (He should be- excuse me-"above that"). If he lies about his own existence reminds me of "I think (speak) therefore I am". Another thing comes to mind from an old George Carlin skit: "If God (...) (25 years ago, 5-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Can God lie? (was: Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Ed Jones

(...) the (...) Well, since there is no god, it would be hard for him to come down. The whole bible is a lie, its the world's best selling fiction novel. (25 years ago, 5-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

God is a lie? (was Re: Can God lie?) —Ben Roller

(...) Hey now, we're not letting the hard line fundamentalists get away with statements like that without anything to back it up. It's fine (with me) if you believe that, but to say it here you should at least give reasons that we can debate. Ben (...) (25 years ago, 5-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) I'm not sure of the relevance of your question. Bruce (25 years ago, 6-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Peter Callaway

(...) Well you stated that Lucifer (aka the Devil) has no power other than to lie. Let's assume for the argument's sake that there is a devil (to stop me getting in trouble from the people who don't believe there is). The lie is in fact his most (...) (25 years ago, 6-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) (emphasis mine, Peter said "a" without the stars) (...) I LOVE hypotheticals. If we posit the existence of *A* devil, is his saying that god doesn't exist necessarily a lie? No. Something that might fit the generic definition of devil might (...) (25 years ago, 7-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Scott Edward Sanburn

Larry, (...) Wow, Larry, that sounds more leftist than Libertarian. I hope there will still be room for us "obnoxious Christians" in Libertopia (Liberatopia? SP?), or will we be banned as well? Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> (...) (25 years ago, 7-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Religious freedom in Libertopia (Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Wasn't intended that way. I think your conventional rightist bias may be coloring your read. Reminder, I was speaking hypothetically. I'd never advocate shutting down a religion because some members of it misused it to effect tyranny. That (...) (25 years ago, 7-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Religious freedom in Libertopia (Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) Me, having a rightist bias? Never! ; ) Actually, I have had a lot of leftist professors say this before, so that is where it is coming from. Very enraging, to say the least. If I read wrong, my apologies. (...) Heh, if only the gun control (...) (25 years ago, 7-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —James Brown

(...) Wow. Why don't you tell us how you really feel? Stop pulling the punches. James (URL) (25 years ago, 7-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Peter Callaway

(...) What is the generic definition of a devil (apart from the red tights and pitchfork)? I ask this so we can all speak about the same thing. My definition follows. I believe a devil represents evil ("evil" with a "d", for darstardly?). What then (...) (25 years ago, 7-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

What is the meaning of life? (was: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Kevin Wilson

(...) I don't agree. *I* won't be here any more, but I will live on in the memories of people whose lives I've touched, in my daughter's genes and any descendents she may have, in what I've written (however long that may last), in what I've built (...) (25 years ago, 7-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: What is the meaning of life? (was: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Erik Olson

(...) Kevin wrote: (...) The religious point of view (Peter's) wants there to be a permanent result to a life, in order for it to have meaning now. Kevin partially rebuts this by saying that what we leave for other people is enough. Yet both of (...) (25 years ago, 7-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: What is the meaning of life? (was: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Peter Callaway

(...) But why do you care? Why do you strive to leave this world a better place? Where do we get this craving for immortality (OK, not everyone does, but we'd all like to be remembered fondly long after were gone). The sad fact is that in say 500 (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Why are christians persecuted? Or are they? (was Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Hardly. I was speaking hypothetically, of course. I'm perfectly fine with anyone of any creed as long as that person doesn't get in the habit of violating my rights. Most christians don't. Heck, some of my best friends are christians <GD&R>. (...) (25 years ago, 7-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Why are christians persecuted? Or are they? (was Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Peter Callaway

(...) I don't think we'll ever live down the crusades either, but whilst they represent dark periods in Christian (and human) history, they do serve as a reminder of how people can get it all wrong. I say again, if you want to know what Christianity (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

Briefly, my flight boards soon. (...) With you so far. A devil is an evil being. You can't know evil without knowing good. As I've said before, animals are amoral and know neither good nor evil. (well, except for cats. Cats are evil. :-) ) (...) (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Frank Filz

Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <38C5A25C.6BA832E3@v...er.net>... (...) One objection I'd like to raise is that not all Christians have an unjust and unfair god. Of course that depends on your definition of Christian, but I think the only useful (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —James Brown

(...) Yup. More specifically Lar, christian *theology* in general, doesn't. Some sects do, but the majority (insofar as I'm aware) do not. However, this may vary in actual practice from sect to sect, region to region, even from church to church and (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

I'm confused. Rereading what I said, I'm saying that god, by allowing repentance to be enough, is unjustly rewarding those who did not work hard or be virtuous by giving them a pass, (all they have to do is sincerely repent) which is unfair to those (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Frank Filz

(...) Unfortuanately Unitarian Universalism can't be pinned down. One interpretation of Universalism is that everyone gets into heaven, no matter how good or bad they are. This doesn't seem a useful interpretation to me. Many Unitarian Universalists (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Peter Callaway

(...) <much snipping to get down to this one point> (...) But what if you only realise there is a problem on your death bed? I know what you're saying, and I struggle with this heaps. Matthew 20:1-16 shows Jesus' attitude to this. It is not by our (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Bill Farkas

(...) This is actually from James chapter 2. (...) A few points that might make this somewhat easier to wrap your brains around: First, the bible places all men on equal standing, all men need to be "saved". - even the proverbial "those who haven't (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

If you guys are happy with that stance, that's cool by me. But you can't explain it away to my satisfaction. Your god is an unjust god by my standards, and that's all that matters to me. Hence, he, if he were to exist, he can blow off for all I (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) I don't reject a god who gives a pass to murderers, if the murderer in question makes up for the loss. And don't get me wrong -- taking a life is a huge thing to make up for IMO, something which few if any can do. But I reserve the right to (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

Oh, and another thing... I'm selfish and proud of it. To not be selfish is to be life denying. (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Erik Olson

It's gotten quiet here, and we're off the lugnet.homepage. I'm going to see if anything runs out of the bushes when I do this... All this splitting hairs & quoting Paul to rule on whether a sinner can be saved and get away with sinning.... I sure (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) It's funny you mention that. An article of my church's faith declares that "we belive that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression." (...) What then is the good life? Can you tell me that? Can anyone (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

1. Vs. Original Sin —Erik Olson

(...) I don't recall such a thing in any other creed. Is this article of faith meant to quibble with or clarify Paul? Not sure myself whether Paul is as important to Mormons, as he is to say Lutherans or Baptists (who make a very big deal out of (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 1. Vs. Original Sin —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Paul is very important to us. However, for all his enthusiasm, he was only human. He certainly became very excited about some things, and much of what he said is doctorine to us, but he wasn't terribly clear about many things as well. Erm, so (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

2. The Good Life —Erik Olson

(...) The Good Life. Aristotle said the good life was to become happy by pursuing the best goals, that is, to excel in whatever you are capable of. To be the best example of what you are. That you are the purpose of your own life, there is no higher (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Erik Olson

(...) Well, I guess it was a troll. But I left off the really bad names! I don't think Christianity has much power to form character traits like intellectual curiosity, productivity, attentiveness, and hipness, so more second-generation Christians (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Hipness? I'd say that's a worldly attribute, de-emphasized by our parents' (any given parents') generations. But I digress. Intellectual curiosity, attentiveness, and especially productivity are promoted by several churches, including my own. (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Oh my. I completely spaced out reading this the first time around. I have a profound and irrational dislike for homosexuals in general, due to a harsh experience I had with a gay boss and his mate during my high school job. I recognize this (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Todd Lehman

(...) How differently do you imagine that you would feel today if you had never had that harsh experience with your gay boss and his mate? (...) I believe that God created bisexuality, homosexuality, and sexuality in animals and humans for a very (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Todd Lehman

(...) d'Oh -- I forgot an "a". That should say: I believe that God created bisexuality, homosexuality, and asexuality in animals and humans for a very good reason. --Todd (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) I would probably view homosexuals on a more even keel. I might, by way of example, compare it to my feelings towards Muslims. Having worked with a few exceptionally awesome folks who happened to be Islamic, my POV towards Muslims in general is (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Note: I picked Muslims as a category for discussion purposes only, because I am not a Muslim and I was discussing how I felt towards people who are different from me in terms of lifestyle. *sigh* Maybe I should stay out of these debates while (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Todd Lehman

(...) They're the proverbial exceptions that prove the rule? --Todd (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Erm, which rule? I used the example of how I feel towards Muslims as an example of my typical reaction. As a rule, I try very hard to not judge people based upon categories. My feelings towards homosexuality is an exception, caused by a (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Todd Lehman

(...) There's an old phrase -- "That's the exception that proves the rule." Example: "All tough cops have moustaches." "All?" "Yeah, all. Well, except for this one cop I talked to once -- he didn't have a moustache... But all the others do!" "He was (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Steve Bliss

(...) [snip examples of stereotyping] (...) I thought that old saying came from English grammar, where every rule has any number of exceptions. The exceptions don't invalidate the rule, they're just exceptions. Personally, I think the 'old phrase' (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) *sigh* again. c/judge people/judge people negatively/ Today is not my day. I'm having a Bad Typing Day. As a result, I threatened to wage war against Larry's house and sell his family into slavery, and I flamed homosexuals while defending (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Kevin Wilson

(...) I believe it is fairly low... in the US and many other countries, but not all. I have read that one of the reasons for the high rate of HIV in Africa and some other third world countries is that heterosexual anal intercourse is much more (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Todd Lehman

(...) I really enjoyed the movie _Chasing_Amy_, especially what Alyssa had to say in the bar scene early in the movie. --Todd (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Larry Pieniazek

(...) <mild spoiler alert> The first part of that movie was great but the big denoument where the roomie tried to make a case for a three way struck me as a bit off. Spoiled what was otherwise a good movie for me. (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Oh. See, there I go assuming again. Thanks for clearing that up, Kevin. Cheers, - jsproat (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Larry Pieniazek

Massive snip just so I can pick on one point. (...) Sexuality only, or are you saying that ANY activity carried out purely for pleasure is irrational. I have an issue either way but let's be clear first. (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) anything (...) factors (...) Any activity done for pleasure is irrational. Or is pleasure rational? I contend that it is not -- emotion and bias play too big of a role for pleasure to be wrapped up in a tidy package. It's part of the human (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Larry Pieniazek

(...) I would contend that to throw out all emotions as not suitable for a rational being is to go too far. Emotions serve at least two good purposes: - they're inputs. They give us valuable insight into our subconscious, as well as insight into our (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Rational. (...) Irrational. *Why* is it enjoyable? *Why* is it good? Is it or is it not necessary? These questions can't be adequately and rationally explained, at least not with modern medicine. And I'm willing to bet <RUMMAGE SRC="POCKETS" (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Todd Lehman

(...) How about activity done for pain? --Todd (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) What, like my job? :-, Cheers, - jsproat (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 3. What exactly is bigotry? More definitions. Trolling admitted. —Steve Bliss

(...) Are you refering to reading an Ayn Rand book? Personally, I'd rather read an atlas. *Shrug* whatever. Steve (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

(canceled) —Erik Olson

4. Why are some nonbelievers admirable people? —Erik Olson

(...) I'm not going to debate this, because there have been a lot. Just like the Christian has to ask "Why are some atheists, Mormons and Jews decent people?" (DUCK NOW!) the atheist wonders "Why are some Christians good people?" The reality is most (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: 4. Why are some nonbelievers admirable people? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Don't rule out the possibility that he may be *on* something. But I take it you see no benefit to self-sacrifice? Certainly no benefit to oneself from a "rational" point of view, but how about from the POV of society? Take, for example, the (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Bill Farkas

(...) It's obvious from the above statement that your just trying to stir the pot, but you DO make many good points. (...) Not true. That's your opinion, on what authority do you base it? (...) Jesus did just that, and continues to answer that very (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Frank Filz

Bill Farkas wrote in message ... (...) more (...) Oooh, can't wait for Larry's response on this one... Frank (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

Bill, you're falling into the trap of quoting from scripture as if it were authoritative again. It is to you, we grant that, but it's not authoritative to me. (...) Trot out someone who's saved, then. Not someone who THINKs he is, or even KNOWS he (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Bill Farkas

(...) It's not a "trap" for me. You're the one who seems to have a problem with it. The fact that someone doesn't *want* to believe it doesn't diminish it's authority. The bible IS my standard, your mind is yours. No offense but the bible has been (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

(canceled) —Jeremy H. Sproat

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Bill, Lemme give you a clue. You're wasting your energy arguing like this. Don't take it personally, I make these misteaks all the time, myself. Here's some pointers: When you're discussing controversial topics such as religion, it's best to (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Bill Farkas

(...) I have my reasons for my methods which are not obvious on the surface. I hinted at them earlier. No more clues here. (...) Honestly, I wasn't emotional at all. That's why I included the parenthetical comment about not trying to be insulting. (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

Typically, when a person says "don't take this personally" it means that there is indeed something there that might be taken personally, and when a person says "no offense" they are about to say something offensive. Sproat gave you some good advice. (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Todd Lehman

(...) Thank God we have the Bible so that don't have to use our minds. --Todd (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Bill Farkas

(...) Thanks Todd, that one gave me a huge chuckle. :~) I wasn't saying that we shouldn't think. What I meant was that our own minds are incapable of true objectivity. We all translate experiences according to a sum total of all our previous (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Karim Nassar

(...) to (...) If that's the case (and I'm not debating that point...I happen to agree) then the Bible is even less of an objective source than our own minds... After all, the content of the Bible is purportedly eyewitness testimony, right? So it (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Bill Farkas

(...) a (...) here. (...) A lot of it is more like a court transcript in the sense that they were official documents (O.T. historical books). Much of the Bible is didactic in nature and therefore doesn't fit your argument. As for the (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Todd Lehman

(...) Aha! OK, thanks for clarifying. I wasn't aware, prior to your pointing it out, that the good book was truly objective. I mean, I always knew it was completely factual, accurate, and consistent, but I never knew that it was truly objective. (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Bill Farkas

(...) How do you talk with your tongue stuck in your cheek all the time? You sure have the gift of sarcasm. I never said any of those things either. Each time I have referenced a bible verse it was to clarify the meaning of said verse which may or (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Todd Lehman

(...) I'm sorry, I didn't glean that. Maybe I'm reading too quickly, or have been adversely influenced by too many bible proponents in the past. I didn't realize you were intending your statements to be taken that they apply personally to you and (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Bill Farkas

(...) evidences. (...) I have only maintained that the Bible is authoritative for those who put themselves under it's authority. It is, in my opinion however, true regardless of whether a particular individual finds it to be so. Assuming that God is (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Todd Lehman

(...) OK, total grokkage now. Cool, man!! --Todd (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) At last, something I can agree with. This is most certainly true. (reminder, accepting the truth of "If A then B" does NOT imply the truth of A) Bill, there isn't much common ground between us, though, as other posters have explained quite (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Todd Lehman

(...) I never thought I'd hear Larry admit that he doesn't rub blue mud in his belly button. :) --Todd (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) It's an old RAH reference. I actually forget if it was from Stranger, Job, Farnhams Freehold or what. (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Karim Nassar

(...) I think that it is a general RAH-type comment that has found its way into several of his books... Like Larry, I'm not 100% sure., but I seem to remember it from more than one book... however, since RAH developed the "Myth as Reality" (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Kevin Wilson

(...) That's a Lazarus Long quote... probably appears in all of the books he shows up in (ie lots). Kevin (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Steve Bliss

(...) I don't think it showed up in _The Number of the Beast_. Then again, I read that one at a fairly young age, and may have been distracted by the illustrations. Steve (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Erik Olson

The last refuge of religion is to turn rabid and claim that nobody can be objective, therefore you need God's revelation. Objectivity isn't an unattainable ideal. It includes using the sum total of your experiences to come to a conclusion! When you (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) I thought the anti-religion stance states that the last refuge of religion is to convert people by the sword. But again, quite sarcastically, I digress... (...) But that's still subjective, isn't it? The interpretation of this data is still (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

Good point (...) But is it a dichotomy or a trichotomy. (rational/irrational vs. rational/not rational/irrational)... I'd say the latter. As I was alluding to in a different portion of the thread, I can have and enjoy emotions without letting them (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Jeremy H. Sproat

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes [and I re-arranged]: (...) Ooh. It appears that my argument has no support for such a trichotomy. My kneejerk reaction is that you're pointing out a flaw in my semantics rather than my logic, but (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) I'd still go with Shrugged. Go buy it and if you're really pressed for time, just read Galt's speech, which is only 100 pages or so (quite a bit much for a radio speech but what the heck...). It starts around page 700 or so IIRC (I'd go look (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Karim Nassar

(...) Who's John Galt? <ducks> ;) --Karim (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) $ (the sign of the dollar) <... and grins> (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Erik Olson

(...) Ayn Rand's philosophy is not a derivation, or long list of concepts implying one another out of thin air with "Logic" hopefully proved true at some point in the chain. If you have to refer to Godel for supplemental reading, you don't get (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

I'll defer to Erik who is much more knowledgable. As I've said before, being convinced by an argument and being able to reproduce the argument accurately enough to convince others are two different things. Rand convinced me. I may not have all the (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Karim Nassar

(...) This is interesting... In one of my college english classes, I wrote a term paper that used chaos theory & fractal geometery to argue that "Free Will" is a contradiction of terms because, following the theory of mathematical chaos, because the (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) I have understood that chaos theory implied that the universe was holistic and non-deterministic. That is, certain behaviors can be modeled with some degree of accuracy, but the large number of outside influences would always prevent 100% (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Flub. Messed up on the order of my footnotes and I can't cancel from the Web interface. I hope my meaning came across... Cheers, - jsproat (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Karim Nassar

(...) The primary tenants of Chaos Theory are 1) The universe is deterministic. 2) The universe is chaotic. Put simply, you were correct, in that for all intents and purposes, it is impossible for us to make long-term predictions of chaotic systems (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Erik Olson

(...) well, I was only considering the arena of ideas... (...) Objectivity is usually taken to mean "independent of the observer." Since it's impossible to NOT be an observer of the universe, therefore, objectivity is impossible, goes the argument. (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Todd Lehman

(...) Wow, I never thought of it that way before -- and I agree 100%. Just as one has to have faith that God does exist in order to be a "theist," one has to have faith that God does not exist in ordre to be an "atheist." That is, there's really no (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Richard Franks

(...) An Apatheist? ;-) Richard (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Todd Lehman

(...) Splendid!!! It's perfect! --Todd (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Sheree Rosenkrantz

Richard Franks <spontificus@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:FrBz4J.Dun@lugnet.com... (...) or (...) Try agnostic. That's what my husband, who is a Philosopher, says. sheree (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Todd Lehman

(...) Hmm, well, agnostic is the closest widely-known word that I can think of, but Richard's new coined word pegs it even better, I think. (apathetic) + [atheist] = (ap[athe)ist] I don't think agnostic quite pegs it for me. I'd say I definitely was (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Kevin Wilson

(...) ROFL!! Hey, I resemble that remark! Kevin (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Selçuk Göre

(...) Wow wow wow! Just as me..:-) The thing that I first realized when I started to go down to the atheistic path was "it doesn't matter if it exist or not, I will be as same, and continue to live as same either way." Sorry the believers, but, (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —James Brown

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Todd Lehman writes: Is there a label for (...) Aren't those two seperate questions? <GD&R> James (URL) getting paid for this --> alladvantage.com Sign up via me, the reference $$ go to fund Lugnet. (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —James Brown

(...) Are you lobbying to have this changed to lugnet.off-topic.troll? (...) How do you know that? Are you claiming omniscience? You *believe* no one knows if they're saved with the same apparant fervor that many christians *believe* they are saved. (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Frank Filz

James Brown wrote in message ... (...) intend (...) do (...) saved. (...) don't (...) I think his point was relating to those Christians who believe that the saving is something for the afterlife. In that case, he's mostly right. Of course he's (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —James Brown

(...) Yeah, I figured that was his point, but by claiming to know that not one of the christians knows they are saved, he's claiming knowledge without factual evidence to back it up - i.e. he believes that, just as they believe they're saved. James (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Erik Olson

(...) My meaning was that it's not knowledge, it's faith. You don't *know* your saved until you experience it. If you mean some psychological transformation, fine, but nobody knows anything about the afterlife. It's all hearsay. You have to take (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —James Brown

(...) if (...) And my point was that you can't claim to know they aren't saved either. For all you know, God does talk to each and every professed christian and influence them to act as they do. You are, in fact, *less* likely to know than they are. (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) And I don't know that monkeys aren't about to fly out of my butt either. But all the objective rational evidence, that is, stuff that can be used to make meaningful predictions, stuff that can be measured and tested, points against it. Your (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —James Brown

(...) There was a time in human history when all the objective rational evidence pointed against the earth being round. Your point? Nothing in the current body of knowledge (from a scientific point of view) can either prove or disprove the existance (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Cite, please. The rational evidence pointed FOR it being round, it was the christian church that was suppressing it to enforce a flat earth, terracentric viewpoint, as I recall. As far back as we can go in history, we have evidence that people (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Todd Lehman

(...) I love this one! The Earth isn't round (it's not even perfectly elliptical), and it isn't flat either. But it then again it *is* flat (if you live your whole life in in the plains of Nebraska) and it *is* round (if you live your whole life on (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Frank Filz

Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <38C9898F.27C595B8@v...er.net>... (...) I guess it really depends on one's definition of Christian. By my definition of Christian, I see people who were quite devout who have done good for the world, and continue to (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —James Brown

(...) Ok, did some digging of my own, and find myself hoist on a petard, presumably my own. My example died, but the point is still extant. Simply because science (objective rational evidence) does not provide for somethings existance does not mean (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Agreed. (...) Also agreed. But in order for X to actually matter, X has to have some effect on reality, or it's just ornamentation on a perfectly valid theory that explains things without X. In this case, the christian god has no effect (in (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —James Brown

(...) I could argue this further, but we'd be getting away from traceable cause and effect, and getting really esoteric. (which is to say, getting into questions like 'Where does the concept of God come from' and 'Does the socio-political effect of (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

Skipped most of it but picked on one thing. James Brown wrote: \ (...) No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the basis for christianity is flawed. The basis for capitalism, and the basis for America, are not. Christianity will produce (...) (25 years ago, 14-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Scott Edward Sanburn

Larry, Man, I really shouldn't get into this: Anyway, here is the start: < rant, babble, etc. (...) I am really trying not to grind my teeth, here, Larry, but you always had a spite against Christianity, which is fine, I have my own spites on issues (...) (25 years ago, 14-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Selçuk Göre

(...) I tried to make it more clear and more universal, as being a former Muslim...:-) Selçuk (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

To the reader, in the below quote Selçuk changed my words in a way that I don't agree with. He did it to make a point, I'm not mad that he did it or anything and no apology or retraction is necessary (to forestall any). (...) I don't agree. I think (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Frank Filz

(...) Some people do interpret "Justice" to imply income redistribution. UUs range almost completely across the political spectrum, and if one had to paint with a broad brush, one would pick up the Liberal brush, but I suspect if more people (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

Well we're definitely in "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" territory and I post this mostly in fun, not because I have issues... (...) I think that's STILL begging the question. :-) What's the difference between religion and (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Selçuk Göre

(...) Sorry, anyway..:-) (...) This is from Steve Bliss's message: "I thought that old saying came from English grammar, where every rule has any number of exceptions. The exceptions don't invalidate the rule, they're just exceptions." Since my (...) (25 years ago, 14-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

Steve's wrong, I feel. Exceptions invalidate a rule, unless they are themselves subject to a subrule (that is, that they are predictable exceptions) and I feel "the exception that proves the rule" is a bit of gentle humor pointing out that (...) (25 years ago, 14-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Frank Filz

(...) Well, UU theologians would argue that it is predictable. Unitarianism is derrived from rejecting the trinity and the divinity of Jesus (something which wasn't "official" until 350 AD). UUism relies on reason to establish it's precepts, so it (...) (25 years ago, 14-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Steve Bliss

(...) Hey! I'm willing to admit to making mistakes, but in this case, I'm being misunderstood. I was just disagreeing with Todd's understanding of the implications of 'exception which proves the rule'. I've never heard that phrase used with ironic (...) (25 years ago, 15-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Todd Lehman

(...) I could be wrong about its primary use these days... I've never heard it used in any was _but_ with ironic (or sarcastic) intent, but I'll buy into the old English grammar etymology of it! :) --Todd (25 years ago, 15-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Steve Bliss

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Todd Lehman wrote: [about 'the exception which proves the rule'] (...) Thinking about it, I can't remember the last time I've actually heard this expression used. So the 'primary use these days' doesn't really apply. (...) (25 years ago, 16-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Sorry for apparently misquoting you, Steve. Are you sure you didn't actually say what I said you said? :-) I never make misteaks, you know... (25 years ago, 16-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Hmmm. The Longest Thread on LUGNET (1) (which will soon be usurped by this thread) was started when Chris Weeks remarked on how quiet .debate was... Cheers, - jsproat 1. (URL) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Longest Thread! (Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Lindsay Frederick Braun

(...) Hey, you started it. ;) The most interesting part is that you started it by simply venting very reasonable and specific frustration--but it got general and took on a life of its own. What timing! Hmm, I missed that last .debate's eventual (...) (25 years ago, 14-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Longest Thread! (Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —James Brown

(...) Well, dunno about most of those, but I'm willing to bet that Brad Justus takes the record for that last one: (URL) getting paid for this --> alladvantage.com Sign up via me, the reference $$ go to fund Lugnet. (25 years ago, 14-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Longest Thread! (Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) simple high-school physics. See, Brad (and the organization he represents) is really cool. However, this thread on religion has lotsa people hot and bothered. (With me so far? You can see it coming... :) And naturally, most things expand when (...) (25 years ago, 14-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Longest Thread! (Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —James Brown

(...) takes (...) No, I was refering to the "most replies to a single message". AFAIK, no other message on Lugnet has generated over 70 direct replies. James (URL) getting paid for this --> alladvantage.com Sign up via me, the reference $$ go to (...) (25 years ago, 14-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Longest Thread! (Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) But -- But it took me a while HOUR to think up that one. *sigh* :-, Cheers, - jsproat (25 years ago, 14-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Longest Thread! (Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Larry Pieniazek

Brad's first post probably takes the record for "widest fan" in that it had more posts from different people, although the average debate thread seems to have lots and lots of posts. But most of the posts are from the usual gang of suspects, (...) (25 years ago, 16-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Longest Thread! (Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?) —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) The thing I absolutely love about LUGNET is the threading goodies Todd has worked into the news server. That makes the Web interface more powerful than most news readers in many ways. And this help threads to *sustain* a life of their own, (...) (25 years ago, 14-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Shiri Dori

(...) if (...) -Shiri (25 years ago, 14-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —William A. Swanberg

I've been steadily wading through this thread for several days now (you have a lot of catching up to do when you go to the field for a week), and have promised myself to stay out of the debate, and I will continue to do so (although the temptation (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Reasoning is OK, nomenclature was wrong (I was rushed, and I JUST made the flight, they closed the door just after I boarded). See below... (...) Most perfect is an INCORRECT label for what I meant, an entity that is omnipotent (which carries (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —William A. Swanberg

So, more a terminology thing than anything else. Although, I do think you need to watch some of your abbreviations, omni PMS conjures up mental images I don't want to deal with, ever! -- William A. Swanberg CPT, SC Commander, 229th Signal Company (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Right. But the point at the root is that even if the universe is infinite and even if we can identify who holds the current title of "most good", there is no implication that this particular entity is omni PBS... and further, you can have at (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Ben Roller

(...) Ok, I'm a Christian, but I have to agree with Larry here. Some of us are really obnoxious! It's hard for me to walk across my campus on Friday nights because the "missionaries" from Bob Jones U(which I understand has been in the news lately (...) (25 years ago, 7-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Eugene Ipavec

(...) Because it is the only one--the only one in its weight class, at any rate--that can be disproved acording to internal, semi-objective standards. And whose followers won't whack you with a fatwa for trying. The other religions must not be that (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) *sigh* No matter how much I try, there's always going to be someone who tells me I am not a Christian simply because I'm a Mormon. I know it doesn't mean a whole lot to mr. Ipavec, but it's fairly important to me. Cheers, - jsproat (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Scott Edward Sanburn

Jeremy, (...) Well, I do not know a lot about Mormonism (I have never studied too much into different branches of Christianity, I think there is a book of Mormons, isn't there?), so I am not a judge of whether you are a Christian or not (God is), (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Eugene Ipavec

(...) Goodness, no. I meant nothing of the sort. Whether the LDS is Christian is as much for me to say as whether the Shi'ites are Moslem. Which is to say not at all. What I was referring to by the generic "Christians" was the sort of Protestant, (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Hmm. (...) Okay, I see your point. Sorry about the accusation. (...) And now you're buttering me up. I can accept that. :-, So why is it that many Christians are so unforgiving in other peoples' religions? Especially towards Christians of (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Bill Farkas

(...) I think that's the underlying problem with labels, and yet they are a necessary evil. So many groups have been borne of a desire to be non-denominational and unifying; then begin to focus on what makes them different from everyone else to the (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Inherent flaw in Christianity? You could as easily ask why is it that so many Libertarians are so tolerant of other peoples' religions and lifestyles... :-) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) Ouch, Larry. >:-P (...) I know it was a joke, but bear with me for a moment... Would Libertarians be tolerant of my lifestyle if I were to become a tyrranical conquorer bent upon stamping out Libertarianism and setting up camp on your private (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Excellent question. Flip answer is that we tolerate anything except intolerance, acted upon in a way that suppresses rights. As you point out 3 sentences on. (...) Rather narrowly from my observation. (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Todd Lehman

(...) IIUYC, you're saying that Libertarians are intolerant of intolerance. --Todd (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) No. Only intolerance acted upon in a way that suppresses rights. We even tolerate someone discrminiating who he will sell scissors to because he only likes right handed people and can't tolerate lefties, as long as there are no governmental (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Todd Lehman

(...) I forgot the winky smilie! If that had actually been what you were saying, it would make a nice paradox. :) One of my favorite bumber stickers is, "Down with Intolerance!" :) (...) How about a governmental ban on the sale of left-handed guns (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Karim Nassar

(...) Since we are in .off-topic anyway... Speaking of bumper stickers, I saw a great one today... It's a bright red sticker that reads "If this sticker is blue, you are driving too fast!" ObReligion: If you got that joke, thank a science teacher; (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) you (...) I saw that one last week and about split a gut. Then I had to get off the shoulder and back into my lane... Cheers, - jsproat (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Intolerance and property rights —Frank Filz

Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <38C99133.A47A4F64@v...er.net>... (...) I'm a bit curious as to how patents fit into this scheme. One the one hand, it is clearly good to protect the investment that went into an invention (both "dollars" and the (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Intolerance and property rights —Larry Pieniazek

(...) This came up before and I don't have a satisfactory answer. I think one is out there, I just haven't taken the time to catalog all the stakeholders and determine their rights. My knee jerk was that IP *is* property. So you have the right not (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) Slow motion response. Sorry. An interesting scenario, but it doesn't seem to conflict with my supposition: i.e. he has no power other than the lie. It's not his most powerful weapon, it's his only weapon. Assuming of course, for the sake of (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Karim Nassar

(...) it? (...) fabric (...) Another very important aspect of this question is that Christianity is a rather peculiar religion when compared to other world religions in that it REQUIRES that it's followers evangelize their beliefs. There are very (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —James Brown

(...) Hmm. When's the last time Sproat tried to convert you? James (URL) getting paid for this --> alladvantage.com Sign up via me, the reference $$ go to fund Lugnet. (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) I haven't ever tried to convert Karim. I have, however, tried to meddle in his spiritual business by expressing my beliefs. The distinction is small but profound. By trying to convert Karim, I would be attempting to force him to do something (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Karim Nassar

(...) Wow, James... :) In my entire very carefully worded post, you've managed to pick out the one exageration... but an unintentional one. Perhaps what I should have said is: "every person I have known personally and interacted with regularly on a (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Jeremy H. Sproat

(...) LOL -- yes, baptism for the dead. It's generally done for family members, however, though it can be done for anybody within reason. In fact, Elvis', JFK's, and others' names has been thrown out of the roll many times; once is enough. :-, (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Amen, brother. Josette is involved in our schools for at least two reasons: - because her involvment makes them a better place - to counteract this very tendency of slanting things. (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —James Brown

(...) :) Fair enough. I've never (to my knowledge!) attempted to convert anyone without them having opened the topic, and I've certainly never told someone I know what's best for them. I would consider myself strongly christian, but I also strongly (...) (25 years ago, 11-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Larry Pieniazek

I'm against public funding of schools as it implies a right to an education (which is a free good) But if you HAVE to have public funding... (...) this is a better way than what we generally do in the US, which is if you want to send your kids (...) (25 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Peter Callaway

(...) I wasn't actually disagreeing with your supposition, just saying that he does lie, and his lies are destructive (see below). (...) A couple of "non-Hindu's" were burnt alive by a group of Hindu's for doing that very thing last year. One of (...) (25 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)