 | | 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 (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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. (...) (24 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. (...) (24 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 (24 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 (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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. (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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 (24 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 (...) (24 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 (24 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. (24 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" (...) (24 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 (24 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 (24 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 (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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 (24 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> (24 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 (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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% (...) (24 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 (24 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 (...) (24 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. (...) (24 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 (...) (24 years ago, 12-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods? —Richard Franks
|
| | | | | (...) An Apatheist? ;-) Richard (24 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 (24 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 (24 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 (...) (24 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 (24 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, (...) (24 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. (24 years ago, 13-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
