Subject:
|
Re: The god debate again... sigh (Re: Will Libertopia cause the needy to get less?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 28 Nov 2000 23:45:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2596 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Plowed ground alert.
Many of us could also say: "Ugh, The LP debate again...bigger sigh!
>
> Let's see if I can manage to just say ONE post on this and then let it go.
> or if anyone else can either... hahaha... (1)
My views are no less valid than yours, I do not seek to ridicule or stifle
yours - or limit them to "ONE" reply. Unlike you, I have no ghosts.
>
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bill Farkas writes:
>
> > > > Interestingly enough, we have an unintentional answer to the "God" debate
> > > > straight from Big Lar himself:
> > > >
> > > > http://news.lugnet.com/general/?n=24629
>
> That's a bit of a stretch, Bill.
Admittedly. Yet, the same logic applies perfectly. I DID admit that it was
all in fun though.
>
> > > Heh. For good or ill, that's kind of a restating of the long-lived
> > > Ontological Argument for God's Existence.
> >
> > Yet, as far as I understand it, the Ontological Argument is more about the
> > nature of existence not whether the thing exists in the first place. As
> > such, the existence of the thing is already a foregone conclusion. As my
> > reference to Lar's observation above indicates: someone who has not
> > witnessed a thing cannot refute someone who has.
>
> Stipulating that there is a connection for the sake of argument (there isn't):
>
> Well, since no one *has* witnessed gods, god or God, in an objective,
> verifiable way, we're safe there.
According to you. Many have witnessed God in verifiable ways. I do not seek
to open that discussion to a million thread posting though. If it happens,
so be it.
> If your christian god is fundamentally
> unknowable, you have no way of knowing if your Born Again Moment(tm) was the
> the One True holy spirit or just DTs from last nights unholy spirits. We
> covered this last time, remember? What's changed since then? Why bring it up
> again?
>
> > Those who have not found God have not sought him in
> > the right place.
>
> Or they aren't looking.
Which is totally fine with me, I don't seek to twist peoples arms into
agreeing with me - my beliefs are mine. Everyone is entitled to their own.
I'm just trying to represent mine in a fairly intelligent manner (because
many here try to relegate them to ridiculousness). I believe I told you once
in a private correspondence how that I disagree with many Christians who
feel it compulsory to accost everyone in their path and brow-beat them with
the "gospel". Christ Himself only spoke to those who wanted to listen to
Him. My engagement here is simply participation in the arena of ideas.
>
> I tend to label myself an atheist, because explaining that I'm agnostic to
> the extent of allowing for the existence of an unknowable spirit who has no
> effect on the universe whatever (no other kind is supported by the evidence)
Yet, He has been guiding all of history as evidenced by fulfilled prophecies
- which is unrefutable.
Bill
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
231 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
