Subject:
|
Re: Does God have a name for God? (was: 20 Years of TLC's Frustration with "LEGOS")
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 30 Mar 2001 15:34:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2523 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes:
> In lugnet.general, Dave Low writes:
> >
> > Does God have a name for God? follow up in off-topic.debate if you dare...
>
> Who knows?? But God (if it exists) probably has another "entity" that it looks
> up to, and chances are it's not called "God". Of course, this assumes that
> "looks" and "up" actually have some kind of meaning in God's environment...
>
> ROSCO
Funny, 'cos in our environment the word 'probably' has a meaning - that
there is sufficient evidence for an event to be more likely to occur than to
not occur. Exactly what are you basing the use of this word on in the above
context?
As for the caveat regarding the assumption that certain concepts retain
their interpretation in a discorporated existence, you fail to mention the
assumption that the main points of the sentence have any meaning in ours.
I'm not entirely convinced any of this is happening at all anyway. Can't we
just argue about favourite coloured bricks or something?
Jason J Railton
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
137 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
|
|
|
|
