Subject:
|
Re: Does God have a name for God?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 30 Jan 2001 17:25:14 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
(q_harlequin_p@hotmail.)AntiSpam(com)
|
Viewed:
|
2987 times
|
| |
|
|
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 17:06:11 GMT, "Aaron West" <maniac@netwebb.com>
wrote:
> > > > > He created all things, including
> > > > > man, whom He created in His own image.
> > > > If that were true why don't we all look alike?
> > > I'm only going in on this one part here. It is my belief that man in God's
> > > image is not exactly literal, but of broader meaning Biblically.
> > Uh yeah, sure, that works too, we can allow that.
> > > Image can
> > > mean form (arms, legs, head, torso) or function.
> > So then it's true the handicapped (those missing various extremities
> > anyway) go to hell. And here I thought South Park was just being
> > humorous.
> ILLUSTRATION. It could also mean lots of other things.
He, he, he, relax Aaron, I was just tryin to be funny.
> > > My opinion of God is that
> > > He (not gender, just a reference) is pure Creativity.
> > Does this mean we have to start calling him Creativity? Gosh I hope
> > not, I have trouble just keeping up with the latest Usenet slang.
> If people are refering to God or a godlike ability, they usually place it in
> caps, please don't get bent.
Creativity is a godlike ability? Wow, so like I'm already one step to
godliness, woo hoo!
> > > God uses 100%+ brain
> > > capacity to create and man is created in that image.
> > God has a physical brain? Now there's an interesting new look on the
> > situation.
> I did not use the term physical, did I.
You didn't need to. You said brain capacity, as in the capacity of
the brain, therefor implying that he has a brain. Otherwise he
wouldn't have the capacity of one, now would he?
> Brain capacity was intended to
> illustrate the difference between you and God.
So how is it that you know the exact range and ability of God's mental
strength?
> > > That is why appearance
> > > is infinite, but our thought process work so similarly.
> > If that were true why don't we all think alike?
> Did I say we think alike?
Well one would normally conclude that if all our thought processes
were very much the same we would all think quite similarly. That's
not even my personal opinion Aaron, that's just straight forward
logic. I'd break it down into truth tables but that'd be too much
like work and I don't really feel the need just yet.
> > > The faces may be
> > > different ("Allah delights in wonderous diversity," Robin Hood: Prince of
> > > Thieves.) but our brains are built the same.
> > You cannot believe how much I'm fighting the urge to post neurological
> > links to prove you wrong on that one...
> So your brain is built from peanut brittle?
Let me see if I get something straight...you actually think the
interior neural synapses in your brain are identical to everyone
elses? YIY! o_O
> > > God made us in the image of
> > > his own creativity, something that IS unique to mankind, to the degree in
> > > which God is reflected, and which gives us mastery over the creatures and
> > > the earth. We cannot create these things ourselves (yet), but as a species
> > > that builds from generation to generation we gain more understanding of the
> > > nature of God's Creativity as we grow in harmony.
> > Grow in harmony? Last I checked mankind (on average) was still
> > killing, murdering, and destroying just as many things as it always
> > has.
> Duh, that is the Biblical point behind sin. If you assume there is a God in
> the sense that many folk do, then you assume that there was a fall innto sin
> at some point.
I assume nothing.
> > > War and hostility
> > > destroys our growth, yet also allows our darker sinful nature of twisted
> > > creation to rear up, killing is kind of like anti-creation.
> > Um, I'm just wondering, do you have some sort of direct hot line with
> > God, or is this what Cleo and the magic seeing crystal you bought in
> > the mall are telling you? I'm just sorta curios as to why YOU in
> > particular seem to have ALL the answers and have it ALL figured out as
> > well. Of course then the last guy that I responded to seemed to
> > believe he was speaking the almighty "truth" of the universe as
> > well...hmmm...is anyone besides me seeing a trend here?
> Did I say I have all the answers? Nooooo. Just had an idea after 11:30 PM
> last night (yawn) that inspired me to post a "thought". If you don't agree,
> please don't be rude.
Post a "thought"?! No, no, don't backpedal onto your own arguments,
you said you were posting the "truth", not a "thought". The word
truth implies certainty and absoluteness. Please don't deny that just
for the sake of trying to save face, it will greatly disappoint me.
> > > We have the
> > > capacity to create, though to a lesser degree than God, because that is the
> > > image we are modeled after. God is the ultimate Master Builder :o)
> > > Midnight Theology, less clear than a foggy night of star-gazing.
> > > Best wishes,
> > > Aaron
> > The bottom line is that you can only assume you were created somehow,
> > either by God or evolution, if you assume beyond a shadow of a doubt
> > that you actually exist. And remember, when you assume, you make an
> > ass (out of) u (and) me. : )
> Gee Robert, I was under the impression that this was a discussion topic, or
> open to statements regarding ideas. I did not realize that this was your
> personal forum for wacking people on Lugnet.
Rip apart what a person believes by pointing out the blindingly
obvious in a way that prevents them from defending themselves and all
of a sudden you're "whacking" people. Yeesh, trust me Aaron, if I had
wanted to verbally "whack" you, you would certainly know it. I'd say
things like, "You should never miss an opportunity to shut up." or
"Your head is emptier than a piggy bank after Christmas." or perhaps
even, "Generally speaking, you aren't learning much when your mouth is
open." That would be whacking. And trust me when I say there is far
worse I could say than that too.
> I'm not preaching, just adding
> a thought, which you take to literally.
Perhaps you should reclassify it as something other than "THE
TRUTH"...you now...if you want to try and keep the victim image up.
> The intention of my post was only
> to say "suppose".
You're not on trial here, why are you working so hard to defend
yourself?
> The only ass I see is u. Kindly get it out of my face.
Always remember you’re unique. Just like everyone else.
> Somebody always has to be rude to a friendly post when it goes into debate.
> Seems you're it.
> Aaron
Somebody always has to play victim and pretend to get their feelings
hurt whenever their "absolute truth about the cosmos" get's bashed in.
Go figure, huh? : )
And let's try and quit x-posting to general, it's upsetting people
there for some reason.
Robert
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Does God have a name for God?
|
| (...) ILLUSTRATION. It could also mean lots of other things. (...) If people are refering to God or a godlike ability, they usually place it in caps, please don't get bent. (...) I did not use the term physical, did I. Brain capacity was intended to (...) (24 years ago, 30-Mar-01, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
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
|
|
|
|
