| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"bob young" |
| Date: |
31 Mar 2004 10:16:09 PM |
| Object: |
Re: God is a ***** |
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes around saying
teh things you do? How can you be so absolutely certain that there isn't
a reality beyond what you're senses tell you, that you would figure you
had absolutely nothing to lose by speaking as you do. What do you gain
by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to say those things
exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no one can
possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time tangeable
.
|
|
| User: "Pat Harrington" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
01 Apr 2004 06:56:43 AM |
|
|
bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message news:<406B9660.3E249AD2@netvigator.com>...
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes around saying
teh things you do? How can you be so absolutely certain that there isn't
a reality beyond what you're senses tell you, that you would figure you
had absolutely nothing to lose by speaking as you do. What do you gain
by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to say those things
exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no one can
possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time tangeable
Then, by that view, only the insane have emotions. They are not
tangible but are, nonetheless, real. Perhaps you don't have them?
That would make you sane? How does that make you feel?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
01 Apr 2004 07:29:11 AM |
|
|
(Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404010456.6023c939@posting.google.com:
bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:<406B9660.3E249AD2@netvigator.com>...
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes around
saying teh things you do? How can you be so absolutely certain
that there isn't a reality beyond what you're senses tell you,
that you would figure you had absolutely nothing to lose by
speaking as you do. What do you gain by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to say
those things exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no one
can possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time
tangeable
Then, by that view, only the insane have emotions. They are not
tangible but are, nonetheless, real. Perhaps you don't have them?
That would make you sane? How does that make you feel?
So God is an emotion?
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Cthulhu for President! Why vote for a lesser evil?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Harrington" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
01 Apr 2004 03:43:00 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message news:<Xns94BE565502D0fstone69@207.69.154.204>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404010456.6023c939@posting.google.com:
bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:<406B9660.3E249AD2@netvigator.com>...
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes around
saying teh things you do? How can you be so absolutely certain
that there isn't a reality beyond what you're senses tell you,
that you would figure you had absolutely nothing to lose by
speaking as you do. What do you gain by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to say
those things exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no one
can possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time
tangeable
Then, by that view, only the insane have emotions. They are not
tangible but are, nonetheless, real. Perhaps you don't have them?
That would make you sane? How does that make you feel?
So God is an emotion?
Sorry, I don't follow your deduction. Bob was discounting
anything not tangible and I merely pointed out something which most of
us share and comprehend as real but is not tangible in the least,
emotions. I wouodn't say God is an emotion but that god has emotions
as we do. In fact, he would have our emotions as we do.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
01 Apr 2004 08:16:22 PM |
|
|
(Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404011342.b475573@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BE565502D0fstone69@207.69.154.204>...
(Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404010456.6023c939@posting.google.com:
bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:<406B9660.3E249AD2@netvigator.com>...
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes
around saying teh things you do? How can you be so absolutely
certain that there isn't a reality beyond what you're senses
tell you, that you would figure you had absolutely nothing to
lose by speaking as you do. What do you gain by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to say
those things exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no one
can possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time
tangeable
Then, by that view, only the insane have emotions. They are
not
tangible but are, nonetheless, real. Perhaps you don't have them?
That would make you sane? How does that make you feel?
So God is an emotion?
Sorry, I don't follow your deduction.
I'm just carrying your analogy out to it's logical conclusion.
Bob was discounting
anything not tangible and I merely pointed out something which most of
us share and comprehend as real but is not tangible in the least,
emotions.
Emotions are, by definition, subjective, which is why they're not
"tangible". They only exist in the mind of the one who experiences them.
I wouodn't say God is an emotion but that god has emotions
as we do. In fact, he would have our emotions as we do.
Which means nothing to one who doesn't already buy that superstition.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Cthulhu for President! Why vote for a lesser evil?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Harrington" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
04 Apr 2004 05:22:20 AM |
|
|
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message news:<Xns94BED86B6CEF5fstone69@207.69.154.202>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404011342.b475573@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BE565502D0fstone69@207.69.154.204>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404010456.6023c939@posting.google.com:
bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:<406B9660.3E249AD2@netvigator.com>...
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes
around saying teh things you do? How can you be so absolutely
certain that there isn't a reality beyond what you're senses
tell you, that you would figure you had absolutely nothing to
lose by speaking as you do. What do you gain by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to say
those things exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no one
can possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time
tangeable
Then, by that view, only the insane have emotions. They are
not
tangible but are, nonetheless, real. Perhaps you don't have them?
That would make you sane? How does that make you feel?
So God is an emotion?
Sorry, I don't follow your deduction.
I'm just carrying your analogy out to it's logical conclusion.
In a very unique way that I didn't recognise and still don't.
Bob was discounting
anything not tangible and I merely pointed out something which most of
us share and comprehend as real but is not tangible in the least,
emotions.
Emotions are, by definition, subjective, which is why they're not
"tangible". They only exist in the mind of the one who experiences them.
That doesn't make them not real, though. So, you wouldn't know
the difference, then, between friendly love and sexual love if someone
were discussing them, rather, only if you felt them. This would mean
that empathy would be beyond your comprehension, as you don't seem to
be able to relate to how others feel. Somehow I don't buy that.
I wouodn't say God is an emotion but that god has emotions
as we do. In fact, he would have our emotions as we do.
Which means nothing to one who doesn't already buy that superstition.
The name of the "superstition" id "Physics". I'm surprised you
haven't been taken in by it. It's quite reasonable stuff!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
04 Apr 2004 07:18:57 AM |
|
|
(Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404040222.5f560763@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BED86B6CEF5fstone69@207.69.154.202>...
(Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404011342.b475573@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BE565502D0fstone69@207.69.154.204>...
(Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404010456.6023c939@posting.google.com:
bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:<406B9660.3E249AD2@netvigator.com>...
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes
around saying teh things you do? How can you be so
absolutely certain that there isn't a reality beyond what
you're senses tell you, that you would figure you had
absolutely nothing to lose by speaking as you do. What do
you gain by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to
say those things exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no
one can possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to
comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time
tangeable
Then, by that view, only the insane have emotions. They
are not
tangible but are, nonetheless, real. Perhaps you don't have
them? That would make you sane? How does that make you feel?
So God is an emotion?
Sorry, I don't follow your deduction.
I'm just carrying your analogy out to it's logical conclusion.
In a very unique way that I didn't recognise and still don't.
You brought up emotions when challenged on the intangibility of God.
Bob was discounting
anything not tangible and I merely pointed out something which most
of us share and comprehend as real but is not tangible in the
least, emotions.
Emotions are, by definition, subjective, which is why they're not
"tangible". They only exist in the mind of the one who experiences
them.
That doesn't make them not real, though. So, you wouldn't know
the difference, then, between friendly love and sexual love if someone
were discussing them, rather, only if you felt them. This would mean
that empathy would be beyond your comprehension, as you don't seem to
be able to relate to how others feel. Somehow I don't buy that.
Of course they're real, they exist in the mind of a person.
If that's your analogy to God, I agree.
I wouodn't say God is an emotion but that god has emotions
as we do. In fact, he would have our emotions as we do.
Which means nothing to one who doesn't already buy that superstition.
The name of the "superstition" id "Physics". I'm surprised you
haven't been taken in by it. It's quite reasonable stuff!!
Physics is repeatable and testable. Those two attributes among others
make it no superstition.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Cthulhu for President! Why vote for a lesser evil?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sheldon Liberman" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
04 Apr 2004 10:23:56 AM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404040222.5f560763@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BED86B6CEF5fstone69@207.69.154.202>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404011342.b475573@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BE565502D0fstone69@207.69.154.204>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404010456.6023c939@posting.google.com:
bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:<406B9660.3E249AD2@netvigator.com>...
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes
around saying teh things you do? How can you be so
absolutely certain that there isn't a reality beyond what
you're senses tell you, that you would figure you had
absolutely nothing to lose by speaking as you do. What do
you gain by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to
say those things exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no
one can possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to
comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time
tangeable
Then, by that view, only the insane have emotions. They
are not
tangible but are, nonetheless, real. Perhaps you don't have
them? That would make you sane? How does that make you feel?
So God is an emotion?
Sorry, I don't follow your deduction.
I'm just carrying your analogy out to it's logical conclusion.
In a very unique way that I didn't recognise and still don't.
You brought up emotions when challenged on the intangibility of God.
Bob was discounting
anything not tangible and I merely pointed out something which most
of us share and comprehend as real but is not tangible in the
least, emotions.
Emotions are, by definition, subjective, which is why they're not
"tangible". They only exist in the mind of the one who experiences
them.
That doesn't make them not real, though. So, you wouldn't know
the difference, then, between friendly love and sexual love if someone
were discussing them, rather, only if you felt them. This would mean
that empathy would be beyond your comprehension, as you don't seem to
be able to relate to how others feel. Somehow I don't buy that.
Of course they're real, they exist in the mind of a person.
If that's your analogy to God, I agree.
I wouodn't say God is an emotion but that god has emotions
as we do. In fact, he would have our emotions as we do.
Which means nothing to one who doesn't already buy that superstition.
The name of the "superstition" id "Physics". I'm surprised you
haven't been taken in by it. It's quite reasonable stuff!!
Physics is repeatable and testable. Those two attributes among others
make it no superstition.
Neither of those two attributes make in unlimited either.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
04 Apr 2004 10:36:16 AM |
|
|
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:4070288C.60801@sympatico.ca:
Fred Stone wrote:
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404040222.5f560763@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BED86B6CEF5fstone69@207.69.154.202>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404011342.b475573@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BE565502D0fstone69@207.69.154.204>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404010456.6023c939@posting.google.com:
bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:<406B9660.3E249AD2@netvigator.com>...
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes
around saying teh things you do? How can you be so
absolutely certain that there isn't a reality beyond what
you're senses tell you, that you would figure you had
absolutely nothing to lose by speaking as you do. What do
you gain by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to
say those things exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no
one can possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to
comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time
tangeable
Then, by that view, only the insane have emotions. They
are not
tangible but are, nonetheless, real. Perhaps you don't have
them? That would make you sane? How does that make you feel?
So God is an emotion?
Sorry, I don't follow your deduction.
I'm just carrying your analogy out to it's logical conclusion.
In a very unique way that I didn't recognise and still don't.
You brought up emotions when challenged on the intangibility of God.
Bob was discounting
anything not tangible and I merely pointed out something which most
of us share and comprehend as real but is not tangible in the
least, emotions.
Emotions are, by definition, subjective, which is why they're not
"tangible". They only exist in the mind of the one who experiences
them.
That doesn't make them not real, though. So, you wouldn't know
the difference, then, between friendly love and sexual love if
someone
were discussing them, rather, only if you felt them. This would mean
that empathy would be beyond your comprehension, as you don't seem to
be able to relate to how others feel. Somehow I don't buy that.
Of course they're real, they exist in the mind of a person.
If that's your analogy to God, I agree.
I wouodn't say God is an emotion but that god has emotions
as we do. In fact, he would have our emotions as we do.
Which means nothing to one who doesn't already buy that
superstition.
The name of the "superstition" id "Physics". I'm surprised you
haven't been taken in by it. It's quite reasonable stuff!!
Physics is repeatable and testable. Those two attributes among others
make it no superstition.
Neither of those two attributes make in unlimited either.
Just because physics is not unlimited doesn't mean that Goddidit.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Cthulhu for President! Why vote for a lesser evil?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Optional" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
04 Apr 2004 10:37:46 AM |
|
|
Physics is repeatable and testable. Those two attributes among others
make it no superstition.
Neither of those two attributes make in unlimited either.
Just because physics is not unlimited doesn't mean that Goddidit.
God gave you the ability to post stupid crap like that. But he still
loves you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Burns" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
04 Apr 2004 02:48:40 PM |
|
|
[Childishly set follow-ups to alt.liberalminded, alt.troll,
alt.games.grand-theft-auto, and can.rec.fishing ignored.]
Optional wrote:
Physics is repeatable and testable. Those two attributes
among others make it no superstition.
Neither of those two attributes make in unlimited either.
Just because physics is not unlimited doesn't mean that Goddidit.
God gave you the ability to post stupid crap like that. But he
still loves you.
Don't you ever wonder why Fred can post "stupid crap like that"?
-- God wants us to believe in Him (or so we're told).
-- God could stop the Sun in the sky or turn all the rivers to
blood, but
-- He doesn't even bother to tack a little miraculous PS onto
Fred's post, something like "Fred's wrong. I exist. -- God"
Jim Burns
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Harrington" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
05 Apr 2004 04:22:52 AM |
|
|
Jim Burns <burns.87@osu.edu> wrote in message news:<40706698.8F62FCD1@osu.edu>...
[Childishly set follow-ups to alt.liberalminded, alt.troll,
alt.games.grand-theft-auto, and can.rec.fishing ignored.]
Optional wrote:
Physics is repeatable and testable. Those two attributes
among others make it no superstition.
Neither of those two attributes make in unlimited either.
Just because physics is not unlimited doesn't mean that Goddidit.
God gave you the ability to post stupid crap like that. But he
still loves you.
Don't you ever wonder why Fred can post "stupid crap like that"?
-- God wants us to believe in Him (or so we're told).
-- God could stop the Sun in the sky or turn all the rivers to
blood, but
-- He doesn't even bother to tack a little miraculous PS onto
Fred's post, something like "Fred's wrong. I exist. -- God"
Jim Burns
God can readily accept futility, he invented it...see!!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sheldon Liberman" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
04 Apr 2004 01:48:17 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:4070288C.60801@sympatico.ca:
Fred Stone wrote:
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404040222.5f560763@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BED86B6CEF5fstone69@207.69.154.202>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404011342.b475573@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BE565502D0fstone69@207.69.154.204>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404010456.6023c939@posting.google.com:
bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:<406B9660.3E249AD2@netvigator.com>...
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes
around saying teh things you do? How can you be so
absolutely certain that there isn't a reality beyond what
you're senses tell you, that you would figure you had
absolutely nothing to lose by speaking as you do. What do
you gain by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to
say those things exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no
one can possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to
comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time
tangeable
Then, by that view, only the insane have emotions. They
are not
tangible but are, nonetheless, real. Perhaps you don't have
them? That would make you sane? How does that make you feel?
So God is an emotion?
Sorry, I don't follow your deduction.
I'm just carrying your analogy out to it's logical conclusion.
In a very unique way that I didn't recognise and still don't.
You brought up emotions when challenged on the intangibility of God.
Bob was discounting
anything not tangible and I merely pointed out something which most
of us share and comprehend as real but is not tangible in the
least, emotions.
Emotions are, by definition, subjective, which is why they're not
"tangible". They only exist in the mind of the one who experiences
them.
That doesn't make them not real, though. So, you wouldn't know
the difference, then, between friendly love and sexual love if
someone
were discussing them, rather, only if you felt them. This would mean
that empathy would be beyond your comprehension, as you don't seem to
be able to relate to how others feel. Somehow I don't buy that.
Of course they're real, they exist in the mind of a person.
If that's your analogy to God, I agree.
I wouodn't say God is an emotion but that god has emotions
as we do. In fact, he would have our emotions as we do.
Which means nothing to one who doesn't already buy that
superstition.
The name of the "superstition" id "Physics". I'm surprised you
haven't been taken in by it. It's quite reasonable stuff!!
Physics is repeatable and testable. Those two attributes among others
make it no superstition.
Neither of those two attributes make in unlimited either.
Just because physics is not unlimited doesn't mean that Goddidit.
Did I imply that was all there was to the case? As for physics, it
certainly implies that there are phenomina that require explanation
beyond science's ability.
BTW, do you know how a bumble bee is able to fly? Science doesn't.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
04 Apr 2004 04:18:35 PM |
|
|
"Sheldon Liberman" <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:40705871.6080802@sympatico.ca...
Fred Stone wrote:
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:4070288C.60801@sympatico.ca:
Fred Stone wrote:
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404040222.5f560763@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BED86B6CEF5fstone69@207.69.154.202>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404011342.b475573@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BE565502D0fstone69@207.69.154.204>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404010456.6023c939@posting.google.com:
bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:<406B9660.3E249AD2@netvigator.com>...
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes
around saying teh things you do? How can you be so
absolutely certain that there isn't a reality beyond what
you're senses tell you, that you would figure you had
absolutely nothing to lose by speaking as you do. What do
you gain by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to
say those things exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no
one can possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to
comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time
tangeable
Then, by that view, only the insane have emotions. They
are not
tangible but are, nonetheless, real. Perhaps you don't have
them? That would make you sane? How does that make you feel?
So God is an emotion?
Sorry, I don't follow your deduction.
I'm just carrying your analogy out to it's logical conclusion.
In a very unique way that I didn't recognise and still don't.
You brought up emotions when challenged on the intangibility of God.
Bob was discounting
anything not tangible and I merely pointed out something which most
of us share and comprehend as real but is not tangible in the
least, emotions.
Emotions are, by definition, subjective, which is why they're not
"tangible". They only exist in the mind of the one who experiences
them.
That doesn't make them not real, though. So, you wouldn't know
the difference, then, between friendly love and sexual love if
someone
were discussing them, rather, only if you felt them. This would mean
that empathy would be beyond your comprehension, as you don't seem to
be able to relate to how others feel. Somehow I don't buy that.
Of course they're real, they exist in the mind of a person.
If that's your analogy to God, I agree.
I wouodn't say God is an emotion but that god has emotions
as we do. In fact, he would have our emotions as we do.
Which means nothing to one who doesn't already buy that
superstition.
The name of the "superstition" id "Physics". I'm surprised you
haven't been taken in by it. It's quite reasonable stuff!!
Physics is repeatable and testable. Those two attributes among others
make it no superstition.
Neither of those two attributes make in unlimited either.
Just because physics is not unlimited doesn't mean that Goddidit.
Did I imply that was all there was to the case? As for physics, it
certainly implies that there are phenomina that require explanation
beyond science's ability.
BTW, do you know how a bumble bee is able to fly? Science doesn't.
Tom: We don't know, so "goddidit"? What an answer, using the unexplainable
to explain the impossible.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sheldon Liberman" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
04 Apr 2004 06:50:18 PM |
|
|
Tom wrote:
"Sheldon Liberman" <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:40705871.6080802@sympatico.ca...
Fred Stone wrote:
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:4070288C.60801@sympatico.ca:
Fred Stone wrote:
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404040222.5f560763@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BED86B6CEF5fstone69@207.69.154.202>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404011342.b475573@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BE565502D0fstone69@207.69.154.204>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404010456.6023c939@posting.google.com:
bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:<406B9660.3E249AD2@netvigator.com>...
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes
around saying teh things you do? How can you be so
absolutely certain that there isn't a reality beyond what
you're senses tell you, that you would figure you had
absolutely nothing to lose by speaking as you do. What do
you gain by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to
say those things exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no
one can possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to
comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time
tangeable
Then, by that view, only the insane have emotions. They
are not
tangible but are, nonetheless, real. Perhaps you don't have
them? That would make you sane? How does that make you feel?
So God is an emotion?
Sorry, I don't follow your deduction.
I'm just carrying your analogy out to it's logical conclusion.
In a very unique way that I didn't recognise and still don't.
You brought up emotions when challenged on the intangibility of God.
Bob was discounting
anything not tangible and I merely pointed out something which most
of us share and comprehend as real but is not tangible in the
least, emotions.
Emotions are, by definition, subjective, which is why they're not
"tangible". They only exist in the mind of the one who experiences
them.
That doesn't make them not real, though. So, you wouldn't know
the difference, then, between friendly love and sexual love if
someone
were discussing them, rather, only if you felt them. This would mean
that empathy would be beyond your comprehension, as you don't seem to
be able to relate to how others feel. Somehow I don't buy that.
Of course they're real, they exist in the mind of a person.
If that's your analogy to God, I agree.
I wouodn't say God is an emotion but that god has emotions
as we do. In fact, he would have our emotions as we do.
Which means nothing to one who doesn't already buy that
superstition.
The name of the "superstition" id "Physics". I'm surprised you
haven't been taken in by it. It's quite reasonable stuff!!
Physics is repeatable and testable. Those two attributes among others
make it no superstition.
Neither of those two attributes make in unlimited either.
Just because physics is not unlimited doesn't mean that Goddidit.
Did I imply that was all there was to the case? As for physics, it
certainly implies that there are phenomina that require explanation
beyond science's ability.
BTW, do you know how a bumble bee is able to fly? Science doesn't.
Tom: We don't know, so "goddidit"? What an answer, using the unexplainable
to explain the impossible.
What is impossible?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pat Harrington" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
05 Apr 2004 04:21:25 AM |
|
|
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<40709F3A.2030602@sympatico.ca>...
Tom wrote:
"Sheldon Liberman" <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:40705871.6080802@sympatico.ca...
Fred Stone wrote:
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:4070288C.60801@sympatico.ca:
Fred Stone wrote:
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404040222.5f560763@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BED86B6CEF5fstone69@207.69.154.202>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404011342.b475573@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BE565502D0fstone69@207.69.154.204>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404010456.6023c939@posting.google.com:
bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:<406B9660.3E249AD2@netvigator.com>...
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes
around saying teh things you do? How can you be so
absolutely certain that there isn't a reality beyond what
you're senses tell you, that you would figure you had
absolutely nothing to lose by speaking as you do. What do
you gain by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to
say those things exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no
one can possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to
comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time
tangeable
Then, by that view, only the insane have emotions. They
are not
tangible but are, nonetheless, real. Perhaps you don't have
them? That would make you sane? How does that make you feel?
So God is an emotion?
Sorry, I don't follow your deduction.
I'm just carrying your analogy out to it's logical conclusion.
In a very unique way that I didn't recognise and still don't.
You brought up emotions when challenged on the intangibility of God.
Bob was discounting
anything not tangible and I merely pointed out something which most
of us share and comprehend as real but is not tangible in the
least, emotions.
Emotions are, by definition, subjective, which is why they're not
"tangible". They only exist in the mind of the one who experiences
them.
That doesn't make them not real, though. So, you wouldn't know
the difference, then, between friendly love and sexual love if
someone
were discussing them, rather, only if you felt them. This would mean
that empathy would be beyond your comprehension, as you don't seem to
be able to relate to how others feel. Somehow I don't buy that.
Of course they're real, they exist in the mind of a person.
If that's your analogy to God, I agree.
I wouodn't say God is an emotion but that god has emotions
as we do. In fact, he would have our emotions as we do.
Which means nothing to one who doesn't already buy that
superstition.
The name of the "superstition" id "Physics". I'm surprised you
haven't been taken in by it. It's quite reasonable stuff!!
Physics is repeatable and testable. Those two attributes among others
make it no superstition.
Neither of those two attributes make in unlimited either.
Just because physics is not unlimited doesn't mean that Goddidit.
Did I imply that was all there was to the case? As for physics, it
certainly implies that there are phenomina that require explanation
beyond science's ability.
BTW, do you know how a bumble bee is able to fly? Science doesn't.
Tom: We don't know, so "goddidit"? What an answer, using the unexplainable
to explain the impossible.
What is impossible?
Round squares. Female fathers. Liquid water that is completely dry.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas P." |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
05 Apr 2004 02:46:39 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 14:48:17 -0400, Sheldon Liberman
<sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote:
Fred Stone wrote:
snip
Just because physics is not unlimited doesn't mean that Goddidit.
Did I imply that was all there was to the case? As for physics, it
certainly implies that there are phenomina that require explanation
beyond science's ability.
Not in any shape or form does it imply that.
BTW, do you know how a bumble bee is able to fly? Science doesn't.
Yes it does. You are repeating a tale that has no truth to it.
Thomas P.
None of the Emperor's clothes had been so successful before.
"But he has got nothing on," said a little child.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
04 Apr 2004 03:27:34 PM |
|
|
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:40705871.6080802@sympatico.ca:
Fred Stone wrote:
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:4070288C.60801@sympatico.ca:
Fred Stone wrote:
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404040222.5f560763@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BED86B6CEF5fstone69@207.69.154.202>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404011342.b475573@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BE565502D0fstone69@207.69.154.204>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404010456.6023c939@posting.google.com:
bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:<406B9660.3E249AD2@netvigator.com>...
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes
around saying teh things you do? How can you be so
absolutely certain that there isn't a reality beyond what
you're senses tell you, that you would figure you had
absolutely nothing to lose by speaking as you do. What do
you gain by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to
say those things exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no
one can possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to
comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time
tangeable
Then, by that view, only the insane have emotions. They
are not
tangible but are, nonetheless, real. Perhaps you don't have
them? That would make you sane? How does that make you feel?
So God is an emotion?
Sorry, I don't follow your deduction.
I'm just carrying your analogy out to it's logical conclusion.
In a very unique way that I didn't recognise and still don't.
You brought up emotions when challenged on the intangibility of God.
Bob was discounting
anything not tangible and I merely pointed out something which
most of us share and comprehend as real but is not tangible in
the least, emotions.
Emotions are, by definition, subjective, which is why they're not
"tangible". They only exist in the mind of the one who experiences
them.
That doesn't make them not real, though. So, you wouldn't know
the difference, then, between friendly love and sexual love if
someone
were discussing them, rather, only if you felt them. This would
mean that empathy would be beyond your comprehension, as you don't
seem to be able to relate to how others feel. Somehow I don't buy
that.
Of course they're real, they exist in the mind of a person.
If that's your analogy to God, I agree.
I wouodn't say God is an emotion but that god has emotions
as we do. In fact, he would have our emotions as we do.
Which means nothing to one who doesn't already buy that
superstition.
The name of the "superstition" id "Physics". I'm surprised you
haven't been taken in by it. It's quite reasonable stuff!!
Physics is repeatable and testable. Those two attributes among
others make it no superstition.
Neither of those two attributes make in unlimited either.
Just because physics is not unlimited doesn't mean that Goddidit.
Did I imply that was all there was to the case?
If not, what *did* you mean by your statement?
As for physics, it
certainly implies that there are phenomina that require explanation
beyond science's ability.
Once again, just because science can't explain it doesn't mean that
Goddidit.
BTW, do you know how a bumble bee is able to fly? Science doesn't.
That's a very old, and very stupid, claim that never was true.
The science of aerodynamics *does* explain how a bumblebee can fly.
http://www.ilr.tu-berlin.de/WKA/technik/bumblebee.html
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Cthulhu for President! Why vote for a lesser evil?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sheldon Liberman" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
04 Apr 2004 05:53:43 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:40705871.6080802@sympatico.ca:
Fred Stone wrote:
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:4070288C.60801@sympatico.ca:
Fred Stone wrote:
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404040222.5f560763@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BED86B6CEF5fstone69@207.69.154.202>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404011342.b475573@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BE565502D0fstone69@207.69.154.204>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404010456.6023c939@posting.google.com:
bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:<406B9660.3E249AD2@netvigator.com>...
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes
around saying teh things you do? How can you be so
absolutely certain that there isn't a reality beyond what
you're senses tell you, that you would figure you had
absolutely nothing to lose by speaking as you do. What do
you gain by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to
say those things exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no
one can possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to
comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time
tangeable
Then, by that view, only the insane have emotions. They
are not
tangible but are, nonetheless, real. Perhaps you don't have
them? That would make you sane? How does that make you feel?
So God is an emotion?
Sorry, I don't follow your deduction.
I'm just carrying your analogy out to it's logical conclusion.
In a very unique way that I didn't recognise and still don't.
You brought up emotions when challenged on the intangibility of God.
Bob was discounting
anything not tangible and I merely pointed out something which
most of us share and comprehend as real but is not tangible in
the least, emotions.
Emotions are, by definition, subjective, which is why they're not
"tangible". They only exist in the mind of the one who experiences
them.
That doesn't make them not real, though. So, you wouldn't know
the difference, then, between friendly love and sexual love if
someone
were discussing them, rather, only if you felt them. This would
mean that empathy would be beyond your comprehension, as you don't
seem to be able to relate to how others feel. Somehow I don't buy
that.
Of course they're real, they exist in the mind of a person.
If that's your analogy to God, I agree.
I wouodn't say God is an emotion but that god has emotions
as we do. In fact, he would have our emotions as we do.
Which means nothing to one who doesn't already buy that
superstition.
The name of the "superstition" id "Physics". I'm surprised you
haven't been taken in by it. It's quite reasonable stuff!!
Physics is repeatable and testable. Those two attributes among
others make it no superstition.
Neither of those two attributes make in unlimited either.
Just because physics is not unlimited doesn't mean that Goddidit.
Did I imply that was all there was to the case?
If not, what *did* you mean by your statement?
Simply that there is more to Creationism than the fact that science
can't dispute it.
As for physics, it
certainly implies that there are phenomina that require explanation
beyond science's ability.
Once again, just because science can't explain it doesn't mean that
Goddidit.
BTW, do you know how a bumble bee is able to fly? Science doesn't.
That's a very old, and very stupid, claim that never was true.
The science of aerodynamics *does* explain how a bumblebee can fly.
http://www.ilr.tu-berlin.de/WKA/technik/bumblebee.html
Thanks for the link. I'll have a read.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
04 Apr 2004 07:12:58 PM |
|
|
"Sheldon Liberman" <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:407091F7.6000508@sympatico.ca...
Fred Stone wrote:
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:40705871.6080802@sympatico.ca:
Fred Stone wrote:
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:4070288C.60801@sympatico.ca:
Fred Stone wrote:
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404040222.5f560763@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BED86B6CEF5fstone69@207.69.154.202>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404011342.b475573@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BE565502D0fstone69@207.69.154.204>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404010456.6023c939@posting.google.com:
bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:<406B9660.3E249AD2@netvigator.com>...
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes
around saying teh things you do? How can you be so
absolutely certain that there isn't a reality beyond what
you're senses tell you, that you would figure you had
absolutely nothing to lose by speaking as you do. What do
you gain by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to
say those things exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no
one can possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to
comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time
tangeable
Then, by that view, only the insane have emotions. They
are not
tangible but are, nonetheless, real. Perhaps you don't have
them? That would make you sane? How does that make you feel?
So God is an emotion?
Sorry, I don't follow your deduction.
I'm just carrying your analogy out to it's logical conclusion.
In a very unique way that I didn't recognise and still don't.
You brought up emotions when challenged on the intangibility of God.
Bob was discounting
anything not tangible and I merely pointed out something which
most of us share and comprehend as real but is not tangible in
the least, emotions.
Emotions are, by definition, subjective, which is why they're not
"tangible". They only exist in the mind of the one who experiences
them.
That doesn't make them not real, though. So, you wouldn't know
the difference, then, between friendly love and sexual love if
someone
were discussing them, rather, only if you felt them. This would
mean that empathy would be beyond your comprehension, as you don't
seem to be able to relate to how others feel. Somehow I don't buy
that.
Of course they're real, they exist in the mind of a person.
If that's your analogy to God, I agree.
I wouodn't say God is an emotion but that god has emotions
as we do. In fact, he would have our emotions as we do.
Which means nothing to one who doesn't already buy that
superstition.
The name of the "superstition" id "Physics". I'm surprised you
haven't been taken in by it. It's quite reasonable stuff!!
Physics is repeatable and testable. Those two attributes among
others make it no superstition.
Neither of those two attributes make in unlimited either.
Just because physics is not unlimited doesn't mean that Goddidit.
Did I imply that was all there was to the case?
If not, what *did* you mean by your statement?
Simply that there is more to Creationism than the fact that science
can't dispute it.
Science doesn't dispute creationism, it just says that it is wrong :-). What
more is there to creationism Sheldon. other than to say 'godiddit".
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sheldon Liberman" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
04 Apr 2004 09:47:54 PM |
|
|
Tom wrote:
"Sheldon Liberman" <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:407091F7.6000508@sympatico.ca...
Fred Stone wrote:
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:40705871.6080802@sympatico.ca:
Fred Stone wrote:
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:4070288C.60801@sympatico.ca:
Fred Stone wrote:
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404040222.5f560763@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BED86B6CEF5fstone69@207.69.154.202>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404011342.b475573@posting.google.com:
Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:<Xns94BE565502D0fstone69@207.69.154.204>...
PatrickDHarrington@hotmail.com (Pat Harrington) wrote in
news:7517a083.0404010456.6023c939@posting.google.com:
bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
news:<406B9660.3E249AD2@netvigator.com>...
Kosta Atheos wrote:
It's one thing to be athiest, but what sort of person goes
around saying teh things you do? How can you be so
absolutely certain that there isn't a reality beyond what
you're senses tell you, that you would figure you had
absolutely nothing to lose by speaking as you do. What do
you gain by it?
How do you know that your supreme being doesn't want him to
say those things exactly?
Are you this way in all walks of life? Gee, I hope not.
Why? How can you tell that's the bad thing to do? I heard no
one can possibly comprehend the ways of god, how can you?
Nut cases comprehend anything they decide they want to
comprehend.
Sane people comprehend what is meaningful and at the same time
tangeable
Then, by that view, only the insane have emotions. They
are not
tangible but are, nonetheless, real. Perhaps you don't have
them? That would make you sane? How does that make you feel?
So God is an emotion?
Sorry, I don't follow your deduction.
I'm just carrying your analogy out to it's logical conclusion.
In a very unique way that I didn't recognise and still don't.
You brought up emotions when challenged on the intangibility of God.
Bob was discounting
anything not tangible and I merely pointed out something which
most of us share and comprehend as real but is not tangible in
the least, emotions.
Emotions are, by definition, subjective, which is why they're not
"tangible". They only exist in the mind of the one who experiences
them.
That doesn't make them not real, though. So, you wouldn't know
the difference, then, between friendly love and sexual love if
someone
were discussing them, rather, only if you felt them. This would
mean that empathy would be beyond your comprehension, as you don't
seem to be able to relate to how others feel. Somehow I don't buy
that.
Of course they're real, they exist in the mind of a person.
If that's your analogy to God, I agree.
I wouodn't say God is an emotion but that god has emotions
as we do. In fact, he would have our emotions as we do.
Which means nothing to one who doesn't already buy that
superstition.
The name of the "superstition" id "Physics". I'm surprised you
haven't been taken in by it. It's quite reasonable stuff!!
Physics is repeatable and testable. Those two attributes among
others make it no superstition.
Neither of those two attributes make in unlimited either.
Just because physics is not unlimited doesn't mean that Goddidit.
Did I imply that was all there was to the case?
If not, what *did* you mean by your statement?
Simply that there is more to Creationism than the fact that science
can't dispute it.
Science doesn't dispute creationism, it just says that it is wrong :-).
It absolutely does no such thing Tom. The worst it says is, we don't know.
What
more is there to creationism Sheldon. other than to say 'godiddit".
How about why, how we know, and what we are to do about it?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
05 Apr 2004 08:30:48 AM |
|
|
Physics is repeatable and testable. Those two attributes among
others make it no superstition.
Neither of those two attributes make in unlimited either.
Just because physics is not unlimited doesn't mean that Goddidit.
Did I imply that was all there was to the case?
If not, what *did* you mean by your statement?
Simply that there is more to Creationism than the fact that science
can't dispute it.
Science doesn't dispute creationism, it just says that it is wrong :-).
It absolutely does no such thing Tom. The worst it says is, we don't
know.
Actually you might be right here. Science only says that creationism as
described in the Hebrew bible is wrong.
What
more is there to creationism Sheldon. other than to say 'godiddit".
How about why, how we know, and what we are to do about it?
You finally found the purpose of religion. Congratulations Sheldon. Now if I
could only get you to realize that religion can't be scientific then I will
have accomplished something today.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
04 Apr 2004 10:28:07 PM |
|
|
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:4070C8DA.5090306@sympatico.ca:
Tom wrote:
<...>
Science doesn't dispute creationism, it just says that it is wrong
:-).
It absolutely does no such thing Tom. The worst it says is, we don't
know.
Science says that we do know that the stories of Creation as found in,
for instance, the Bible are positively not true.
What
more is there to creationism Sheldon. other than to say 'godiddit".
How about why, how we know, and what we are to do about it?
That is religion, not specifically Creationism.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Cthulhu for President! Why vote for a lesser evil?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roy Jose Lorr" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
10 Apr 2004 11:42:35 PM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
Science says that we do know that the stories of Creation as found in,
for instance, the Bible are positively not true.
I see, science is god.
..--
The last stage of
utopian sentimentalism
is homicidal mania.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
11 Apr 2004 09:00:07 AM |
|
|
"Roy Jose Lorr" <mosestorah@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:4078CCA0.76F499EB@worldnet.att.net...
Fred Stone wrote:
Science says that we do know that the stories of Creation as found in,
for instance, the Bible are positively not true.
I see, science is god.
No, you don't see again.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
11 Apr 2004 07:09:44 AM |
|
|
Roy Jose Lorr <mosestorah@worldnet.att.net> wrote in
news:4078CCA0.76F499EB@worldnet.att.net:
Fred Stone wrote:
Science says that we do know that the stories of Creation as found in,
for instance, the Bible are positively not true.
I see, science is god.
God is not science.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Cthulhu for President! Why vote for a lesser evil?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sheldon Liberman" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
05 Apr 2004 11:20:37 AM |
|
|
Fred Stone wrote:
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:4070C8DA.5090306@sympatico.ca:
Tom wrote:
<...>
Science doesn't dispute creationism, it just says that it is wrong
:-).
It absolutely does no such thing Tom. The worst it says is, we don't
know.
Science says that we do know that the stories of Creation as found in,
for instance, the Bible are positively not true.
What
more is there to creationism Sheldon. other than to say 'godiddit".
How about why, how we know, and what we are to do about it?
That is religion, not specifically Creationism.
Not quite. It is posible to entertain thoughts on Creationism with
subscribing to any particular religion. There are many people who
consider themselve spiritual though not religious.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
05 Apr 2004 03:38:02 PM |
|
|
"Sheldon Liberman" <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:40718755.6010207@sympatico.ca...
Fred Stone wrote:
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:4070C8DA.5090306@sympatico.ca:
Tom wrote:
<...>
Science doesn't dispute creationism, it just says that it is wrong
:-).
It absolutely does no such thing Tom. The worst it says is, we don't
know.
Science says that we do know that the stories of Creation as found in,
for instance, the Bible are positively not true.
What
more is there to creationism Sheldon. other than to say 'godiddit".
How about why, how we know, and what we are to do about it?
That is religion, not specifically Creationism.
Not quite. It is posible to entertain thoughts on Creationism with
subscribing to any particular religion. There are many people who
consider themselve spiritual though not religious.
Yes there are, however, the vast majority don't entertain thoughts on
"Creationism". I have never met a person, although I'm sure a few exist, who
had any thoughts about 'Creationism' who didn't have a god belief of some
type.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sheldon Liberman" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
05 Apr 2004 05:40:54 PM |
|
|
Tom wrote:
"Sheldon Liberman" <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:40718755.6010207@sympatico.ca...
Fred Stone wrote:
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:4070C8DA.5090306@sympatico.ca:
Tom wrote:
<...>
Science doesn't dispute creationism, it just says that it is wrong
:-).
It absolutely does no such thing Tom. The worst it says is, we don't
know.
Science says that we do know that the stories of Creation as found in,
for instance, the Bible are positively not true.
What
more is there to creationism Sheldon. other than to say 'godiddit".
How about why, how we know, and what we are to do about it?
That is religion, not specifically Creationism.
Not quite. It is posible to entertain thoughts on Creationism with
subscribing to any particular religion. There are many people who
consider themselve spiritual though not religious.
Yes there are, however, the vast majority don't entertain thoughts on
"Creationism". I have never met a person, although I'm sure a few exist, who
had any thoughts about 'Creationism' who didn't have a god belief of some
type.
Religion is more than the belief in the Creator, Tom, it is the sharing
of a system of beliefs built around that idea.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom" |
|
| Title: Re: God is a ***** |
05 Apr 2004 06:12:33 PM |
|
|
"Sheldon Liberman" <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:4071E076.8000504@sympatico.ca...
Tom wrote:
"Sheldon Liberman" <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:40718755.6010207@sympatico.ca...
Fred Stone wrote:
Sheldon Liberman <sheldon.liberman@sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:4070C8DA.5090306@sympatico.ca:
Tom wrote:
<...>
Science doesn't dispute creationism, it just says that it is wrong
:-).
It absolutely does no such thing Tom. The worst it says is, we don't
know.
Science says that we do know that the stories of Creation as found in,
for instance, the Bible are positively not true.
What
more is there to creationism Sheldon. other than to say 'godiddit".
How about why, how we know, and what we are to do about it?
That is religion, not specifically Creationism.
Not quite. It is posible to entertain thoughts on Creationism with
subscribing to any particular religion. There are many people who
consider themselve spiritual though not religious.
Yes there are, however, the vast majority don't entertain thoughts on
"Creationism". I have never met a person, although I'm sure a few exist,
who
had any thoughts about 'Creationism' who didn't have a god belief of
some
type.
Religion is more than the belief in the Creator, Tom, it is the sharing
of a system of beliefs built around that idea.
Sheltie, do you intentionally change the subject to reflect a particular
comment that you would like to make? Why don't you make an attempt to answer
the comment in question. I realize that for simpletons like you, who can't
read for comprehension, this is a huge task but try it anyway.
.
|
|
|
|
|
</ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
