[ref001] apologetics: DEBATE LOGS - 3/21/96 apologetics: DEBATE LOGS - 3/21/96 [02:59] Aco
apologetics: DEBATE LOGS - 3/21/96
apologetics: DEBATE LOGS - 3/21/96
[02:59] Acolyte (firstname.lastname@example.org) joined
[02:59] Mode change '+o Acolyte ' by ApoloBotemail@example.com
[02:59] LibRul (Hempster@modem65.wwonline.com) joined
[02:59] Arai (firstname.lastname@example.org) joined #apologetics.
[02:59] re arai
[02:59] why apologetics?
[02:59] re all
[02:59] ..as in Christian apologetics?
[02:59] it fits the channel purpose
[02:59] hence my nick
[03:00] ah well
[03:00] anyhow, I don't think viability is
a test of what a thing is, but rather wht it can do
[03:00] undernet is kinda slow
[03:00] depends efnet splits
[03:00] its a trade off
[03:01] about abortion
[03:01] anyhow, I don't think viability is
a test of what a thing is, but rather wht it can do
[03:01] I think natural viability should be
the litmus test of personhood
[03:01] I need to run for a bit. back later
[03:01] Arai (email@example.com) left irc: Arai
[03:01] I dunno..let mother nature dictate the
[03:01] Oblivion (kwernebu@IS.Dal.Ca) joined #apologetics.
[03:02] lib is that what medicine is for?
[03:02] What's the argument?
[03:02] noticed (some) Christians can be very
testy when it comes to topics?
[03:02] lin its just the channel format is
[03:02] we should avoid the whole problem
and just sterilize the race
[03:02] Oblivion that would be a final solution
[03:03] oblivion gee sounds like some german
I once read about
[03:03] C. S. Lewis was a fraud.
[03:03] oblivion how was lewis a fraud?
[03:03] rapture is false doctrine
[03:03] soup is good food
[03:03] lib sure the rapture is so?
[03:04] His whole system was dogmatic.
[03:04] lib is medicine for the purpose of
letting "nature" take its cource or for life?
[03:04] Acolyte is so what? so true or so much
[03:04] Oblivion that was the point, any system
[03:04] Acolyte I suppose so..unless it's hernal
[03:04] you can't argue from a dogma though.
[03:04] That's *my* whole point.
[03:04] It eliminates rational discussion.
[03:04] RU a nazi?
[03:05] What...you mean me?
[03:05] oblivion u missed th point
[03:05] no I am not a nazi
[03:05] oblivion define dogma
[03:05] heh..just asking
[03:05] librul not even close
[03:06] dogma: presupposed assumption of fundamental
principles which are not questioned within the theology.
[03:06] dogma does not merely apply to theology
[03:06] Of course not!
[03:06] any system has dogma,
[03:06] there's secular dogma
[03:06] I meant with regards to our present
[03:06] science etc
[03:06] we have zxioms, big deal
[03:06] axioms even
[03:06] so does everyone
[03:07] so..lets plan the revolution :)
[03:07] that does not preclude rational discussion
[03:07] lib hardly
[03:07] lib I am a theonomist, it would not
[03:07] LibRul (Hempster@modem65.wwonline.com) left
irc: Read error to LibRul[modem65.wwonline.com]: EOF
[03:08] oblivin axioms are not some kind of
[03:08] r they?
[03:08] When examining such things as Christianity
though, I think it's asking too much to presume salvation,
[03:08] er...eliminate one though.
[03:08] who ever said that?
[03:08] I don't presume soteriology
[03:08] I don't know, don't think anyone did.
[03:09] The Triune God is the foundational
axiom in my system, everything else flows from there
[03:09] DGC (firstname.lastname@example.org) joined
[03:09] But in a system such as Aristotle's,
the axioms are limited to what is known to us, what
is immediate to our experience.
[03:09] hullo dgc
[03:09] Exactly. And having that as an axiom
skews the whole system from word go.
[03:09] oblivion if one is disposed to a soley
empiricst epistemology true
[03:09] hi everyone
[03:10] what system does not have an axiom?
[03:10] And an epistemology (or ontology)
based on deontic principles is rubbish!
[03:10] Achimoth (email@example.com)
[03:10] hey achimoth
[03:10] hi aco.. made 51 in #bible finally
[03:10] It remains unknowable.
[03:10] Drawing conculsions from unproven
[03:11] One can not proceed in knowledge from
what is unknown.
[03:13] guess I should get some sleep.
[03:13] Oblivion (kwernebu@IS.Dal.Ca) left irc: Read
error to Oblivion[IS.Dal.Ca]: EOF from client
[03:15] what's the topic - or is everyone too sleepy
(it's only 8:15pm where I am)
[03:15] I am talking on the ohone so hold on
[03:17] zx (firstname.lastname@example.org) joined #apologetics.
[03:17] zx (email@example.com) left #apologetics.
[03:19] DGC (firstname.lastname@example.org) left
[03:22] Hume (email@example.com) joined #apologetics.
[03:23] Hume (firstname.lastname@example.org) left #apologetics.
[03:25] Cassidy_ (email@example.com)
[03:25] silent as a whorehouse in Salt Lake
CCity in here.......................
[03:26] Cassidy_ (firstname.lastname@example.org)
[03:28] DGC (email@example.com) joined
[03:41] Achimoth (firstname.lastname@example.org)
left irc: Leaving Gangsta-G 3.0(c), Homies inc. BY
[03:41] DGC (email@example.com) left
[03:42] Achimoth (firstname.lastname@example.org)
[03:44] hey achimoth
[03:46] Acolyte (email@example.com) left
[03:51] Achimoth (firstname.lastname@example.org)
[05:17] mrsbw2 (email@example.com) joined
[05:17] mrsbw2 (firstname.lastname@example.org) left
[05:37] JamesBond (Mark@mi2958.wlv.ac.uk) joined #apologetics.
[05:38] JamesBond (Mark@mi2958.wlv.ac.uk) left #apologetics.
[05:38] JamesBond (Mark@mi2958.wlv.ac.uk) joined #apologetics.
[05:40] JamesBond (Mark@mi2958.wlv.ac.uk) left #apologetics.
[06:16] W (email@example.com) got netsplit.
[06:19] W (firstname.lastname@example.org) returned to #apologetics.
[06:19] Mode change '+o W ' by Manhattan.KS.US.Undernet.Org
[07:58] ProfG (greenew@SL2.elink.net) joined #apologetics.
[07:59] Acolyte (email@example.com) joined
[07:59] whats the prob?
[08:00] no apologetics on #Bible
[08:00] Elim (firstname.lastname@example.org) joined #apologetics.
[08:00] 'allo 'allo :)
[08:00] Elim :-)
[08:01] spell worship right
[08:01] Actually, I was trying real hard to accept
the bible as the word of god, just for this discussion.
[08:02] Action: ProfG is about to turn ApoloBot off
- you can privately MESSAGE the bot for this stuff!
[08:02] Alcuin (email@example.com)
[08:02] You know, calling your bot 'Apolo' might
make ppl think this is a Greek channel :)
[08:02] geez touchy
[08:03] I can't even search, sheesh
[08:03] yes you can, in /msg or /query
[08:03] THERE IT IS
[08:03] Acolyte (firstname.lastname@example.org) left
[08:04] Acolyte (email@example.com) joined
[08:05] Mode change '+o Acolyte ' by ApoloBotfirstname.lastname@example.org
[08:06] so how are you Ac?
[08:07] hey alcuin can you give me a hand?
[08:07] Action: Alcuin holds out a hand to Acolyte.
[08:07] alcuin I am doing a problem with formulas
[08:07] hold on a sec
[08:07] thanks guys, sorry to force the move
[08:08] ProfG: Why should you be sorry to enforce
a legitimate rule?
[08:08] not sorry to enforce the rule :-)
[08:08] sorry to have to enforce it on friends
[08:09] We only flagrantly violate the rules
to test you. ;)
[08:09] so who is this weetbix person?
[08:10] I suspect that one cause behind the
frequent appearance of apologetic discussions in #bible
is the fact that some folks can only open one window
at once, and are reluctant to leave that channel.
The superior bot might also be a f
[08:10] ""weetbix2 ~email@example.com
* Mr Ed""
[08:10] "superior bot" THIS
[08:10] "superior bot" = logos9, no?
[08:11] actually, they have the same guts, except
for more versions
[08:11] profg personally you are about the
only op I obey in #bible
[08:11] profg others...we...I bend
[08:11] and bend
[08:12] and bend ...oops it broke! ;)
[08:12] Cannibal (firstname.lastname@example.org) joined
[08:12] alcuin anyhow
[08:12] I got this problem
[08:12] Action: Alcuin passes a hand to Cannibal.
[08:12] weetbix2 (email@example.com) joined
[08:12] "here, you can have one, too,"
[08:12] Hi Cannibal
[08:12] hi Alcuin :)
[08:12] hi Acolyte :)
[08:12] it is with factoring perfect suqare
[08:13] alcuin I can't seem to factor this
[08:13] Lemme see.
[08:13] hi Cannibal
[08:13] welcome weetbix2
[08:13] hi ProfG :)
[08:13] alcuin the trinomial is: 16x2+72xy+81y2
[08:13] So, weetbix2, where were we?
[08:14] alcuin its the middle term I need
[08:14] who knows
[08:14] 72xy<-------------this one
[08:15] oh wait
[08:15] I see it
[08:15] never mind
[08:15] [4x+9y]^2, no?
[08:15] Action: ProfG 's palms begin sweating as the
numerical discussions swarm around his head...
[08:16] thats the one I got
[08:16] Action: ProfG grows dizzy
[08:16] I saw it just a sec ago
[08:16] what were you discussing, weetbix?
[08:16] well been good but must go
[08:16] no, wait
[08:16] oh ok
[08:16] I'm interested
[08:16] ProfG: Hmm, is this what you get when
you don't accept the Bible as the word of God? I see
your point now, trying to keep this out of #bible :-)
[08:16] profg thats anb understatment
[08:17] Elim: blame Acolyte with his dumb ol'
[08:18] the fact is that i can see the reason
why most religons cant be seen as the same
[08:18] when you take them down to the fundamentals
they say believe in me and love thy neighbour
[08:18] I was most interested in that last comment
you made in #Bible
[08:18] profg hey it took me a long time to
get over my prob with math, don;t you start it up again
[08:19] prof why? and what about it
[08:21] For an answer to your inquiry, press
. For a rhyme on "*ello", press 
[08:21] prof why? and what about it
[08:21] Action: ProfG has closed that #Bible window,
and can't quote weetbix now unfortunately
[08:21] alcuin how old r u?
[08:21] profg u on mirc?
[08:22] Action: Alcuin puts no stock in ages, which
are a construct of man
[08:22] alcuin ok so tell me anyhow
[08:22] alcuin humor me
[08:22] Time is an interesting thing.
[08:22] alcuin every thing we have is a construct
[08:22] Acolyte yes
[08:22] most of what we see is to
[08:23] Action: ProfG is not a constructivist
[08:23] though I *love* deconstructionists -
they do my job for me on modernity :-)
[08:23] weetbix2: There exist some things which
are not constructs of man.
[08:23] but most of life is
[08:24] Elim (firstname.lastname@example.org) left #apologetics.
[08:24] The real question is whether we try
in futility to construct a representation of reality
for ourselves apart from God, or whether we accept
and work within God's construction of reality.
[08:25] profg yup
[08:25] As Derrida insists, there's no reaching
a transcendental signified, if one starts with the
[08:26] Action: ProfG has to read Derrida, et. al,
for - can you believe it? - International Relations...
it's an infestation, I tell you!
[08:26] Which text[s]?
[08:27] heh, can't remember now (thank God)
[08:27] Nick change: Cannibal -> JohnKnox
[08:27] if god revealed him self to moses
etc could he not have revealed himself to others
[08:28] weebix2: Could he have? Yes. Did he?
[08:28] It's recounted in the OT as well as
the new ;)
[08:28] could those ppl not have interpreted
[08:28] profg try Wittgenstein
[08:28] weebix2: Could they have? Sure. Did
[08:28] ie formed different religions
[08:29] Acolyte: yup, him too
[08:29] Jesus and Moses are in accord; ditto
the other canonical sources.
[08:29] alcuin come on who are you kidding
how many religions are based on the bible
[08:29] profg just thought of soemthn
[08:29] at least 30 odd
[08:30] profg, that is a RAD VERSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[08:30] profg look at it and think Modalism
[08:30] Acolyte :-)
[08:30] SO IS that suposed to mean sommit
[08:30] profg it KILLS modalism
[08:30] Acolyte: well, of course ;->
[08:30] weebix2: I'm not claiming that there
are not other interpretations of the Bible. I'm saying
that the interpretations within the bible are authoritative,
and those outside of it are not necessarily authoritative.
[08:30] profg, have you read Boyd's book on
[08:31] u should
[08:31] that and bowman's bk on JW's
[08:31] biff (Mofo@pc24.astro.lu.se) joined #apologetics.
[08:31] Action: ProfG has to read too much IR caca
[08:31] have you read Bowman on the Trinity?
[08:31] Acolyte: u know Carson's little book
on "gifts" ?
[08:31] but the bible was written after god
revealed himself to moses right
[08:31] caca? yuk
[08:31] Int'l Relations
[08:32] each has their calling
[08:32] weetbix2: right.
[08:32] biff (Mofo@pc24.astro.lu.se) left #apologetics.
[08:32] profg I just wonder what would have
happned if you were in calif when you were in ECUSA
and had met me when you were an atheist. ;)
[08:32] Topic changed by ApoloBotemail@example.com:
You've got questions? We've got answers.
[08:32] so could have god revealed himself
to some one else and thats how the koran was written
[08:32] Acolyte: I would have killed you. :-)
[08:32] as an example
[08:32] in a drunken rage.
[08:33] weetbix@: The koran contradicts the
bible, but there is no contradiction within the bible.
Therefore, the koran could not be of God.
[08:33] profg you mean I would have killed
you, with the gospel and some Josh McDowell bks. ;)
[08:33] Acolyte: Not to mention some Chuck Smith
[08:33] Acolyte: heh, got a question for you