Burgy wrote:
>And for Glenn -- You keep coming back to Ugaboobah. Do you really
>think that
>saying the right sylables gets you into heaven? Maybe, for some primitive
>tribes in another time and place, "Ugaboobah" was the best word they could
>come up with for what they worshipped. Does that disqualify them? What if
>they had come up with the sylables "Je-sus?" Would that have made a
>difference?
>
I like Ugaboogah. He is an honest god and only wants you to send all your
money to his servant/creator, me. Unfortunately, I can't get anyone else to
follow Ugaboogah.
That being said, what you, and others, seem to miss about Ugaboogah (also
spelled oogabooga, oogaboogah etc) is that I am not speaking of the plan of
salvation here. I am using Ugaboogah to illustrate that if the
theology/requirements of Ugaboogah are mutually incompatible with the
theology/requirements of Jehovah, then they can no more be the same god any
more than Zeus and Jehovah are the same. And if Jehovah didn't create the
world, then who did? Did anyone? My point is that if the God we worship
didn't create the heavens and the earth, then he isn't a God worth
worshiping. We need to worship the actual creator. Apollo and Diana didn't
create. Ar those lascivious gods merely Jehovah miscomprehended? Molech
demanded child sacrifice, Jehovah doesn't. They can't be the same.
glenn
see http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk/dmd.htm
for lots of creation/evolution information
anthropology/geology/paleontology/theology\
personal stories of struggle
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 02 2002 - 17:00:32 EDT