Atheism vs Christianity: 26 new messages in 15 topics

Atheism vs Christianity
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity?hl=en

Atheism-vs-Christianity@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Law and Order
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/c3347e150f4895b2?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 6:21 am
From: Brock Organ

On Mar 23, 2008, at 2:16 AM, rappoccio wrote:

>
>
>
> On Mar 23, 12:09 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 23, 2008, at 12:58 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>
>>>> From: brockor...@gmail.com
>>>> Subject: [AvC] Re: Law and Order
>>
>>>> I don't share your belief.
>>
>>> I don't fucking care.
>>
>> That's unfortunate, because I make some really good points. :)
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Brock
>
> You make no points whatsoever.

For example:

"Interestingly enough, Law and Order is probably the best recent
example of a modern view of medieval disputation that I know of. I'm
convinced the writers and producers of the show must read and use
Thomas Aquinas' work on a regular basis."

is an excellent point. Disproved you are, yet again.

> You intentionally distract from
> arguments that paint you in a bad light.

Physician, heal thyself. :)

Regards,

Brock

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 6:23 am
From: Brock Organ

On Mar 23, 2008, at 6:05 AM, bonfly wrote:
>
> Shut up and give me Dag Yo your fucking lunch money.

While you ad hominate, I share an articulate and well thought out
position. It is:

Regards,

Brock

>
> On Mar 23, 2:44 pm, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 22, 2008, at 11:09 PM, zen cycle wrote:
>>
>>>> From: brockor...@gmail.com
>>>> Subject: [AvC] Re: Law and Order
>>
>>>> On Mar 22, 2008, at 2:00 PM, LL wrote:
>>
>>>>> LL: No, your beliefs reflect the Westminster Confession of Faith
>>> and
>>>>> everything else you've been indoctrinated to.
>>
>>>> You make it sound so bad. :)
>>
>>> It is.
>>
>> I don't share your belief.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Brock
> >

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 6:29 am
From: Brock Organ

On Mar 23, 2008, at 6:10 AM, bonfly wrote:

>
> Shut up and give Dag Yo your lunch money.

For example:

is an excellent point.

Regards,

Brock

>
> On Mar 23, 3:09 pm, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 23, 2008, at 12:58 AM, zen cycle wrote:
>>
>>>> From: brockor...@gmail.com
>>>> Subject: [AvC] Re: Law and Order
>>
>>>> I don't share your belief.
>>
>>> I don't fucking care.
>>
>> That's unfortunate, because I make some really good points. :)
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Brock
> >

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Seriously, how can you be so stupid?
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/b42d4b1d62930412?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 6:31 am
From: Trance Gemini

No wonder trollboy hates wikipedia ;-)

Quote.
Troll (Internet) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Internet troll)
"Do not feed the trolls" redirects here. For the Wikipedia essay, see
Wikipedia:What is a troll?

An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who
posts controversial and usually irrelevant or off-topic messages in an
online community, such as an online discussion forum, with the
intention of baiting other users into an emotional response[1] or to
generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.[2]
End Quote.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

On Mar 23, 9:07 am, zen cycle <funkmaste...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Subject: [AvC] Re: Seriously, how can you be so stupid?
> > From: booyah....@gmail.com
>
> > you state that we are all evolved apes, which i know is a lie because
> > evolution is a bunch of crap
>
> By what chain of evidence ?
>
> > christians "have remained retarded" so how are you differentiating
> > christians from "we" ? i am interested to know
>
> 'bout as bright as a box of bolts, aintcha big fella......
>
> 'We' means humans. All humans. Brainwashed twits like you just refuse to believe it. Your silly god makes as much sense as worshiping the potato bugs that live under your trailer home.
>
> Here's an experiment. Pray to the potato bugs for a while, then pray to god for a while. Then come back to us and let us know which one works better.
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Watch "Cause Effect," a show about real people making a real difference. Learn more.http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/MTV/?source=text_watchcause

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Acceptance or Rejection of Divine revelation
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/b170ea5fc0a32729?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 6:31 am
From: Brock Organ

On Mar 23, 2008, at 7:38 AM, Drafterman wrote:
> On Mar 23, 12:41 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 22, 2008, at 10:50 PM, Drafterman wrote:
>>> On Mar 22, 8:42 pm, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mar 22, 2008, at 12:51 PM, Drafterman wrote:
>>>>> On Mar 22, 9:22 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mar 22, 2008, at 8:33 AM, Drafterman wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 12:33 am, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 11:29 pm, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 10:42 pm, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 11:56 am, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What is the measuring stick and why
>>>>>>>>>>> is it valid?
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Anyone?
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Anyone?
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Bueller?
>>
>>>>>>>>>> I like WCF Chapter 1 Section 10.
>>
>>>>>>>>> Which, of course, doesn't answer the question.
>>
>>>>>>>> I thought it was an excellent answer.
>>
>>>>>>> Perhaps it is. Just not to the question I asked.
>>
>>>>>> I would certainly disagree with that. You've been answered quite
>>>>>> excellently with that reference.
>>
>>>>> No I haven't since it does not answer the "Why is it valid" part of
>>>>> the question.
>>
>>>> Well, at least you've recognized it as an answer to the "what"
>>>> portion.
>>
>>> So? If I owe someone a dollar and pay them 50 cents I can't exactly
>>> say I've repaid the debt, can I?
>>
>>> Likewise, responding to half a question isn't an answer.
>>
>> Its an excellent answer. And I'm glad I shared it.
>
> No, it's not. It's 50% an answer and in any education system that's a
> failing grade. I'd rather you answer the whole question rather than
> waste time and space.

Too bad. You got my excellent answer anyway.

Regards,

Brock

==============================================================================
TOPIC: The true religion
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/faba882756fcb9cb?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 6:34 am
From: Trance Gemini

On Mar 23, 7:48 am, bonfly <anub...@aapt.net.au> wrote:
> Hi Ahmedd. Hand me that sharpened tent peg matey ... it has your
> mohamudanian name inscribed upon its inside self of the whole inner
> innyness of its inside non-selfishness-self-shell-fishedness. Trust
> me.

I doubt he'll be back but just in case ....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons_controversy

;-)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Burial Vs Cremation
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/693da611ae952991?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 6:37 am
From: sai

The Research conducted on both kinds of funeral rites i.e. Cremation
and Burial only cremation meets all the criteria for the effectiveness
of a funeral rite as below:

* Minimises the attack by ghosts
* Helps the subtle body shake off its bond to the physical body
* Gives momentum and protection to the subtle body in the afterlife

Sometimes we are attached to the form of funeral rite that our culture
is used to. However, the spiritual repercussions of burial need to be
weighed against one's psychological attachment for a certain funeral
rite.

To learn more and view the subtle drawings of this topic visit:
http://www.spiritualresearchfoundation.org/spiritualresearch/difficulties/ancestors/Burial_Cremation.php

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Is Brock Organ autistic?
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/f09d8f85fa6b3549?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 6:37 am
From: Brock Organ

On Mar 23, 2008, at 7:40 AM, Drafterman wrote:

>
> On Mar 23, 12:40 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 22, 2008, at 10:49 PM, Drafterman wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Mar 22, 8:42 pm, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mar 22, 2008, at 12:52 PM, Drafterman wrote:
>>>>> On Mar 22, 9:23 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mar 22, 2008, at 8:33 AM, Drafterman wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 12:28 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2008, at 11:33 PM, Drafterman wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 6:21 pm, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2008, at 6:11 PM, zencycle wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> From: "Brock Organ" <brockor...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [AvC] Re: Is Brock Organ autistic?
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Some of the strongest Christians are autistic.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There's a fucking schocker!!!!!
>>
>>>>>>>>>> God loves them, too. :)
>>
>>>>>>>>> Yeah. He loved them so much he made them autistic.
>>
>>>>>>>> You make it sound so bad. :)
>>
>>>>>>> Why don't you go out and convince some parents with autistic
>>>>>>> children
>>>>>>> how good it is?
>>
>>>>>> Why?
>>
>>>>> To brighten up their day.
>>
>>>> What noble motives you cite. :)
>>
>>> Cited by me, ignored by you.
>>
>> Its a gentle rebuke, as I don't believe your motives behind the
>> suggestion are particularly noble.
>
> A matter of interpretation. Of course my intentions aren't noble.

You've taken my point then.

> I don't believe autism is a good thing so I don't believe lying to
> parents about it is noble.

My point was:

>> Some of the strongest Christians are autistic.
> There's a fucking schocker!!!!!

God loves them, too. :)

> You do believe it's a good thing, so you should think telling the
> parents about it is noble.

See my point above for what I think. :)

> The only question is, why aren't you? You
> seem to be spending a lot of time avoiding the aleviation of pain of
> others. How very Christian of you.

I believe I have responded well to the question titling this thread:

> What do
> you think, guys? Is Broke Organ autistic?

"I don't believe so."

Regards,

Brock

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 7:10 am
From: Dev

In reality, I am far from being literally sure that Brock Organ is
autistic. We have no way of knowing that. I think you took the post a
little too literally. The point of the post was simply that Brock
Organ's posting style is eerily similar to Raymond's dialogue from
_Rain Man_, and that the diagnosis of "autistic" would explain a lot
about his posting style. Brock does not converse, on this group, like
a person of sound mental health. At all. This is probably because
Christianity discourages intelligent discourse, which is why it is so
rare to find a Christian here who actually "debates" at anywhere near
the adult standards that the atheists do. But Brock, after you've
attempted to debate him a few times, has a pretty unique kind of non-
response where he repeats the same things over and over exclusive of
what anyone else is actually talking about. Like an autistic, he shuts
himself out of the external discussion in favor of some kind of
repetitive, internal dialogue exclusive of anything anyone else says
to him. There is _something_ seriously wrong with him--it's just a
matter of speculation regarding what it's actually called.

On Mar 22, 8:53 pm, "Phillip Montgomery" <phillipm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I know an autistic. What exactly is it that makes you think Brock
> autistic? He repeats phrases and sentences?
>
> Has anyone asked Brock if he is autistic? It is my understanding that
> autism is now more a spectrum of various disorders ranging from what was in
> the past dubbed retardation to milder forms like Aspergers. It might be
> difficult to label Brock or anyone else autistic.
>
> In any case, I leave the question. Brock, are you autistic? For that
> matter, out of curiosity, is anyone else here autistic? Does that impact
> your atheism/theism?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 10:49 PM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 22, 8:42 pm, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Mar 22, 2008, at 12:52 PM, Drafterman wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 22, 9:23 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> On Mar 22, 2008, at 8:33 AM, Drafterman wrote:
>
> > > >>> On Mar 22, 12:28 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>> On Mar 21, 2008, at 11:33 PM, Drafterman wrote:
>
> > > >>>>> On Mar 21, 6:21 pm, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>>> On Mar 21, 2008, at 6:11 PM, zencycle wrote:
>
> > > >>>>>>> From: "Brock Organ" <brockor...@gmail.com>
> > > >>>>>>> Subject: [AvC] Re: Is Brock Organ autistic?
>
> > > >>>>>>>> Some of the strongest Christians are autistic.
>
> > > >>>>>>> There's a fucking schocker!!!!!
>
> > > >>>>>> God loves them, too. :)
>
> > > >>>>> Yeah. He loved them so much he made them autistic.
>
> > > >>>> You make it sound so bad. :)
>
> > > >>> Why don't you go out and convince some parents with autistic
> > children
> > > >>> how good it is?
>
> > > >> Why?
>
> > > > To brighten up their day.
>
> > > What noble motives you cite. :)
>
> > Cited by me, ignored by you.
>
> > > Regards,
>
> > > Brock
>
> --
> Phillip Montgomery
> Blog athttp://philtheinfidel.blogspot.com/- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 7:12 am
From: Trance Gemini

On Mar 23, 10:10 am, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> In reality, I am far from being literally sure that Brock Organ is
> autistic. We have no way of knowing that. I think you took the post a
> little too literally. The point of the post was simply that Brock
> Organ's posting style is eerily similar to Raymond's dialogue from
> _Rain Man_, and that the diagnosis of "autistic" would explain a lot
> about his posting style. Brock does not converse, on this group, like
> a person of sound mental health. At all. This is probably because
> Christianity discourages intelligent discourse, which is why it is so
> rare to find a Christian here who actually "debates" at anywhere near
> the adult standards that the atheists do. But Brock, after you've
> attempted to debate him a few times, has a pretty unique kind of non-
> response where he repeats the same things over and over exclusive of
> what anyone else is actually talking about. Like an autistic, he shuts
> himself out of the external discussion in favor of some kind of
> repetitive, internal dialogue exclusive of anything anyone else says
> to him. There is _something_ seriously wrong with him--it's just a
> matter of speculation regarding what it's actually called.

Very nicely explained, Dev :-)

>
> On Mar 22, 8:53 pm, "Phillip Montgomery" <phillipm...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I know an autistic. What exactly is it that makes you think Brock
> > autistic? He repeats phrases and sentences?
>
> > Has anyone asked Brock if he is autistic? It is my understanding that
> > autism is now more a spectrum of various disorders ranging from what was in
> > the past dubbed retardation to milder forms like Aspergers. It might be
> > difficult to label Brock or anyone else autistic.
>
> > In any case, I leave the question. Brock, are you autistic? For that
> > matter, out of curiosity, is anyone else here autistic? Does that impact
> > your atheism/theism?
>
> > On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 10:49 PM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 22, 8:42 pm, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Mar 22, 2008, at 12:52 PM, Drafterman wrote:
>
> > > > > On Mar 22, 9:23 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> On Mar 22, 2008, at 8:33 AM, Drafterman wrote:
>
> > > > >>> On Mar 22, 12:28 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>>> On Mar 21, 2008, at 11:33 PM, Drafterman wrote:
>
> > > > >>>>> On Mar 21, 6:21 pm, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>> On Mar 21, 2008, at 6:11 PM, zencycle wrote:
>
> > > > >>>>>>> From: "Brock Organ" <brockor...@gmail.com>
> > > > >>>>>>> Subject: [AvC] Re: Is Brock Organ autistic?
>
> > > > >>>>>>>> Some of the strongest Christians are autistic.
>
> > > > >>>>>>> There's a fucking schocker!!!!!
>
> > > > >>>>>> God loves them, too. :)
>
> > > > >>>>> Yeah. He loved them so much he made them autistic.
>
> > > > >>>> You make it sound so bad. :)
>
> > > > >>> Why don't you go out and convince some parents with autistic
> > > children
> > > > >>> how good it is?
>
> > > > >> Why?
>
> > > > > To brighten up their day.
>
> > > > What noble motives you cite. :)
>
> > > Cited by me, ignored by you.
>
> > > > Regards,
>
> > > > Brock
>
> > --
> > Phillip Montgomery
> > Blog athttp://philtheinfidel.blogspot.com/-Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 7:16 am
From: Dev

I think it's possible he doesn't care. Theists don't believe in God
for more rational reasons than others, even though some of them give
more rational-sounding explanations. It's a matter of rationalization
that is contingent largely on intelligence. An idiot doesn't need to
rationalize a delusion as much as a smarter person does because
idiots, being more easily convinced, have lower-maintenance delusions.
Brock's delusions seem to be maintained by simple repetition of
asserting the validity of the delusion. That's all his mental state
really requires.

On Mar 21, 9:45 pm, Dag Yo <sir_ro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Do you think it's possible that Brock really doesn't understand that
> expanded explanations can exist for such points of view?
>
> On Mar 21, 6:10 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I'll leave it up to the readers to decide if I correctly paraphrased
> > what you said.
>
> > On Mar 21, 6:33 pm, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 21, 2008, at 6:55 PM, Dev wrote:
>
> > > > So Brock hasn't quite admitted to being autistic, but here he says
> > > > that autism fills him with joy and happiness and strengthens faith. :)
>
> > > Not quite. What I said was:
>
> > > >> Some of the strongest Christians are autistic. Of course, not all
> > > >> autistic people are Christian, but some of those who are, have a faith
> > > >> that inspires and fills me with joy and happiness. It makes me think
> > > >> of Isaiah 46: 3-5.
>
> > > Which is not the same as:
>
> > > > here he says
> > > > that autism fills him with joy and happiness and strengthens faith. :)
>
> > > Of course, I do praise God and thank Him for His wondrous care and
> > > love. :)
>
> > > Regards,
>
> > > Brock
>
> > > > On Mar 21, 4:09 pm, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> On Mar 21, 2008, at 11:09 AM, Drafterman wrote:
>
> > > >>> On Mar 21, 11:04 am, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>> On Mar 20, 8:55 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > >>>>> What do
> > > >>>>> you think, guys? Is Broke Organ autistic?
>
> > > >>>> I don't believe so.
>
> > > >>> You raise an interesting point. Do autistic people know they're
> > > >>> austic? Do that have the capability of recognizing that within
> > > >>> themselves?
>
> > > >> Some of the strongest Christians are autistic. Of course, not all
> > > >> autistic people are Christian, but some of those who are, have a faith
> > > >> that inspires and fills me with joy and happiness. It makes me think
> > > >> of Isaiah 46: 3-5.
>
> > > >> "I (the Lord) have made, and I will bear"
>
> > > >> Praise God.
>
> > > >> Regards,
>
> > > >> Brock- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 7:21 am
From: Drafterman

On Mar 23, 9:37 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 23, 2008, at 7:40 AM, Drafterman wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 23, 12:40 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mar 22, 2008, at 10:49 PM, Drafterman wrote:
>
> >>> On Mar 22, 8:42 pm, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Mar 22, 2008, at 12:52 PM, Drafterman wrote:
> >>>>> On Mar 22, 9:23 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> On Mar 22, 2008, at 8:33 AM, Drafterman wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> On Mar 22, 12:28 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2008, at 11:33 PM, Drafterman wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 6:21 pm, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2008, at 6:11 PM, zencycle wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> From: "Brock Organ" <brockor...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [AvC] Re: Is Brock Organ autistic?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Some of the strongest Christians are autistic.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> There's a fucking schocker!!!!!
>
> >>>>>>>>>> God loves them, too. :)
>
> >>>>>>>>> Yeah. He loved them so much he made them autistic.
>
> >>>>>>>> You make it sound so bad. :)
>
> >>>>>>> Why don't you go out and convince some parents with autistic
> >>>>>>> children
> >>>>>>> how good it is?
>
> >>>>>> Why?
>
> >>>>> To brighten up their day.
>
> >>>> What noble motives you cite. :)
>
> >>> Cited by me, ignored by you.
>
> >> Its a gentle rebuke, as I don't believe your motives behind the
> >> suggestion are particularly noble.
>
> > A matter of interpretation. Of course my intentions aren't noble.
>
> You've taken my point then.
>
> > I don't believe autism is a good thing so I don't believe lying to
> > parents about it is noble.
>
> My point was:
>
> >> Some of the strongest Christians are autistic.
> > There's a fucking schocker!!!!!
>
> God loves them, too. :)
>
> > You do believe it's a good thing, so you should think telling the
> > parents about it is noble.
>
> See my point above for what I think. :)

You've dishonestly left out the part where you implied autism isn't
bad.

>
> > The only question is, why aren't you? You
> > seem to be spending a lot of time avoiding the aleviation of pain of
> > others. How very Christian of you.
>
> I believe I have responded well to the question titling this thread:
>
> > What do
> > you think, guys? Is Broke Organ autistic?
>
> "I don't believe so."
>
> Regards,
>
> Brock

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Hello everyone
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/b959d03c4835e354?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 6:39 am
From: Trance Gemini

On Mar 23, 1:06 am, Holden <holden.blindman.mcfarl...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I didn't mean I was insulted myself. The person that wrote the message
> about my God being myth, fiction, and BS didn't back up the statement
> about his not believing in any God or supernatural being and so I
> thought it prudent to ask if he was merely talking about something he
> knew nothing about or didn't really have anything to bring to the
> table.
> I'm not insulted, a true debater of a subject can never allow other
> peoples' comments to insult him. He can however, become annoyed when
> said person says something but does not back it up with evidence.
>

Holden. You're the one who believes in something that isn't to proven
to exist.

That means that the burden of proof is on you to prove that your
little god exists before you can assert that he does.

Ask your high school science teacher.

We don't have to prove that nothing doesn't exist because it doesn't.

This is why the poster could make those remarks to you without
supporting them and without being challenged.

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" --Carl Sagan.

> LL wrote:
> > On Mar 22, 3:02 pm, Holden <holden.blindman.mcfarl...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > If my God is myth and BS, what's yours, or do you believe in a God at
> > > all? Or did you just join this group to insult anyone who believes in
> > > the true God? I just want to know.
>
> > LL: We're here to discuss whether believing in anything supernatural
> > is rational. So far, nobody has shown that it is, though many have
> > tried. People do claim to be insulted here, but there's no reason to
> > be. We are discussing whether any god exists, that's all. If that idea
> > insults you, you probably shouldn't be here.
>
> > > bonfly wrote:
> > > > You're God is a made up-fusion of myth and bullshit. Mostly
> > > > bullshit. Ah, the hell with it, it's all bullshit.
>
> > > > On Mar 23, 7:46 am, Holden <holden.blindman.mcfarl...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > First of all, the needs to believe in God are many. The first reason
> > > > > is, I don't want to end up in Hell. The second reason is that we've
> > > > > all seen the results of what can happen if you don't do as God has
> > > > > asked you.
> > > > > I've heard stories from Christian people who have known atheists
> > > > > who, in their old age, have gotten extremely sick and weak, and they
> > > > > claim that's a punishment from God, and after hearing what the
> > > > > atheists did, I have to agree.
> > > > > The third reason I believe in God is because of the Bible. True, I
> > > > > realize it could be totally fictional, but somewhere deep in my
> > > > > conscience, I know everything in it is real, right down from Genesis
> > > > > to Revelation, and speaking of Revelation, that time I feel, is nearly
> > > > > ahead of us.
> > > > > Now, you're probably going to ask, how do I know there's a Hell?
> > > > > Well, how can you know? I guess the only real way to know is if you
> > > > > live life like an idiot your entire life and wake up one day in a
> > > > > fiery pit with grotesque demons all around, stabbing you to death with
> > > > > pitchforks and other things I will not go into right now. I hope this
> > > > > has cleared a few things up.
>
> > > > > Drafterman wrote:
> > > > > > On Mar 22, 5:12�pm, Holden <holden.blindman.mcfarl...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > Well, no other Gods really make sense.
>
> > > > > > I agree except for the "other" part.
>
> > > > > > > However, you are right in one
> > > > > > > respect. There isn't a God that really does make sense.
>
> > > > > > Then why believe in any?
>
> > > > > > > Every God ever
> > > > > > > dreamed up, by man or otherwise, �has certain querks which, when
> > > > > > > identified, put them on a level totally above any human.
>
> > > > > > If you don't understand God, then how do you know those querks put it
> > > > > > above man?
>
> > > > > > > I just think
> > > > > > > the God I believe in makes more sense than others, and I'm willing to
> > > > > > > back that statement up all the way if need be.
>
> > > > > > I'd rather you back up the need to believe in God to begin with.
>
> > > > > > > Dave wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Mar 22, 8:25 am, Holden <holden.blindman.mcfarl...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > How are all of you today? I have been looking to join a group of
> > > > > > > > > people that debate religion and philosiphy, and I think I've come to
> > > > > > > > > the right place. I wish to say from the outset, I am a Christian. I am
> > > > > > > > > on the side of Jesus Christ. He is my lord and saviour, no matter what
> > > > > > > > > anyone else may try and tell you.
>
> > > > > > > > Why would I care?
>
> > > > > > > > > However, I do have some beliefs that
> > > > > > > > > people think are wrong or odd for a Christian, so I'm coming to see
> > > > > > > > > how you all of this wonderful group take them. Feel free to respond, I
> > > > > > > > > like heated discussions, just so long as they don't turn too nasty. I
> > > > > > > > > just wanted to let you all know I'm here.
>
> > > > > > > > You posted nothing to respond to?
>
> > > > > > > > How about you answer a question - why do you reject all gods but the
> > > > > > > > christian one?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -

==============================================================================
TOPIC: getting crucified without catching germs
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/bf3a81c85e3f3276?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 6:49 am
From: Trance Gemini

On Mar 23, 8:43 am, simonsaysbye <tahtah4...@live.co.uk> wrote:
> On Mar 23, 10:49 am, Observer <mayors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 23, 3:18 am, simonsaysbye <tahtah4...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 22, 6:29 am, Observer <mayors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 21, 2:18 pm, simonsaysbye <tahtah4...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Mar 21, 4:50 pm,Observer<mayors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Mar 21, 6:03 am, simonsaysbye <tahtah4...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Mar 21, 1:17 am, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:> Perfect questions, Kitty. This is why it isn't religious "extremists"
> > > > > > > > who are the root of the problem, but religious faith itself. If you
> > > > > > > > have religious faith in anything regarding The Bible, you really don't
> > > > > > > > have a case for explaining why any other beliefs are crazier than
> > > > > > > > yours are. They might be less popular, but they certainly couldn't be
> > > > > > > > any less sane or rational.
>
> > > > > > > I don't agree.
>
> > > > > >Observer
>
> > > > > > You are too stupid to have an opinion that anyone would care about.
> > > > > Righto.
>
> > > > > > Getting the activities of people on the fringe of a
>
> > > > > > > belief and then applying that to the whole is shoddy/lazy thinking.
> > > > > > > You probably are not impressed when Christians bang on about how
> > > > > > > atheism is all about nihlism and we may as well just kill ourselves
> > > > > > > now.
>
> > > > > >Observer
> > > > > > Please do you stupid fuck .
>
> > > > > I have spent time with many people who are struggling with suicide.
>
> > > > Observer
>
> > > > Why did they not already have enough trouble?
>
> > > > Did you drop a load of good old christian belief that man is evil ,
> > > > and unworthy . That should help a lot. Or did you tell them about the
> > > > fictive inept, sadomasochistic , monster that you worship. You know
> > > > the one that had himself/his son tortured to death to save them from
> > > > his own wrath. That is always a good line for someone on the verge of
> > > > suicide.
>
> > > > I
>
> > > > > would rather be a stupid fuck and helped people rediscover what it
> > > > > means to get some joy in life than to me sod who gets some pleasure
> > > > > from being abusive and unkind.
>
> > > > Observer
>
> > > > You ignorant fuck the horrors of the bible are scarcely a fountain of
> > > > joy.
> > > > If you would do humankind some real good then encourage them to
> > > > educate them selves , to learn science, scientific method , and
> > > > critical thought so that they no longer have to suck an the teat of a
> > > > bloated corps and can share in the joy and wonder of discovery and
> > > > enlightenment.
>
> > > > Fuck your uneducated mindless ways and the self imposed ignorance of
> > > > christian despots.
>
> > > > Psychonomist
>
> > > I wonder, is your profound hatred towards me and the millions of
> > > others who happen to be Christian a consequence of your atheism?
>
> > Observer
> > You flatter your self . Any inclination for or against the likes of
> > you does not raise to the level of hatred. I simply detest the filth
> > that you spread and the irreparable harm you hateful superstition does
> > to the human psyche.
>
> What you seem to be saying is that you detest what I belive, and not
> who I am. Is that correct?
>
>
>
> > Your
>
> > > cruel comments remind me of an infant raging against the grown-up
> > > world.
>
> > Observer
> > Again you flatter your self . I cry out against the insipid madness
> > that of your fucking superstitious psychosis .
>
> > Unlike you who pretend to care about your fellow men I really do .
> >I
> > care that you lie to them , deceive them, that you keep your children
> > from education and teach them to live in the self loathing that
> > follows from the false guilts , and accusations of the essential evil
> > of humankind and original sin. To say nothing of your worship of a
> > fictive sadomasochistic monster .
>
> Please read this:http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html
>
> > There is much to detest but you don't raise above the level of being
> > worthy of disgust.
>
> So speaks the voice of atheism. Thank you for making the picture of
> athiesm a little more complete.
>
> > So Get it straight There is no room for you in my mind for hatred or
> > even cruelty . I slap your dumb ass around verbally in an attempt
> > either to wake you up or to let others who might fall into the sewer
> > of Christian filth to see your psychosis for what it is.
>
> Well at least you think me worthy of being woken up, albeit in a
> slight aggressive educational style.
>

Everyone here has a different style of debate. It's rarely personal
even with the name-calling.

For a christian you're a thoughtful and challenging debater. Your
ability to stay calm and rational and explore the issues is quite
admirable.

However, a lot of us do have contempt for religion and religious
beliefs.

That's what's coming across to you. Not contempt for you as a person.

Sometimes we get a little frustrated repeating ourselves. That's not
your fault because you're new here and don't have any idea how many
times we've repeated these same arguments.

So, keep a thick skin, stick around, and give some thought to what
we're saying.

That's really all we're asking, including Observer, and you do seem to
be doing that, unlike some of the other Christian posters here.

Have a good one, Simon :-)

>
>
> > Psychonomist
>
> Well
>
>
>
> > > > > > I'm not that impressed when you do the same thing but with
>
> > > > > > > Christian thinking.
>
> > > > > >Observer
> > > > > > A true oxymoron "Christian thinking"
>
> > > > > > You are true parasites on the cognitive abilities of humanity.
>
> > > > > > Your filthy fucking superstition is among the most horrid infections
> > > > > > since the bubonic plague .
>
> > > > > One thing I can say about your contributions: I can never know what's
> > > > > coming next. Sometimes something useful, other times not.
>
> > > > > > Psychonomist
>
> > > > > > > > On Mar 20, 4:39 pm, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > On Mar 20, 6:31 pm, simonsaysbye <tahtah4...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > A bizarre way that people misunderstand what it means to believe in a
> > > > > > > > > > God who died on a cross. I know I'm giving ammunition to you guys, but
> > > > > > > > > > then I'm not interested in pretending this kind of thing does not go
> > > > > > > > > > on.
>
> > > > > > > > > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7305522.stm
>
> > > > > > > > > And it's this sort of thing that makes atheists question the sanity of
> > > > > > > > > many Christians.
>
> > > > > > > > > Nice to see that you have a problem with that :-).
>
> > > > > > > > > However, let me ask you this.
>
> > > > > > > > > Why is this more insane than believing in God and the Bible in the
> > > > > > > > > first place?
>
> > > > > > > > > Why is it a misunderstanding? It seems to me that they are following
> > > > > > > > > the Bible exactly and emulating Jesus exactly, so what are they
> > > > > > > > > misunderstanding?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Discussion on the-support-of-the-premise-no-god-exists-via-the-
scientific-method
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/4bff299d21eafe3d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 6:50 am
From: simonsaysbye

O: "All objects, under only the force of gravity, near the surface of
the Earth, will accelerate at 32.2ft/s^2"

So if I were to put the planet Jupiter near the surface of the Earth
it would accelerate at 32.2ft/s^2? What about an object of infinite
mass? What about a photon? In fact, all objects of different masses
will accelerate differently.

I'm all for the scientific method, don't get me wrong. But if it
actually is as good a method of describing the universe as you say it
is, we may as well get things right. It seems to me that there are a
possible infinite number of objects that negates O. Apply this
statistically if you like: the probability drops from approaching 100%
to approaching 0%. So what has the scientific method really
achieved?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Just seen a great program on BBC2 about the Turin Shroud.
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/09fb4b917fc51029?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 6:57 am
From: Trance Gemini

On Mar 23, 4:47 am, Lawrey <lawrenc...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Maggsy,
>
> I watched the program from start to finish. The one thing that stood
> out in it and was so obvious as to be bordering on the bizaare, were
> the people involved including the very religious presenter who
> recently
> fronted another religious history program. Strange how they all remind
> me of you and the way you so desperately want this piece of fake to
> be of some significant sign that it once wrapped the body of a
> biblical character. A character so vague as to be involved in a
> controversy as to his very existence except in the NT Fables.
>
> They concentrated on the possiblity of painting and scortching.
> For some odd reason they completely forgot about the art of
> hot-stone-steaming, using very basic chemicals such as borate and
> magnesium chloride, soda, and an agglomeration of root infusions
> like dandelion for staining. I wonder why?
>
> It was almost painful to watch the desperate need to make of this
> obvious fake, something that it is not.
> Just how low can religiously minded people stoop in insisting that
> a fake is something to venerate? How Nauseous? How Degrading?
> A desperate attempt to involve scientific method to authenticate
> a shambolic and fraudulent artifact.

Exactly. I've seen a couple of shows like that on the shroud here in
Canada.

Willful ignorance of the facts is the approach these shows generally
take.

Dave was obviously right in his assessment of the show without even
seeing it ;-)

>
> On Mar 22, 10:02 pm, Maggsy <davidmaggs2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Any one seen this? Thought it was very interesting. Looking more and
> > more like the carbon 14 dating is wrong and that the test is not
> > reliable in some situations. There is a lot of evidence that suggests
> > the shroud is genuine and I thought the program was well balanced and
> > presented the evidence well.Did any one else see it?

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 6:58 am
From: Trance Gemini

On Mar 23, 8:26 am, landson <landson2...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Recently, a friend of mine was trying to explain to me why she
> believed in God.
>
> One of her "proofs" was The "Miracle of Fatima". Supposedly in
> Portugal, in 1917, there were 40,000 people standing outside in the
> rain waiting to see a miracle. Suddenly, rain stopped, the sun turned
> black, zig-zagged around in the sky, and then Fatima appeared in the
> sky and talked to the people.
>
> I asked my friend, "Were you there?". She said that she wasn't but her
> friend told her about it.
>
> I asked if her friend was there. She said she wasn't but her friend
> heard about it from the priest at church.
>
> I asked if the priest was there. She said he wasn't but he read about
> it in a book.
>
> I asked if the author of the book was there. She said that he wasn't
> but he had read other books and reports before he wrote his book.
>
> I asked if the other authors were there. She said that one of the
> other authors actually talked to people who were there.
>
> Then I asked her, "If we go outside right now, can God make the sun
> turn black?" She got a confused look on her face and stared repeating
> about what she heard from her friend who heard from a priest who read
> in a book by an author who read another book by an author who talked
> to people who were there.
>
> I stopped her and asked her again, "If we go outside right now, can
> God make the sun turn black?" She didn't know how to answer. I told
> her to call me the next time that the sun turned black.
>
> So, how much more reliable is the Shroud of Turin than the Miracle of
> Fatima?

Very nicely said.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: TO THE SEEKERS OF TRUTH I GIVE YOU THIS WONDERFUL BOOK !!!
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/84c0516240a796a9?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 7:06 am
From: Trance Gemini

On Mar 23, 6:18 am, thewayoftruth1 <bicbess2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Description of the book the true message of jesus:
>
> Dr. Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips
>
> Published by Dar Al Fatah in 1996 Description An analytic look at
> Jesus' person and the content of his message. Examines Christian
> sources historically and textually and compares them with the Islamic
> point of view as found in the Quran and Sunnah
>
> and this is the link :http://www.zshare.net/download/935049809440c1/

Hi thewayofthetruth1,

Since you like posting links, here's one for you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons_controversy

Oh, and by the way, I'm still waiting for a response to my last posts
which you have chosen to ignore.

Here's the link to that thread in case you forgot:

http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/e88a778f7451add5/39dce8efcd186899?q=thewayofthetruth1+trance&lnk=nl&

Look forward to hearing your replies. And this time, please respond to
the specific issues raised. You tend to ignore those and just go into
rants about how evil we westerners are.

We westerners, find that approach, insulting and offensive and would
appreciate it if you would stop coming here insulting and offending
us.

Clear responses specific to the issues raised would be appreciated,
however.

Thank you, and have a good day :-)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Brock's experiment
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/832a2df832d57295?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 7:11 am
From: Trance Gemini

On Mar 23, 5:36 am, Lawrey <lawrenc...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Trance,
>
> Brock has utilised the art of the twisted paradigm, since the
> his first post. He has resorted to the use of psychology more
> recently. There is but one counter to his method, the aim of
> which is to keep the pot boiling and dialogue flowing to his
> agenda. Unfortunately we all have ego's and for some to be
> seen to resist the challenge is, to show weakness or defeat.
> I submit however that the only response to him is no
> response at all, and where he seeks to slot in, to totally
> ignore, or if response is required make it minimal and cut it
> off where you decide and do not be drawn by him.
>
> He needs to control, you must take that away.

That's excellent advice Lawrey, Thanks :-)

And I agree wholly. When he tried to "troll" me in, I told him I was
interested in playing his little game. At that time I didn't know
exactly what it was.

Now I do. The proof is there in his own words and reading the whole
thread is quite enlightening.

>
> On Mar 23, 2:37 am, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In case anyone was wondering what little game Brocky's been playing
> > with us ...
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/a-civil-religious-debate/browse_thread...
>
> > From: Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com>
> > Date: Mar 11, 10:20 pm
> > Subject: The Art of Verbal Intimidation : Learn it and fight back!
> > To: A Civil Religious Debate
>
> > Thank you, Walt.
>
> > Strife is the word that we normally use today when talking about
> > eristic behavior. I think your analyses are right on. There is a
> > willful striving towards spite and vitriol, usually associated with
> > personal vituperative attacks.
>
> > The issue is, if one disengages because the situation is eristic, then
> >
> > that simply reinforces the negative behavior pattern and a sense of
> > control to the person being negative. So how does one engage and
> > dialog with folks who are eristic without going there also? That is
> > an
> > important part of my experiment with the online forums. An experiment
> >
> > in progress. :)
>
> > Thanks for your thoughts,
>
> > Brock

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Poll: Most Misused Words/Terms on AvC
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/bbad87630f3d08a6?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 7:15 am
From: Trance Gemini

On Mar 22, 11:28 pm, Shannon <SPCro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Vagina

I'm a woman and I don't get it Lol.

>
> On Mar 19, 5:52 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > These polls usually turn out to be too chaotic to be tallied, but at
> > worst they can lead to some interesting discussion. I want everyone to
> > think of the words and terms you see used _incorrectly_ the most and
> > the most annoyingly and distribute six points based on how much they
> > annoy you. You can apply the six points however you want. Explanations
> > for why the word is included are welcome.
>
> > I'll start you off:
>
> > "Atheism" (or variations like "atheist") -- 2 points
>
> > No-brainer. We've had only a billion threads trying to explain that we
> > define "atheist" as a lack of a belief in God but for some reason
> > theists don't accept it--mainly because it makes it hard for them to
> > argue with us if they acknowledge our actual position. The prime
> > offenders here are usually newbies, but special note should be given
> > to EGreg and that Corpus Callosum guy for being particularly whiny
> > about how hard it is to argue with atheists when they define
> > themselves that way.
>
> > "ad hominem" -- 2 points
>
> > Don't even want to get into it again. I've written countless posts, an
> > article in the "Pages" section, and lots of links explaining what this
> > means so anyone who has been around here and doesn't get it deserves
> > no respect from anyone. Prime offenders are anyone on ACRD, which is
> > largely founded on the concept that "ad hominem" should be used
> > incorrectly.
>
> > "pantheist" -- 1 point
>
> > This is mainly for Keith, who says he is a pantheist and thinks "all
> > is God"--which would mean he is only on this group to annoy God, call
> > God a "demon" and other names, and tell God that God is going to judge
> > Himself and send Himself to Hell.
>
> > "evolution" -- 1 point
>
> > Another no-brainer. The more scientifically-minded of you would
> > probably allot more points to this because of all the times you've had
> > to correct theist interpretations of what evolutionists are asserting.
>
> > Runners-up include pretty much any other scientific term used by a
> > theist.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: If you could end all religion...
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/cc3ac9df33ac05ea?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 7:23 am
From: Dev

No thirst to know=no religion--you've got it backwards. It is
basically the equivalent of drinking your own urine because you're
thirsty. Religious people can't stand not having certain answers, so
they take what they can get regardless of their value or validity.
Now, all learning creatures utilize science--it is simply the
mechanism of trial and error by which we learn. Obviously, it is
required for the survival of humans and many other creatures so
obviously, it must have predated religion. Religion couldn't pass from
generation to generation without science, whereas clearly science can
exist independent from religion.

On Mar 22, 5:45 am, Stonethatbleeds <fb...@ncf.ca> wrote:
> no such thing as anything before religion in sciences and science came
> long after religion and could not exist before and could not exist as
> a replacement!
> NO RELIGION- NO THIRST TO KNOW!
> You be happy with a piece of fruit, and never ask if the moon is a
> heavenly body or not. You could not imagine anything you do not see
> for the essence of religion is based in imagination to see in the mind
> what the eyes do not see. You can't even think of people on other
> world with out religion FIRST!
> NO RELIGION NO NEED TO ASK AND YOU BANNA TASTE GOOD TO YOU PEEL AND
> ALL.
>
> On Mar 21, 9:54 pm, rappoccio <rappoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 21, 7:03 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > I think a key word is "unnecessary". Theists like to mention evils
> > > caused by nature, which is a fact of life, and science, which has done
> > > more good than harm. It is important to emphasize that the point is
> > > not that theism has caused so much harm in the world, it is that it
> > > has caused so much more harm than it has good. When evaluating the
> > > value of something you have to weigh the pros versus the cons, and
> > > with religion it's a no-brainer. When Christians bring up the one
> > > percent of The Bible that has a "positive message" (treating others
> > > well, etc.) it is important to mention that these moral standards are
> > > in no way contingent on The Bible or any religious faith. If you were
> > > to add good bits to _Mein Kampf_, it would not make _Mein Kampf_ a
> > > morally valuable book. Dismissing religious faith is not "throwing the
> > > baby out with the bathwater", but simply throwing out the bathwater.
> > > And the baby crapped in it.
>
> > LOL!
>
> > > On Mar 21, 8:47 am, wiseclam <wisec...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 20, 7:22 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > You'd have to be crazy not to. Religion is unnecessary, it generally
> > > > > makes people behave worse and not better, and it is behind a massively
> > > > > high percentage of human suffering in the past and today. Not ending
> > > > > religion if you could would make you a sadist.
>
> > > > I think this a very strong point (note my recent comment about having
> > > > a moral responsibility to end religion). I had not thought about this
> > > > question before I asked it but this answer (and the contribution of
> > > > others) is helping me form my view on the subject.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 7:24 am
From: Dev

No, an atheist without religion is an atheist. Try again.

On Mar 22, 5:49 am, Stonethatbleeds <fb...@ncf.ca> wrote:
> tHANK YOU FOR AGAIN CONFIRMING YOU ARE NOTHING WITH OUT RELIGIONS AND
> CALLING YOURSELF A SORRY SACK OF SHIT IS EXACLY RIGHT. wITH OUT
> RELIGION YOU NOT EVEN BE HERE! LOL! YOU GOT NOTHING WITH OUT RELIGION
> AND YOUR FUNCTION BE NOTHING WITH OUT IT!
> SO, tell us what you would need to cling to to hate if religion did
> not exist? You know you would NEED something or your life have no
> point!
> So would you be saying religion is it and atheist lyars and fools?
> Would it hate of women? Hate of creatures and monsters... oh ya you
> could not claim monmsters as that is religion too... athist with out
> religion is a fish out of water dying of lack of place to live.
>
> On Mar 21, 10:25 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>
>
> > When someone brings up a hypothetical like wiseclam did, it is not
> > really necessary to add unnecessary details. It's a hypothetical. He
> > simply suggested that theists all lose their faith. That just means
> > they suddenly start looking at what they used to believe in as what it
> > is: fiction. You know, I'm supposed to be the one who has the big,
> > negative view of theists but even I wouldn't suggest that a
> > significant portion of them are such sorry sacks of shit that they
> > actually _need_ that garbage to function. They think they do, but
> > that's because the nature of the disease of theism has a built-in
> > mechanism that explicitly tells them that they need it. But let's
> > entertain this notion. If theists simply need faith to function,
> > whereas atheists do not, then the implication would be that they were
> > inherently inferior as opposed to being afflicted. Now, while I do
> > think it takes a certain weakness of mind to be an adult theist, I
> > think they are also afflicted and they wouldn't be nearly so bad if
> > they weren't afflicted. I'd say this is probably the case with most
> > delusions.
>
> > On Mar 21, 6:21 pm, chazworth <chazwy...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > The Devil is in the detail. How would this miracle be achieved?
> > > Would all the nutter wake up enlightened one morning, or would they
> > > all just loose their reason to live?
> > > All those theists that serve hamburgers and operate the till at the
> > > checkout would be too confused to work. There would be chaos. Who
> > > would sweep the streets?
>
> > > On Mar 20, 9:51 pm, wiseclam <wisec...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > > > If you could put an end to all religious thought with one realtively
> > > > simple act would you do it? Why or why not?
>
> > > > What are the pros and cons of taking such a step?
>
> > > > Feel free to focus your answer around Christianity since this is AvC
> > > > not AvR.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 7:25 am
From: Dev

Please explain why this isn't a terrible analogy.

On Mar 22, 3:58 pm, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
<ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 20, 2:51 pm, wiseclam <wisec...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > If you could put an end to all religious thought with one realtively
> > simple act would you do it?
>
> No.
>
> > Why or why not?
>
> If you could replace food with a nutrition + fiber pill, would you do
> it (eliminate food)?

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 7:32 am
From: Dev

Your analogies are a lot better than his. Saying lack of religion is a
fiber pill and religion is food is a terrible analogy for lots of
reasons.
(1) Getting nutrients from food is healthier than just taking pills.
Religion is _not_ healthier than a lack of religion, as is proven by
pretty much everything.
(2) Religion is not more delicious than a lack of religion, unless you
find insanity, rape, sexism, racism, genocide, slavery, pointless war,
honor killings, abuse, ignorance, hypocrisy, lies, the inhibition of
medicine, the inhibition of knowledge and needless division to be a
delicious meal.
(3) Religion is not more well-balanced than a lack of religion, unless
you find insanity, rape, sexism, racism, genocide, slavery, pointless
war, honor killings, abuse, ignorance, hypocrisy, lies, the inhibition
of medicine, the inhibition of knowledge and needless division to be a
well-balanced meal.

Here are some other superior analogies:
(1) Atheism is like eating real food, religion is like pretending to
eat food.
(2) Atheism is like eating a nourishing meal, religion is like eating
junk food.
(3) Atheism is like eating your food instead of pushing it around the
plate to make it look like you ate some food.
(4) Atheism is like eating your food instead of throwing it at
someone.

etc.

On Mar 22, 7:09 pm, chazworth <chazwy...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 22, 9:58 pm, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
>
> <ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 20, 2:51 pm, wiseclam <wisec...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > > If you could put an end to all religious thought with one realtively
> > > simple act would you do it?
>
> > No.
>
> > > Why or why not?
>
> > If you could replace food with a nutrition + fiber pill, would you do
> > it (eliminate food)?
>
> You have got that backwards. Taking religion out is like removing the
> bowl of gruel and replacing it with an extensive international menu
> and fine wines list.
> Christians eat porridge, and drink lambs piss.
> Moslems eat sand and drink camel's piss.
> Free-thinkers have a range of cuisine and an extensive choice of tasty
> beverages.
> If only you would open your mind to the possibilities!

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Gods no joke
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/browse_thread/thread/61f46c2caf9ad20e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 7:28 am
From: Trance Gemini

On Mar 23, 9:17 am, bob600 <b...@nireland.com> wrote:
> Bob600 replies:- But who devised the joke. Perhaps there is no God
> only the Devil, and he propagated the myth of God just to have a good
> laugh at all the expressions on the Theists faces when they turn up at
> the gates of hell after death. That would be one hell of a practical
> joke (if you pardon the pun) and perfectly in keeping with the nature
> of the beast.

I beg to differ Bobby. I think God does have a sense of humor, albeit
a rather sick, twisted, and sadistic one.

I think God's plan was to play a joke on humanity. I mean look at the
Adam and Eve thing.

First you have a couple of people running around naked who don't have
a clue.

God gets bored and decides to stick a tree and a talking snake in the
garden to get things going.

He tells them not to eat from that tree. Now, think about it. Why put
it there and then tell them not to eat from it?

Then the snakes starts talking and well of course the inevitable
happens.

Later, he gets bored again, and decides to send his kid to roil things
up again and do a little guilting.

You know, the "I died for your sins" thing. Of course, everyone is all
over this.

Shall I go on? ;-)

>
> On 23 Mar, 07:39, Lawrey <lawrenc...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> > The whole religious bit is one big joke! isn't it?
>
> > On Mar 21, 11:25 pm, bob600 <b...@nireland.com> wrote:
>
> > > Is it a sin to have a sense of humour? I have yet to read in the
> > > Bible, or descriptions of God by the great and good that he has a
> > > sense of humour. So does this mean that laughter is wrong and a joke a
> > > sin, perhaps the theists could enlighten me as to the precedents in
> > > the Bible for the odd joke or two.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Mar 23 2008 7:34 am
From: Dev

His followers are both masochists _and_ sadists. Otherwise, you've got
it now. :)

On Mar 22, 6:42 am, bob600 <b...@nireland.com> wrote:
> Bob600 replies:- So that makes God a sadist and his followers
> masochists, I'm glad I chose the dark side.
>
> On 22 Mar, 02:30, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>
>
> > It's sadistic humor. Christians call it "love".
>
> > On Mar 21, 6:49 pm, bob600 <b...@nireland.com> wrote:
>
> > > Bob600 replies:- I grant you that we can see a sense of humour in the
> > > antics of the theists God, but can God? The things you mention could
> > > just as easily be examples of psychotic episodes and only illustrate
> > > that God gets pleasure from our pain, and pleasure from others pain is
> > > not humour its sadism.
>
> > > On 21 Mar, 23:52, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > See my thread "The Bible As A Science Fiction Short Story". Assuming
> > > > The Christian God is real and omniscient, all must be happening
> > > > exactly as He knew it would happen when He created it. Why would He
> > > > put The Tree of Knowledge in The Garden of Eden except as a practical
> > > > joke? Clearly, taking the assumption of the truth of The Bible, the
> > > > character Christians call "God" finds rape, genocide and all that good
> > > > stuff absolutely hilarious which is precisely why it exists: for His
> > > > amusement.
>
> > > > On Mar 21, 5:25 pm, bob600 <b...@nireland.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Is it a sin to have a sense of humour? I have yet to read in the
> > > > > Bible, or descriptions of God by the great and good that he has a
> > > > > sense of humour. So does this mean that laughter is wrong and a joke a
> > > > > sin, perhaps the theists could enlighten me as to the precedents in
> > > > > the Bible for the odd joke or two.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity"
group.

To post to this group, send email to Atheism-vs-Christianity@googlegroups.com
or visit http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Atheism-vs-Christianity-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com?hl=en

Atheism vs Christianity

Sunday, March 23, 2008

26 new messages in 15 topics - digest

0 comments:

Blog Archive

Links