Atheism vs Christianity: Atheism-vs-Christianity - 25 new messages in 6 topics

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

Atheism-vs-Christianity@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Congratulations - 18 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/d322fa2af711303a?hl=en
* How do Christians avoid worshipping the wrong god? - 3 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/6d788c3a77b4c371?hl=en
* A Gentle inquisition please tell us why ? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/2b0c60cf9303d074?hl=en
* Weird, yet strangely compelling French Army Cartoon - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/0c9a1bae0d243dcb?hl=en
* Vatican raises the white flag.. - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/c0bfa2389b80f1a9?hl=en
* Another Theist bites the dust. - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/e4d18055d0abcf63?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Congratulations
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/d322fa2af711303a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 1:47 pm
From: Woodbridge

On Dec 2, 1:42 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Firstly, consider that everyone assumed that I was, what? Christian?
> Islam? Whatever. That is when the remarks were made. They were
> intended to be toward myself--at least most of them.
>
> In hind-sight, I'll admit that my post probably guaranteed a flame war
> and was probably taken as a flame. Also consider this before dropping
> the gallows trap door: I'd never been to groups.google.com and I
> joined this one because it was on the sign-on page and looked like a
> place for learning. Note that immediately most of the titles are
> flames to begin with. I ignored those and went to safe-looking
> titles. Bile. Bile. Bile. From people who are claiming to be
> loving, intelligent, and thoughtful. (yes, those claims were actually
> made) I expected a battle ground of wit and instead, watched people
> shooting fish in a barrel. Fun stuff. The joy I saw people getting
> from outright meanness left me non-plussed and I shouldn't have posted
> what I did the way that I did. My apologies for being disenchanted
> with the language and heckling.
>
> I have a question: From what I can tell, there's only two theists
> posting regularly. Is there more? I'd like to hear both sides of
> this, even though I was told that there were no sides.
>

I told that there were no BOTH sides not no sides.If there is two side
that says there is God prove that side.Otherwise anyone can say three
sides with SpiderMan and no SpiderMan also.
But to say three side we must give PROOF for SpiderMan YES?
Same thing with God YES?

> On Dec 2, 3:00 pm, Answer_42 <ipu.belie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 2, 3:05 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > <snip>
>
> > Once more, a theist playing the victim and showing signs of having
> > difficulties understanding simple sentences.
>
> > > I mentioned the insults? So far, here's a description of me by our
> > > peers here:
> > > A dishonest biased prick.
>
> > That was my comment, and
>
> > 1) it was not an insult, just a fact.
> > 2) not addressed at you, as you claim above.
>
> > > I am still spewing your bullshit about "new atheism" (actually, I've
> > > never heard the term before this comment)
>
> > Lifted from my post.
> > I was merely repeating what a theist has claimed (except for the
> > "spewing" and "bullshit" which are not really insults since "New
> > Atheism" is bullshit, and it was not addressed at you anyway.)
>
> > If you want to know about "new atheism", join the club! Ask Brock to
> > explain it.
> > The best he could do was produce a few web pages/blogs that used the
> > term in their page title. He could never demonstrate that it was an
> > actual movement/organization/philosophy/etc.
>
> > > Then you are no self-respecting Christian. (apparently not)
>
> > Where is the insult here?
>
> > > arrogant prick
>
> > Yep, that one is an insult!
>
> > > I have apparently been suffering from Alzheimer's. (wow, didn't see
> > > that one coming)
>
> > An wrong assessment?
>
> > > I have an unremarkable life.
>
> > Not insults.
>
> > > I have no feelings, no brains, no consciences, no ethics, absolutely
> > > nothing that a human would call human. Period.
>
> > A wrong assessment?
>
> > > Wow, that one had a "Period." So why should I even continue? How
> > > does one debate with that? I mean, I don't want to start with debates
> > > proving I have feelings, brains, conscience, ethics, and that I'm
> > > human! I mean, I need to go find those groups first, I guess...
>
> > So, you produced little evidence in lieu of actual insults that were
> > actually addressed at you.
> > But, considering that your OP was an open call for flaming how can you
> > be honestly surprised that you got what you were asking for?
>
> > In case you try to disagree with me, here is a little reminder of your
> > opening statement:
> > "
> > have to say, I joined this group, guessing at exactly what it would
> > contain, and I was, sadly, correct.
>
> > Atheists groups like this are 99% angry people who aren't actually
> > interested in intelligent discussion, but are trying to bait a non-
> > atheist into a flame war.
> > "
>
> > Right off the bat you claim that 99% percent of atheist on this site
> > are angry and do not want to intelligent discussions, so they must be
> > stupid or something like that.
>
> > Then you have the balls to state that the same atheists are only
> > interested in flaming?
>
> > "Arrogant prick" was too good for you, actual bona fide arrogant
> > pricks the world over are offended that you were associated with them.
> > _________________________________
> > I am fond of saying that reading the Bible turned me into an atheist.
> > -- Ruth Hurmence Green

== 2 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 1:48 pm
From: rappoccio

Let me explain:

"Clear" is not a color. It is the absence of a color.

"Bald" is not a hair style. It is the absence of a hair style.

"Atheism" is not a belief system. It is the absence of a particular
belief system (that gods exist).

Clearer now?

On Dec 2, 3:45 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Errr. .. . whaaaa???!!!?? You've been making more sense than that
> before now. Clever (?) comparisons that are completely unrelated
> really don't make your point clear. I do understand that you disagree
> with me, but I'm not following your reasoning...
>
> On Dec 2, 10:10 am, rappoccio <rappoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 1, 4:54 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 1, 2:57 pm, Dag Yo <sir_ro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 1, 11:17 am, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:> I have to say, I joined this group, guessing at exactly what it would
> > > > > contain, and I was, sadly, correct.
>
> > > > > Atheists groups like this are 99% angry people who aren't actually
> > > > > interested in intelligent discussion, but are trying to bait a non-
> > > > > atheist into a flame war. There is SOME intelligent discussion here,
> > > > > but it's not worth looking throu all the rubbish to find it. These
> > > > > furious people know that they'll always win because the people they
> > > > > wish to attack will not respond "in-kind," that is, abjectly hateful
> > > > > language, cursing, name-calling, and outright tirades. The picture
> > > > > you are painting of atheists is that you're all hateful old codgers
> > > > > hiding in your basement screaming at the screens as you type holes
> > > > > through your keyboard with every angry jab.
>
> > > > I can kind of see how you might get that impression but sometimes when
> > > > the person you're chatting with keeps lying, changing the subject,
> > > > evading questions and generally acts like a prick, after a while it
> > > > can irk even the most pleasant of us, and bring us to the point at
> > > > which we'll use a bit of colorful language. I'd love an "intelligent
> > > > discussion" and regularly try to have them with newbies, but the vast
> > > > majority of theists newbies and old regulars alike really don't seem
> > > > to be anything more than dishonest assholes...and at some point you've
> > > > just got to call them on it -- if for no other reason that to attempt
> > > > to make them see their dishonesty and hope that they will change their
> > > > ways.
>
> > > > > The atheists I've met in real life were thoughtful and weren't
> > > > > arrogant enough to claim that they were actually no more than
> > > > > agnostics.
>
> > > > Actually atheism and agnosticism describe different qualities and are
> > > > not mutually exclusive by any means.
>
> > > > > Those of you flaming about logic-this and logic-that should consider
> > > > > that no conclusion can be made without the facts. When, exactly, did
> > > > > you get that last iota of information that decided it all for you?
>
> > > > You actually need to use logic to make sense of the facts before you
> > > > -- thats why we use it.
>
> > > > > Of course, you'll flame me now, but that won't bother me one bit,
> > > > > because upon my first read of this group, I realized there was not
> > > > > enough intelligent conversation here to warrant dealing with the
> > > > > hateful, unthinking (however, all-knowledgeable) codgers hacking at
> > > > > their keyboards in their dark basements.
> > > > > Maybe the group is misnamed? It's a one-sided battle from what I can
> > > > > see here. Hmm... Maybe "Atheism Completely And Utterly Annihiliates
> > > > > The Christian Girly Men With Their Mighty Nuclear-Powered Tongues"
>
> > > > Of course it's a one-sided battle; when it comes to the God hypothesis
> > > > there isn't the slightest bit of evidence and the atheists aren't
> > > > making any unwarranted claims while theists are...
>
> > > I have to say this, and I know it'll clump your oats, but the reality
> > > is that atheism is just as much a religion as any other. I have to
> > > say, I've never seen anyone verbally fight for what they want near as
> > > furiously as I've seen atheists do. That may not fit the dictionary
> > > definition of religion, but it has all the same attributes. It's
> > > definitely a belief system, wouldn't you agree?
>
> > Atheism is a belief system the same way "clear" is a color, or "bald"
> > is a hairstyle.

== 3 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 1:49 pm
From: Woodbridge

You not witness post by checkers and I AM TRU CHRISTIAN and Treebeard
and Borgan etc YES?

On Dec 2, 1:44 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So the hate I witness here is just for the people of religion, right?
>
> On Dec 2, 3:36 pm, Woodbridge <Woodbri...@archaeologist.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 2, 1:32 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > It sounds like we had a similar upbringing. However, I recognized
> > > that it was the _people_ that make the cage. The beliefs actually
> > > seemed to have a good purpose and intent until people get hold of it.
> > > I have to say that I think there's much to say _for_ religious
> > > ideals. Accountability, striving to become better, helping your
> > > neighbor, golden rule, etc. The ideals are great. It's always been
> > > the people I've had a problem with. I don't think they understand/
> > > interpret the intent of most of the stuff in the (insert religious
> > > text title here).
>
> > > Question: Does atheist mean you're against religion of any kind?
>
> > ATheist mean person not believe in god including ALL gods> Consider pantheism, Christianity, Islam, lucky rabbit feet, humanism,
> > > etc. Does everyone here hate all religions or do we pick and choose?
>
> > Hating religion is like hating alchemy no sense hating alchemy YES?
>
> > > On Dec 2, 3:06 pm, Medusa <Medusa4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > ObservantEye;
>
> > > > > You know, I don't think these guys are interested in Bible verses. I
> > > > > think you're just poking a bear in a cage when you do that...
>
> > > > Your first statement is correct. Most of us were raised in a
> > > > religion, and most of us have read the Bible. I even own two copies.
>
> > > > But I'm not angry; I have just rejected the cage religion had me in
> > > > for years.
>
> > > > Medusa

== 4 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 1:55 pm
From: rappoccio

The first two books I quoted are science related texts. If you think
they're incompatible with theism (particularly your theism), then
ultimately that's your issue... your beliefs contradict reality. I
can't really do much to help you if you don't accept reality for what
it is, and instead assume what it should be.

The third book is a short primer on why religion is dangerous and
harmful.

There are plenty of books on why religion isn't dangerous and harmful.
Nothing I've found convincing though. You can go with the bat-shit
crazy loonies like Kent Hovind, or the even MORE bat-shit crazy
loonies like Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron, or the slightly less than
bat-shit crazy loonie like Dinesh D'Sousa, or perhaps you can read
books from an actual scientist who is a theist, Francis Collins.

Not a word of it is even remotely holding water.

On Dec 2, 3:33 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Do you know of, or have you read any books on the theist side? I'd
> like to see both sides and decide for myself, rather than only read
> the books that already agree with one side...
>
> On Dec 2, 2:10 pm, rappoccio <rappoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Here's a better idea: Go to the library on Sunday. Or hell, today.
>
> > Check out a few books:
>
> >http://www.literature.org/authors/darwin-charles/the-origin-of-species/
>
> >http://www.amazon.com/Blind-Watchmaker-Evidence-Evolution-Universe/dp...
>
> >http://www.amazon.com/Letter-Christian-Nation-Sam-Harris/dp/0307265773
>
> > and start reading.
>
> > On Dec 2, 2:18 pm, Mary Wolls <marywo...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > > Woodbridge,
>
> > > Go to church on Sunday. Then you will see.
>
> > > Mary Wolls
>
> > > > Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2008 10:52:07 -0800> Subject: [AvC] Re: Congratulations> From: ipu.belie...@gmail.com> To: Atheism-vs-Christianity@googlegroups.com> > > On Dec 2, 1:12 pm, Mary Wolls <marywo...@live.com> wrote:> > > Woodbridge,> >> > When he enters your heart you will know.> > I saw this guy on YouTube who claims that the holy spirit enters> through a hole in the back of the head...> > I am confused now.> > I really really want this magical sky being to enter my body... But,> who to believe? Why?> _________________________________> I am fond of saying that reading the Bible turned me into an atheist.> -- Ruth Hurmence Green> _________________________________________________________________
>
> > > You live life online. So we put Windows on the web.http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/127032869/direct/01/

== 5 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 1:56 pm
From: ObservantEye

I also value both. The ethics is really what I'm talking about, I
guess. You say that the laws of the modern secular democracies
generally reflect your idea of ethical rights and wrongs. What if
they didn't? BTW, I agree that the Dark Ages was a horrible nightmare
that theists and atheists both want to avoid ever again. But again,
the actual events I think you're referring to had to do with a
governmentalized religion. That's just a nightmare in itself.

I've seen many good reconciliations of evolution and Genesis. I'm
betting you've seen the same ones. I really don't know for a fact how
everything went back then. I wasn't there. None of us have
conclusive proof. We have theories and we have scant evidence and we
have words written to a people very little like us. We've been able
to prove the world isn't on a tortoise's back like the Indians believe
or believed by pointing telescopes in all directions. No turtle. So
no one, in my opinion has an arguable position on this since we have
no witnesses to ask and no instruments to measure with and no evidence
lying right in front of us. Some say we evolved from Martian pee in
the ocean. Same problem there.

On Dec 2, 3:40 pm, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 2, 12:50 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm mentally healthy and am an inquisitive child (at heart). As an
> > atheist, how do you decide what is right and what is wrong? Is there
> > a site or something I can see? I'm honestly curious here.
>
> What do you mean, right and wrong as in "factually correct," or right
> and wrong as in ethics? Because I value both. I'm not trying to avoid
> your question. I'd say (to keep it managably short) the laws of the
> modern secular democracies generally reflect my idea of ethical rights
> and wrongs. I also think the more people get their facts straight the
> better society will be - if most members of a culture believe the
> other members of the culture are going to be tortured for eternity by
> God then they might be inclined to treat the non-believers like crap
> (history shows this is exactly what happens). So start by getting the
> facts straight - does God even exist? Being right about this IS
> important.
>
> If you're an inquisitive child at heart (and I'm assuming you're a
> Christian - forgive me if I'm wrong) then how do you reconcile, say,
> evolution with Genesis?
>
> > On Dec 2, 12:33 pm, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 2, 9:37 am, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Dec 1, 5:10 pm, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 4:30 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:19 pm, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > I mean, come on, how can you respect yourself and believe you are a
> > > > > > > wretched
> > > > > > > > sinner who deserves nothing more than an eternity in hell at the same
> > > > > > > time?
>
> > > > > > > *good* *point*
>
> > > > > > > But most of the time I don't buy that they really see themselves as
> > > > > > > sinners.
>
> > > > > > Probably not, but that belief is absolutely the core of Christianity (and
> > > > > > most religions, incidentally)--without that belief, the "sacrifice" of
> > > > > Jesus
> > > > > > is useless and meaningless (why do we need a savior if we're not
> > > > > "depraved",
> > > > > > as Brock so gleefully puts it). They like to say that their religion is
> > > > > all
> > > > > > about love and forgiveness and shit, but they're lying or mistaken. All
> > > > > that
> > > > > > "God's love" is pointless if we don't need it to live a good life/get
> > > > > into
> > > > > > Heaven. So, as much as the phrase "true Christian" get well-deserved flak
> > > > > > around here, I think you could argue that anyone who DOESN'T see himself
> > > > > as
> > > > > > a sinner isn't a "true Christian", in the sense that he does not ACTUALLY
> > > > > > believe the core tenets of Christianity.
>
> > > > > I agree with you, but I'm finding it weird that the ones who seem the
> > > > > loudest about being depraved sinners (e.g. Brock, e.g. thea. e.g.
> > > > > preachers) come across as being the most in love with themselves.
>
> > > > That's a good point. But then, we know from his behavior that Brock doesn't
> > > > actually believe what he says, and only says it in order to justify his
> > > > unjustifiable points.
>
> > > Exactly. Brock just wants to be seen as Jesus Junior, so he talks the
> > > talk. That's my point. The only people that actually fall for the
> > > "wretched sinner" bullshit are frightened children and the mentally
> > > ill, it seems to me.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -

== 6 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 1:56 pm
From: Woodbridge

Or Borgan is BIG hypocrite saying nothing to Christian I AM TRU
CHRISTIAN
On Dec 2, 12:46 pm, "Brock Organ" <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 3:40 PM, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Nope. No hate here!
>
> What an ... um, observant eye you have, ... um, ObservantEye ... :)
>
> Regards,
>
> Brock
>
>
>
> > On Dec 1, 6:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> >> What bad happens to the world when a Christian burns to death,
> >> exactly?
>
> >> Take flushing a public toilet as an example, if you like.

== 7 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 2:00 pm
From: ObservantEye

Yes, thank you. I simply didn't get it. clever...

On Dec 2, 3:48 pm, rappoccio <rappoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Let me explain:
>
> "Clear" is not a color. It is the absence of a color.
>
> "Bald" is not a hair style. It is the absence of a hair style.
>
> "Atheism" is not a belief system. It is the absence of a particular
> belief system (that gods exist).
>
> Clearer now?
>
> On Dec 2, 3:45 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Errr. .. . whaaaa???!!!?? You've been making more sense than that
> > before now. Clever (?) comparisons that are completely unrelated
> > really don't make your point clear. I do understand that you disagree
> > with me, but I'm not following your reasoning...
>
> > On Dec 2, 10:10 am, rappoccio <rappoc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 1, 4:54 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 1, 2:57 pm, Dag Yo <sir_ro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Dec 1, 11:17 am, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:> I have to say, I joined this group, guessing at exactly what it would
> > > > > > contain, and I was, sadly, correct.
>
> > > > > > Atheists groups like this are 99% angry people who aren't actually
> > > > > > interested in intelligent discussion, but are trying to bait a non-
> > > > > > atheist into a flame war. There is SOME intelligent discussion here,
> > > > > > but it's not worth looking throu all the rubbish to find it. These
> > > > > > furious people know that they'll always win because the people they
> > > > > > wish to attack will not respond "in-kind," that is, abjectly hateful
> > > > > > language, cursing, name-calling, and outright tirades. The picture
> > > > > > you are painting of atheists is that you're all hateful old codgers
> > > > > > hiding in your basement screaming at the screens as you type holes
> > > > > > through your keyboard with every angry jab.
>
> > > > > I can kind of see how you might get that impression but sometimes when
> > > > > the person you're chatting with keeps lying, changing the subject,
> > > > > evading questions and generally acts like a prick, after a while it
> > > > > can irk even the most pleasant of us, and bring us to the point at
> > > > > which we'll use a bit of colorful language. I'd love an "intelligent
> > > > > discussion" and regularly try to have them with newbies, but the vast
> > > > > majority of theists newbies and old regulars alike really don't seem
> > > > > to be anything more than dishonest assholes...and at some point you've
> > > > > just got to call them on it -- if for no other reason that to attempt
> > > > > to make them see their dishonesty and hope that they will change their
> > > > > ways.
>
> > > > > > The atheists I've met in real life were thoughtful and weren't
> > > > > > arrogant enough to claim that they were actually no more than
> > > > > > agnostics.
>
> > > > > Actually atheism and agnosticism describe different qualities and are
> > > > > not mutually exclusive by any means.
>
> > > > > > Those of you flaming about logic-this and logic-that should consider
> > > > > > that no conclusion can be made without the facts. When, exactly, did
> > > > > > you get that last iota of information that decided it all for you?
>
> > > > > You actually need to use logic to make sense of the facts before you
> > > > > -- thats why we use it.
>
> > > > > > Of course, you'll flame me now, but that won't bother me one bit,
> > > > > > because upon my first read of this group, I realized there was not
> > > > > > enough intelligent conversation here to warrant dealing with the
> > > > > > hateful, unthinking (however, all-knowledgeable) codgers hacking at
> > > > > > their keyboards in their dark basements.
> > > > > > Maybe the group is misnamed? It's a one-sided battle from what I can
> > > > > > see here. Hmm... Maybe "Atheism Completely And Utterly Annihiliates
> > > > > > The Christian Girly Men With Their Mighty Nuclear-Powered Tongues"
>
> > > > > Of course it's a one-sided battle; when it comes to the God hypothesis
> > > > > there isn't the slightest bit of evidence and the atheists aren't
> > > > > making any unwarranted claims while theists are...
>
> > > > I have to say this, and I know it'll clump your oats, but the reality
> > > > is that atheism is just as much a religion as any other. I have to
> > > > say, I've never seen anyone verbally fight for what they want near as
> > > > furiously as I've seen atheists do. That may not fit the dictionary
> > > > definition of religion, but it has all the same attributes. It's
> > > > definitely a belief system, wouldn't you agree?
>
> > > Atheism is a belief system the same way "clear" is a color, or "bald"
> > > is a hairstyle.

== 8 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 2:01 pm
From: ObservantEye

No, I skipped them apparently. I'm honestly trying to stick to
discussions. Not hate-swapping. I have none to swap.

On Dec 2, 3:49 pm, Woodbridge <Woodbri...@archaeologist.com> wrote:
> You not witness post by checkers and I AM TRU CHRISTIAN and Treebeard
> and Borgan etc YES?
>
> On Dec 2, 1:44 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > So the hate I witness here is just for the people of religion, right?
>
> > On Dec 2, 3:36 pm, Woodbridge <Woodbri...@archaeologist.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 2, 1:32 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > It sounds like we had a similar upbringing. However, I recognized
> > > > that it was the _people_ that make the cage. The beliefs actually
> > > > seemed to have a good purpose and intent until people get hold of it.
> > > > I have to say that I think there's much to say _for_ religious
> > > > ideals. Accountability, striving to become better, helping your
> > > > neighbor, golden rule, etc. The ideals are great. It's always been
> > > > the people I've had a problem with. I don't think they understand/
> > > > interpret the intent of most of the stuff in the (insert religious
> > > > text title here).
>
> > > > Question: Does atheist mean you're against religion of any kind?
>
> > > ATheist mean person not believe in god including ALL gods> Consider pantheism, Christianity, Islam, lucky rabbit feet, humanism,
> > > > etc. Does everyone here hate all religions or do we pick and choose?
>
> > > Hating religion is like hating alchemy no sense hating alchemy YES?
>
> > > > On Dec 2, 3:06 pm, Medusa <Medusa4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > ObservantEye;
>
> > > > > > You know, I don't think these guys are interested in Bible verses. I
> > > > > > think you're just poking a bear in a cage when you do that...
>
> > > > > Your first statement is correct. Most of us were raised in a
> > > > > religion, and most of us have read the Bible. I even own two copies.
>
> > > > > But I'm not angry; I have just rejected the cage religion had me in
> > > > > for years.
>
> > > > > Medusa

== 9 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 2:01 pm
From: ObservantEye

I will read it tonight though. Thanks for the tip.

== 10 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 2:03 pm
From: ObservantEye

I hate this. This is the second time I gotta be stupid today. What
in the name of Spiderman are you saying here?

On Dec 2, 3:56 pm, Woodbridge <Woodbri...@archaeologist.com> wrote:
> Or Borgan is BIG hypocrite saying nothing to Christian I AM TRU
> CHRISTIAN
> On Dec 2, 12:46 pm, "Brock Organ" <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 3:40 PM, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Nope. No hate here!
>
> > What an ... um, observant eye you have, ... um, ObservantEye ... :)
>
> > Regards,
>
> > Brock
>
> > > On Dec 1, 6:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > >> What bad happens to the world when a Christian burns to death,
> > >> exactly?
>
> > >> Take flushing a public toilet as an example, if you like.

== 11 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 2:05 pm
From: Woodbridge

I also not hate I only ask for proof.Important thing is not blame
atheist only for hate because that is being hypocrite like Borgan
If stick to discussion only it is very good

On Dec 2, 2:01 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, I skipped them apparently. I'm honestly trying to stick to
> discussions. Not hate-swapping. I have none to swap.
>
> On Dec 2, 3:49 pm, Woodbridge <Woodbri...@archaeologist.com> wrote:
>
> > You not witness post by checkers and I AM TRU CHRISTIAN and Treebeard
> > and Borgan etc YES?
>
> > On Dec 2, 1:44 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > So the hate I witness here is just for the people of religion, right?
>
> > > On Dec 2, 3:36 pm, Woodbridge <Woodbri...@archaeologist.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 2, 1:32 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > It sounds like we had a similar upbringing. However, I recognized
> > > > > that it was the _people_ that make the cage. The beliefs actually
> > > > > seemed to have a good purpose and intent until people get hold of it.
> > > > > I have to say that I think there's much to say _for_ religious
> > > > > ideals. Accountability, striving to become better, helping your
> > > > > neighbor, golden rule, etc. The ideals are great. It's always been
> > > > > the people I've had a problem with. I don't think they understand/
> > > > > interpret the intent of most of the stuff in the (insert religious
> > > > > text title here).
>
> > > > > Question: Does atheist mean you're against religion of any kind?
>
> > > > ATheist mean person not believe in god including ALL gods> Consider pantheism, Christianity, Islam, lucky rabbit feet, humanism,
> > > > > etc. Does everyone here hate all religions or do we pick and choose?
>
> > > > Hating religion is like hating alchemy no sense hating alchemy YES?
>
> > > > > On Dec 2, 3:06 pm, Medusa <Medusa4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > ObservantEye;
>
> > > > > > > You know, I don't think these guys are interested in Bible verses. I
> > > > > > > think you're just poking a bear in a cage when you do that...
>
> > > > > > Your first statement is correct. Most of us were raised in a
> > > > > > religion, and most of us have read the Bible. I even own two copies.
>
> > > > > > But I'm not angry; I have just rejected the cage religion had me in
> > > > > > for years.
>
> > > > > > Medusa

== 12 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 2:10 pm
From: ObservantEye

I believe in Spiderman. Don't mess with Spidey. That's just war...

Then why the Atheist vs Christianity group? Why do you post here? Can
I get a thought-out, honest answer? I'd actually like to see
everyone's response to this one. Surely you have a purpose? Right?
There's actions you must wish for since you've taken the time for so
many words. I was told earlier in the thread that atheists want
nothing, but why waste your time? Should we start a new thread for
this? I know I'd learn a lot.

Once more though--don't mess with Spidey.

On Dec 2, 3:47 pm, Woodbridge <Woodbri...@archaeologist.com> wrote:
> On Dec 2, 1:42 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Firstly, consider that everyone assumed that I was, what? Christian?
> > Islam? Whatever. That is when the remarks were made. They were
> > intended to be toward myself--at least most of them.
>
> > In hind-sight, I'll admit that my post probably guaranteed a flame war
> > and was probably taken as a flame. Also consider this before dropping
> > the gallows trap door: I'd never been to groups.google.com and I
> > joined this one because it was on the sign-on page and looked like a
> > place for learning. Note that immediately most of the titles are
> > flames to begin with. I ignored those and went to safe-looking
> > titles. Bile. Bile. Bile. From people who are claiming to be
> > loving, intelligent, and thoughtful. (yes, those claims were actually
> > made) I expected a battle ground of wit and instead, watched people
> > shooting fish in a barrel. Fun stuff. The joy I saw people getting
> > from outright meanness left me non-plussed and I shouldn't have posted
> > what I did the way that I did. My apologies for being disenchanted
> > with the language and heckling.
>
> > I have a question: From what I can tell, there's only two theists
> > posting regularly. Is there more? I'd like to hear both sides of
> > this, even though I was told that there were no sides.
>
> I told that there were no BOTH sides not no sides.If there is two side
> that says there is God prove that side.Otherwise anyone can say three
> sides with SpiderMan and no SpiderMan also.
> But to say three side we must give PROOF for SpiderMan YES?
> Same thing with God YES?
>
> > On Dec 2, 3:00 pm, Answer_42 <ipu.belie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 2, 3:05 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > <snip>
>
> > > Once more, a theist playing the victim and showing signs of having
> > > difficulties understanding simple sentences.
>
> > > > I mentioned the insults? So far, here's a description of me by our
> > > > peers here:
> > > > A dishonest biased prick.
>
> > > That was my comment, and
>
> > > 1) it was not an insult, just a fact.
> > > 2) not addressed at you, as you claim above.
>
> > > > I am still spewing your bullshit about "new atheism" (actually, I've
> > > > never heard the term before this comment)
>
> > > Lifted from my post.
> > > I was merely repeating what a theist has claimed (except for the
> > > "spewing" and "bullshit" which are not really insults since "New
> > > Atheism" is bullshit, and it was not addressed at you anyway.)
>
> > > If you want to know about "new atheism", join the club! Ask Brock to
> > > explain it.
> > > The best he could do was produce a few web pages/blogs that used the
> > > term in their page title. He could never demonstrate that it was an
> > > actual movement/organization/philosophy/etc.
>
> > > > Then you are no self-respecting Christian. (apparently not)
>
> > > Where is the insult here?
>
> > > > arrogant prick
>
> > > Yep, that one is an insult!
>
> > > > I have apparently been suffering from Alzheimer's. (wow, didn't see
> > > > that one coming)
>
> > > An wrong assessment?
>
> > > > I have an unremarkable life.
>
> > > Not insults.
>
> > > > I have no feelings, no brains, no consciences, no ethics, absolutely
> > > > nothing that a human would call human. Period.
>
> > > A wrong assessment?
>
> > > > Wow, that one had a "Period." So why should I even continue? How
> > > > does one debate with that? I mean, I don't want to start with debates
> > > > proving I have feelings, brains, conscience, ethics, and that I'm
> > > > human! I mean, I need to go find those groups first, I guess...
>
> > > So, you produced little evidence in lieu of actual insults that were
> > > actually addressed at you.
> > > But, considering that your OP was an open call for flaming how can you
> > > be honestly surprised that you got what you were asking for?
>
> > > In case you try to disagree with me, here is a little reminder of your
> > > opening statement:
> > > "
> > > have to say, I joined this group, guessing at exactly what it would
> > > contain, and I was, sadly, correct.
>
> > > Atheists groups like this are 99% angry people who aren't actually
> > > interested in intelligent discussion, but are trying to bait a non-
> > > atheist into a flame war.
> > > "
>
> > > Right off the bat you claim that 99% percent of atheist on this site
> > > are angry and do not want to intelligent discussions, so they must be
> > > stupid or something like that.
>
> > > Then you have the balls to state that the same atheists are only
> > > interested in flaming?
>
> > > "Arrogant prick" was too good for you, actual bona fide arrogant
> > > pricks the world over are offended that you were associated with them.
> > > _________________________________
> > > I am fond of saying that reading the Bible turned me into an atheist.
> > > -- Ruth Hurmence Green

== 13 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 2:19 pm
From: Woodbridge

Why do you hate?
Borgan says Dev is hater many times but not say I AM TRU CHRISTIAN is
hater even ONCE because Dev is Atheist and I AM TRU CHRISTIAN is
Christian.
So Borgan is BIG hypocrite

On Dec 2, 2:03 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I hate this. This is the second time I gotta be stupid today. What
> in the name of Spiderman are you saying here?
>
> On Dec 2, 3:56 pm, Woodbridge <Woodbri...@archaeologist.com> wrote:
>
> > Or Borgan is BIG hypocrite saying nothing to Christian I AM TRU
> > CHRISTIAN
> > On Dec 2, 12:46 pm, "Brock Organ" <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 3:40 PM, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Nope. No hate here!
>
> > > What an ... um, observant eye you have, ... um, ObservantEye ... :)
>
> > > Regards,
>
> > > Brock
>
> > > > On Dec 1, 6:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > >> What bad happens to the world when a Christian burns to death,
> > > >> exactly?
>
> > > >> Take flushing a public toilet as an example, if you like.

== 14 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 2:19 pm
From: "Turner Hayes"

On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 4:42 PM, ObservantEye <mike.shull@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Firstly, consider that everyone assumed that I was, what? Christian?
> Islam? Whatever. That is when the remarks were made. They were
> intended to be toward myself--at least most of them.
>
> In hind-sight, I'll admit that my post probably guaranteed a flame war
> and was probably taken as a flame. Also consider this before dropping
> the gallows trap door: I'd never been to groups.google.com and I
> joined this one because it was on the sign-on page and looked like a
> place for learning. Note that immediately most of the titles are
> flames to begin with. I ignored those and went to safe-looking
> titles. Bile. Bile. Bile. From people who are claiming to be
> loving, intelligent, and thoughtful. (yes, those claims were actually
> made) I expected a battle ground of wit and instead, watched people
> shooting fish in a barrel. Fun stuff. The joy I saw people getting
> from outright meanness left me non-plussed and I shouldn't have posted
> what I did the way that I did. My apologies for being disenchanted
> with the language and heckling.
>
> I have a question: From what I can tell, there's only two theists
> posting regularly. Is there more? I'd like to hear both sides of
> this, even though I was told that there were no sides.

Off the top of my head, there's

Brock Organ
Checkers
Alan Wosterburg (or something like that)
Allan I-forget-his-last-name a.k.a. Vaarsuvius a.k.a. Treebeard
Bob Crowley
thea
simonsaysbye comes around sporadically
I AM A TRUE CHRISTIAN is probably actually a troll, but posts as a Christian

Am I forgetting anyone?

>
>
> On Dec 2, 3:00 pm, Answer_42 <ipu.belie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Dec 2, 3:05 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > Once more, a theist playing the victim and showing signs of having
> > difficulties understanding simple sentences.
> >
> > > I mentioned the insults? So far, here's a description of me by our
> > > peers here:
> > > A dishonest biased prick.
> >
> > That was my comment, and
> >
> > 1) it was not an insult, just a fact.
> > 2) not addressed at you, as you claim above.
> >
> > > I am still spewing your bullshit about "new atheism" (actually, I've
> > > never heard the term before this comment)
> >
> > Lifted from my post.
> > I was merely repeating what a theist has claimed (except for the
> > "spewing" and "bullshit" which are not really insults since "New
> > Atheism" is bullshit, and it was not addressed at you anyway.)
> >
> > If you want to know about "new atheism", join the club! Ask Brock to
> > explain it.
> > The best he could do was produce a few web pages/blogs that used the
> > term in their page title. He could never demonstrate that it was an
> > actual movement/organization/philosophy/etc.
> >
> > > Then you are no self-respecting Christian. (apparently not)
> >
> > Where is the insult here?
> >
> > > arrogant prick
> >
> > Yep, that one is an insult!
> >
> > > I have apparently been suffering from Alzheimer's. (wow, didn't see
> > > that one coming)
> >
> > An wrong assessment?
> >
> > > I have an unremarkable life.
> >
> > Not insults.
> >
> > > I have no feelings, no brains, no consciences, no ethics, absolutely
> > > nothing that a human would call human. Period.
> >
> > A wrong assessment?
> >
> > > Wow, that one had a "Period." So why should I even continue? How
> > > does one debate with that? I mean, I don't want to start with debates
> > > proving I have feelings, brains, conscience, ethics, and that I'm
> > > human! I mean, I need to go find those groups first, I guess...
> >
> > So, you produced little evidence in lieu of actual insults that were
> > actually addressed at you.
> > But, considering that your OP was an open call for flaming how can you
> > be honestly surprised that you got what you were asking for?
> >
> > In case you try to disagree with me, here is a little reminder of your
> > opening statement:
> > "
> > have to say, I joined this group, guessing at exactly what it would
> > contain, and I was, sadly, correct.
> >
> > Atheists groups like this are 99% angry people who aren't actually
> > interested in intelligent discussion, but are trying to bait a non-
> > atheist into a flame war.
> > "
> >
> > Right off the bat you claim that 99% percent of atheist on this site
> > are angry and do not want to intelligent discussions, so they must be
> > stupid or something like that.
> >
> > Then you have the balls to state that the same atheists are only
> > interested in flaming?
> >
> > "Arrogant prick" was too good for you, actual bona fide arrogant
> > pricks the world over are offended that you were associated with them.
> > _________________________________
> > I am fond of saying that reading the Bible turned me into an atheist.
> > -- Ruth Hurmence Green
> >
>

== 15 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 2:21 pm
From: "Turner Hayes"

On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 5:10 PM, ObservantEye <mike.shull@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I believe in Spiderman. Don't mess with Spidey. That's just war...
>
> Then why the Atheist vs Christianity group? Why do you post here? Can
> I get a thought-out, honest answer? I'd actually like to see
> everyone's response to this one. Surely you have a purpose? Right?
> There's actions you must wish for since you've taken the time for so
> many words. I was told earlier in the thread that atheists want
> nothing, but why waste your time? Should we start a new thread for
> this? I know I'd learn a lot.

"Why are you here?" threads come along about once every month or three. I'd
look in the archives rather than start yet another thread if I were you. It
gets tiresome answering the same questions over and over again.

>
>
> Once more though--don't mess with Spidey.
>
> On Dec 2, 3:47 pm, Woodbridge <Woodbri...@archaeologist.com> wrote:
> > On Dec 2, 1:42 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Firstly, consider that everyone assumed that I was, what? Christian?
> > > Islam? Whatever. That is when the remarks were made. They were
> > > intended to be toward myself--at least most of them.
> >
> > > In hind-sight, I'll admit that my post probably guaranteed a flame war
> > > and was probably taken as a flame. Also consider this before dropping
> > > the gallows trap door: I'd never been to groups.google.com and I
> > > joined this one because it was on the sign-on page and looked like a
> > > place for learning. Note that immediately most of the titles are
> > > flames to begin with. I ignored those and went to safe-looking
> > > titles. Bile. Bile. Bile. From people who are claiming to be
> > > loving, intelligent, and thoughtful. (yes, those claims were actually
> > > made) I expected a battle ground of wit and instead, watched people
> > > shooting fish in a barrel. Fun stuff. The joy I saw people getting
> > > from outright meanness left me non-plussed and I shouldn't have posted
> > > what I did the way that I did. My apologies for being disenchanted
> > > with the language and heckling.
> >
> > > I have a question: From what I can tell, there's only two theists
> > > posting regularly. Is there more? I'd like to hear both sides of
> > > this, even though I was told that there were no sides.
> >
> > I told that there were no BOTH sides not no sides.If there is two side
> > that says there is God prove that side.Otherwise anyone can say three
> > sides with SpiderMan and no SpiderMan also.
> > But to say three side we must give PROOF for SpiderMan YES?
> > Same thing with God YES?
> >
> > > On Dec 2, 3:00 pm, Answer_42 <ipu.belie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > On Dec 2, 3:05 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > <snip>
> >
> > > > Once more, a theist playing the victim and showing signs of having
> > > > difficulties understanding simple sentences.
> >
> > > > > I mentioned the insults? So far, here's a description of me by our
> > > > > peers here:
> > > > > A dishonest biased prick.
> >
> > > > That was my comment, and
> >
> > > > 1) it was not an insult, just a fact.
> > > > 2) not addressed at you, as you claim above.
> >
> > > > > I am still spewing your bullshit about "new atheism" (actually,
> I've
> > > > > never heard the term before this comment)
> >
> > > > Lifted from my post.
> > > > I was merely repeating what a theist has claimed (except for the
> > > > "spewing" and "bullshit" which are not really insults since "New
> > > > Atheism" is bullshit, and it was not addressed at you anyway.)
> >
> > > > If you want to know about "new atheism", join the club! Ask Brock to
> > > > explain it.
> > > > The best he could do was produce a few web pages/blogs that used the
> > > > term in their page title. He could never demonstrate that it was an
> > > > actual movement/organization/philosophy/etc.
> >
> > > > > Then you are no self-respecting Christian. (apparently not)
> >
> > > > Where is the insult here?
> >
> > > > > arrogant prick
> >
> > > > Yep, that one is an insult!
> >
> > > > > I have apparently been suffering from Alzheimer's. (wow, didn't
> see
> > > > > that one coming)
> >
> > > > An wrong assessment?
> >
> > > > > I have an unremarkable life.
> >
> > > > Not insults.
> >
> > > > > I have no feelings, no brains, no consciences, no ethics,
> absolutely
> > > > > nothing that a human would call human. Period.
> >
> > > > A wrong assessment?
> >
> > > > > Wow, that one had a "Period." So why should I even continue? How
> > > > > does one debate with that? I mean, I don't want to start with
> debates
> > > > > proving I have feelings, brains, conscience, ethics, and that I'm
> > > > > human! I mean, I need to go find those groups first, I guess...
> >
> > > > So, you produced little evidence in lieu of actual insults that were
> > > > actually addressed at you.
> > > > But, considering that your OP was an open call for flaming how can
> you
> > > > be honestly surprised that you got what you were asking for?
> >
> > > > In case you try to disagree with me, here is a little reminder of
> your
> > > > opening statement:
> > > > "
> > > > have to say, I joined this group, guessing at exactly what it would
> > > > contain, and I was, sadly, correct.
> >
> > > > Atheists groups like this are 99% angry people who aren't actually
> > > > interested in intelligent discussion, but are trying to bait a non-
> > > > atheist into a flame war.
> > > > "
> >
> > > > Right off the bat you claim that 99% percent of atheist on this site
> > > > are angry and do not want to intelligent discussions, so they must be
> > > > stupid or something like that.
> >
> > > > Then you have the balls to state that the same atheists are only
> > > > interested in flaming?
> >
> > > > "Arrogant prick" was too good for you, actual bona fide arrogant
> > > > pricks the world over are offended that you were associated with
> them.
> > > > _________________________________
> > > > I am fond of saying that reading the Bible turned me into an atheist.
> > > > -- Ruth Hurmence Green
> >
>

== 16 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 2:25 pm
From: "Turner Hayes"

On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>
> On Dec 2, 9:37 am, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Dec 1, 5:10 pm, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 4:30 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Dec 1, 1:19 pm, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I mean, come on, how can you respect yourself and believe you are
> a
> > > > > wretched
> > > > > > sinner who deserves nothing more than an eternity in hell at the
> same
> > > > > time?
> >
> > > > > *good* *point*
> >
> > > > > But most of the time I don't buy that they really see themselves as
> > > > > sinners.
> >
> > > > Probably not, but that belief is absolutely the core of Christianity
> (and
> > > > most religions, incidentally)--without that belief, the "sacrifice"
> of
> > > Jesus
> > > > is useless and meaningless (why do we need a savior if we're not
> > > "depraved",
> > > > as Brock so gleefully puts it). They like to say that their religion
> is
> > > all
> > > > about love and forgiveness and shit, but they're lying or mistaken.
> All
> > > that
> > > > "God's love" is pointless if we don't need it to live a good life/get
> > > into
> > > > Heaven. So, as much as the phrase "true Christian" get well-deserved
> flak
> > > > around here, I think you could argue that anyone who DOESN'T see
> himself
> > > as
> > > > a sinner isn't a "true Christian", in the sense that he does not
> ACTUALLY
> > > > believe the core tenets of Christianity.
> >
> > > I agree with you, but I'm finding it weird that the ones who seem the
> > > loudest about being depraved sinners (e.g. Brock, e.g. thea. e.g.
> > > preachers) come across as being the most in love with themselves.
> >
> > That's a good point. But then, we know from his behavior that Brock
> doesn't
> > actually believe what he says, and only says it in order to justify his
> > unjustifiable points.
>
> Exactly. Brock just wants to be seen as Jesus Junior, so he talks the
> talk. That's my point. The only people that actually fall for the
> "wretched sinner" bullshit are frightened children and the mentally
> ill, it seems to me.

Nonsense! Are you saying the only people who can possibly be True Christians
are frightened children and the mentally ill!?!?

Oh, wait. No, that makes perfect sense. As you were.

>
> >
>

== 17 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 2:26 pm
From: Woodbridge

On Dec 2, 2:10 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I believe in Spiderman. Don't mess with Spidey. That's just war...
>
> Then why the Atheist vs Christianity group? Why do you post here? Can
> I get a thought-out, honest answer?
I post because I want Christian to give proof or accept that God is
real like SpiderMan only.So no need to make gay people be second class
or third class people.No need to start war and say God told me to do
war when there is no God proof.Many things like that being done as
compulsory which are dangerous to people like Judaists and Atheists

I'd actually like to see
> everyone's response to this one. Surely you have a purpose? Right?
> There's actions you must wish for since you've taken the time for so
> many words. I was told earlier in the thread that atheists want
> nothing, but why waste your time? Should we start a new thread for
> this? I know I'd learn a lot.
>
> Once more though--don't mess with Spidey.
>
Ha ha

> On Dec 2, 3:47 pm, Woodbridge <Woodbri...@archaeologist.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 2, 1:42 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Firstly, consider that everyone assumed that I was, what? Christian?
> > > Islam? Whatever. That is when the remarks were made. They were
> > > intended to be toward myself--at least most of them.
>
> > > In hind-sight, I'll admit that my post probably guaranteed a flame war
> > > and was probably taken as a flame. Also consider this before dropping
> > > the gallows trap door: I'd never been to groups.google.com and I
> > > joined this one because it was on the sign-on page and looked like a
> > > place for learning. Note that immediately most of the titles are
> > > flames to begin with. I ignored those and went to safe-looking
> > > titles. Bile. Bile. Bile. From people who are claiming to be
> > > loving, intelligent, and thoughtful. (yes, those claims were actually
> > > made) I expected a battle ground of wit and instead, watched people
> > > shooting fish in a barrel. Fun stuff. The joy I saw people getting
> > > from outright meanness left me non-plussed and I shouldn't have posted
> > > what I did the way that I did. My apologies for being disenchanted
> > > with the language and heckling.
>
> > > I have a question: From what I can tell, there's only two theists
> > > posting regularly. Is there more? I'd like to hear both sides of
> > > this, even though I was told that there were no sides.
>
> > I told that there were no BOTH sides not no sides.If there is two side
> > that says there is God prove that side.Otherwise anyone can say three
> > sides with SpiderMan and no SpiderMan also.
> > But to say three side we must give PROOF for SpiderMan YES?
> > Same thing with God YES?
>
> > > On Dec 2, 3:00 pm, Answer_42 <ipu.belie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 2, 3:05 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > <snip>
>
> > > > Once more, a theist playing the victim and showing signs of having
> > > > difficulties understanding simple sentences.
>
> > > > > I mentioned the insults? So far, here's a description of me by our
> > > > > peers here:
> > > > > A dishonest biased prick.
>
> > > > That was my comment, and
>
> > > > 1) it was not an insult, just a fact.
> > > > 2) not addressed at you, as you claim above.
>
> > > > > I am still spewing your bullshit about "new atheism" (actually, I've
> > > > > never heard the term before this comment)
>
> > > > Lifted from my post.
> > > > I was merely repeating what a theist has claimed (except for the
> > > > "spewing" and "bullshit" which are not really insults since "New
> > > > Atheism" is bullshit, and it was not addressed at you anyway.)
>
> > > > If you want to know about "new atheism", join the club! Ask Brock to
> > > > explain it.
> > > > The best he could do was produce a few web pages/blogs that used the
> > > > term in their page title. He could never demonstrate that it was an
> > > > actual movement/organization/philosophy/etc.
>
> > > > > Then you are no self-respecting Christian. (apparently not)
>
> > > > Where is the insult here?
>
> > > > > arrogant prick
>
> > > > Yep, that one is an insult!
>
> > > > > I have apparently been suffering from Alzheimer's. (wow, didn't see
> > > > > that one coming)
>
> > > > An wrong assessment?
>
> > > > > I have an unremarkable life.
>
> > > > Not insults.
>
> > > > > I have no feelings, no brains, no consciences, no ethics, absolutely
> > > > > nothing that a human would call human. Period.
>
> > > > A wrong assessment?
>
> > > > > Wow, that one had a "Period." So why should I even continue? How
> > > > > does one debate with that? I mean, I don't want to start with debates
> > > > > proving I have feelings, brains, conscience, ethics, and that I'm
> > > > > human! I mean, I need to go find those groups first, I guess...
>
> > > > So, you produced little evidence in lieu of actual insults that were
> > > > actually addressed at you.
> > > > But, considering that your OP was an open call for flaming how can you
> > > > be honestly surprised that you got what you were asking for?
>
> > > > In case you try to disagree with me, here is a little reminder of your
> > > > opening statement:
> > > > "
> > > > have to say, I joined this group, guessing at exactly what it would
> > > > contain, and I was, sadly, correct.
>
> > > > Atheists groups like this are 99% angry people who aren't actually
> > > > interested in intelligent discussion, but are trying to bait a non-
> > > > atheist into a flame war.
> > > > "
>
> > > > Right off the bat you claim that 99% percent of atheist on this site
> > > > are angry and do not want to intelligent discussions, so they must be
> > > > stupid or something like that.
>
> > > > Then you have the balls to state that the same atheists are only
> > > > interested in flaming?
>
> > > > "Arrogant prick" was too good for you, actual bona fide arrogant
> > > > pricks the world over are offended that you were associated with them.
> > > > _________________________________
> > > > I am fond of saying that reading the Bible turned me into an atheist.
> > > > -- Ruth Hurmence Green

== 18 of 18 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 2:28 pm
From: Woodbridge

Christian LimaToo also.
But he was banned for changing my post and other things

On Dec 2, 2:19 pm, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 4:42 PM, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Firstly, consider that everyone assumed that I was, what? Christian?
> > Islam? Whatever. That is when the remarks were made. They were
> > intended to be toward myself--at least most of them.
>
> > In hind-sight, I'll admit that my post probably guaranteed a flame war
> > and was probably taken as a flame. Also consider this before dropping
> > the gallows trap door: I'd never been to groups.google.com and I
> > joined this one because it was on the sign-on page and looked like a
> > place for learning. Note that immediately most of the titles are
> > flames to begin with. I ignored those and went to safe-looking
> > titles. Bile. Bile. Bile. From people who are claiming to be
> > loving, intelligent, and thoughtful. (yes, those claims were actually
> > made) I expected a battle ground of wit and instead, watched people
> > shooting fish in a barrel. Fun stuff. The joy I saw people getting
> > from outright meanness left me non-plussed and I shouldn't have posted
> > what I did the way that I did. My apologies for being disenchanted
> > with the language and heckling.
>
> > I have a question: From what I can tell, there's only two theists
> > posting regularly. Is there more? I'd like to hear both sides of
> > this, even though I was told that there were no sides.
>
> Off the top of my head, there's
>
> Brock Organ
> Checkers
> Alan Wosterburg (or something like that)
> Allan I-forget-his-last-name a.k.a. Vaarsuvius a.k.a. Treebeard
> Bob Crowley
> thea
> simonsaysbye comes around sporadically
> I AM A TRUE CHRISTIAN is probably actually a troll, but posts as a Christian
>
> Am I forgetting anyone?
>
>
>
> > On Dec 2, 3:00 pm, Answer_42 <ipu.belie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Dec 2, 3:05 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > <snip>
>
> > > Once more, a theist playing the victim and showing signs of having
> > > difficulties understanding simple sentences.
>
> > > > I mentioned the insults? So far, here's a description of me by our
> > > > peers here:
> > > > A dishonest biased prick.
>
> > > That was my comment, and
>
> > > 1) it was not an insult, just a fact.
> > > 2) not addressed at you, as you claim above.
>
> > > > I am still spewing your bullshit about "new atheism" (actually, I've
> > > > never heard the term before this comment)
>
> > > Lifted from my post.
> > > I was merely repeating what a theist has claimed (except for the
> > > "spewing" and "bullshit" which are not really insults since "New
> > > Atheism" is bullshit, and it was not addressed at you anyway.)
>
> > > If you want to know about "new atheism", join the club! Ask Brock to
> > > explain it.
> > > The best he could do was produce a few web pages/blogs that used the
> > > term in their page title. He could never demonstrate that it was an
> > > actual movement/organization/philosophy/etc.
>
> > > > Then you are no self-respecting Christian. (apparently not)
>
> > > Where is the insult here?
>
> > > > arrogant prick
>
> > > Yep, that one is an insult!
>
> > > > I have apparently been suffering from Alzheimer's. (wow, didn't see
> > > > that one coming)
>
> > > An wrong assessment?
>
> > > > I have an unremarkable life.
>
> > > Not insults.
>
> > > > I have no feelings, no brains, no consciences, no ethics, absolutely
> > > > nothing that a human would call human. Period.
>
> > > A wrong assessment?
>
> > > > Wow, that one had a "Period." So why should I even continue? How
> > > > does one debate with that? I mean, I don't want to start with debates
> > > > proving I have feelings, brains, conscience, ethics, and that I'm
> > > > human! I mean, I need to go find those groups first, I guess...
>
> > > So, you produced little evidence in lieu of actual insults that were
> > > actually addressed at you.
> > > But, considering that your OP was an open call for flaming how can you
> > > be honestly surprised that you got what you were asking for?
>
> > > In case you try to disagree with me, here is a little reminder of your
> > > opening statement:
> > > "
> > > have to say, I joined this group, guessing at exactly what it would
> > > contain, and I was, sadly, correct.
>
> > > Atheists groups like this are 99% angry people who aren't actually
> > > interested in intelligent discussion, but are trying to bait a non-
> > > atheist into a flame war.
> > > "
>
> > > Right off the bat you claim that 99% percent of atheist on this site
> > > are angry and do not want to intelligent discussions, so they must be
> > > stupid or something like that.
>
> > > Then you have the balls to state that the same atheists are only
> > > interested in flaming?
>
> > > "Arrogant prick" was too good for you, actual bona fide arrogant
> > > pricks the world over are offended that you were associated with them.
> > > _________________________________
> > > I am fond of saying that reading the Bible turned me into an atheist.
> > > -- Ruth Hurmence Green

==============================================================================
TOPIC: How do Christians avoid worshipping the wrong god?
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/6d788c3a77b4c371?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 1:48 pm
From: Woodbridge

Violation of Christian Code of Conduct #2, 4, 5:

"Labeling Atheists
Some Christians have labeled atheists as stupid, devil-worshippers, or
morally void. Though there may be some atheists who

fit these categories (as would many in the general population),
atheists are not categorically stupid, devil-worshipping,

degenerates with no morals. Many of them are fine citizens, honest,
caring, loving, and patient. For a Christian, or anyone

for that matter, to make a blanket statement about atheists in a
derogatory manner is wrong. It is the same thing atheists

sometimes do when they accuse Christians of being irrational,
psychotic, or stupid. Such accusations have no place on either

side of the argument of truth.
Generally speaking, atheists are not stupid. Many of them have thought
through their position over a long period of time and

arrive at conclusions after much thought. Some were raised in
religious homes, have seen what religion has to offer, and

have rejected it. Of course, I think that atheists have drawn
incorrect conclusions about God, but it doesn't mean they are

dumb. Some atheists have presented very cogent arguments against the
existence of God, which need to be addressed.
So, just because someone believes in God and encounters someone who
doesn't, that does not mean that either side is stupid.

Labeling and name-calling have no place in the discussion.
Ignoring Atheists' Questions
If you were standing on a railroad track and a train was heading your
way, closing your eyes and ignoring the locomotive

will not make it go away. If an atheist asks a question and you
ignore it repeatedly, it would be fair for him to conclude

you were incapable of answering the objection. Of course, this does
not mean you have to always answer everything because

dialogue flows both ways. But, it is important that you face issues.
If you don't have an answer, admit it. That's okay.

It doesn't mean you are wrong. It means you don't have an answer. Go
study and get an answer and get back to him.
Stating that Atheism is a religion
Atheists will repeatedly tell you that they are not in a religion. A
religion almost always is defined to include belief in

a deity of some sort. Atheism is non-belief in a deity. It isn't
necessarily a "belief that there is no God," (though it can

be)but is "not believing either way."
To label an atheist as a religious person is to put up a roadblock to
effective communication. It would be like someone

saying to a Christian, "You believe in a mean, tyrannical being who
likes to torture people." The Christian would simply

roll his eyes and think that the person doesn't know what he's talking
about. So, how much effective conversation could

there be in either instance? Not much.
Stating unsupportable facts
No one has all documentation for everything they say. It is not
reasonable to require proof from an atheist on everything

said. Nevertheless, if you are going to state a fact or two, it is
good to have the documentation at the tip of your tongue

-- at least occasionally, of have access to it. It adds to your
credibility. Of course, you don't have to document

everything, but if you have some illustrious fact to use, try and have
it documented.
Never admitting when you are wrong
Pride is a harmful thing. It caused the fall. It ruins marriages.
It leads to anger and self-righteousness. It has no

place in the Christian's life. Never admitting you are wrong is being
prideful. If an atheist, or anyone, proves you wrong

is something, be kind and courteous. Admit you made a mistake and go
on. Everyone makes mistakes, even atheists. There is

nothing wrong with admitting an error. It no more proves you are
wrong about Christianity than being wrong about the color

of a boat means boats don't exist. But, if you never admit when you
are wrong, you will not be able to convince anyone in a

discussion of your position. You will simply lose the respect of the
one with whom you are debating."

http://www.carm.org/atheism/christianmistakes.htm
On Dec 2, 1:43 pm, "Brock Organ" <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 4:30 PM, etienne <etienne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I don't claim that. Rather, I claim:
>
> >> 1) I believe that the Bible is objectively true
>
> > Well, the bible is objectively false
>
> The indictment may be easier to bring than the conviction.
>
> >> 2) The objective truth of the Bible is independent of my beliefs
>
> > You dream
>
> It's truth really is independent of my person. :)
>
> Regards,
>
> Brock

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 1:49 pm
From: ynot

On Dec 2, 11:43 pm, "Brock Organ" <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 4:30 PM, etienne <etienne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I don't claim that. Rather, I claim:
>
> >> 1) I believe that the Bible is objectively true
>
> > Well, the bible is objectively false
>
> The indictment may be easier to bring than the conviction.
>
> >> 2) The objective truth of the Bible is independent of my beliefs
>
> > You dream
>
> It's truth really is independent of my person. :)
>
> Regards,
>
> Brock

I like it how A42 puts it:

Bla Bla Bla I love jesus Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla The bible
is true Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla If you do not agree with
me Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla You will go to hell
Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Fear god Bla Bla Bla
Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla I am right Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla
Objective truth of first principles Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla You are
wrong Bla Bla BlaBla Bla BlaBla Bla BlaBla Bla Bla Westminster
Confession Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla
Wikipedia Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla
Love god is not the same as poke out your eye with a pointed stick
Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Cesar
crossed the Rubicon Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla BlaBla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla
Bla Bla and 1.50$ will get you a coffee at most truck stops Bla Bla
Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla I am never wrong Bla Bla Bla
Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla mankind is not the
measurement of all things Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla
Bla Bla Bla Bla I tremble before my god Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla
Bla Bla Humans are born with sin Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla
Bla Bla Bla Only Jesus can save you from yourself Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla
Bla Or not :) Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla

Yes Brock, we know, we have heard it all before.

ynot

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 2:02 pm
From: "Brock Organ"

On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 4:49 PM, ynot <ynotamil@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> 2) The objective truth of the Bible is independent of my beliefs
>>
>> > You dream
>>
>> It's truth really is independent of my person. :)
>
> I like it how A42 puts it:

There's no accounting for taste. ;D

Regards,

Brock

==============================================================================
TOPIC: A Gentle inquisition please tell us why ?
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/2b0c60cf9303d074?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 1:55 pm
From: hucktunes

I'm sure that others don't. You alone know what you're going on about.
Christians rely on cryptic speech. Rather than plain speak they use
innuendo. But when it comes down to it, it is just nonsense. Wouldn't
you agree?

On Dec 2, 1:12 pm, checkers <mkone...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> On Dec 2, 6:43 pm, hucktunes <bob.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > What I don't understand is the hip cat surfer dude talk. That made no
> > sense at all. It indicates that you are the one that has a problem
> > understanding posts. Rather than addressing a point you seem to want
> > to spin it in another direction.
>
> chx
> the talk comes from the past. anyway i was just thanking you for the
> cool post. it confirmed what i knew all along. i am sure the others
> see it the same as i do ;)
>
> stay cool.
>
>
>
> > On Dec 2, 12:19 am, checkers <mkone...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 2, 5:25 am, hucktunes <bob.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Not sure I quite understand your point, Checkers. I don't smoke the
> > > > stuff myself. Don't drink either. But living in Humboldt County you
> > > > can bet that most of my friends smoke lots of pot. And they all seem
> > > > to be Christians, too. They say some pretty wacky stuff concerning
> > > > Jesus, especially when they've been smoking pot. A real superstitious
> > > > lot. And then there's the ones with dreadlocks that seem to believe
> > > > that Haile Selassie is a god. Pretty wacky, eh?
>
> > > chx
> > > don't break your head understanding. it is interesting that your
> > > prisons are about 80% 'christian'
>
> > > > On Dec 1, 1:31 pm, checkers <mkone...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Dec 1, 10:47 pm, hucktunes <bob.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > All I said to them was I don't want to talk to them about Jesus. They
> > > > > > asked if I knew Jesus. I told them no, go away. My pot smoking friend
> > > > > > sitting next to me on my front porch said that he knew Jesus. So I had
> > > > > > a discussion with him and discovered that he'd never read the Bible
> > > > > > and was a complete dummy when it came to history. He'd been introduced
> > > > > > to the Jesus myth while taking anger management classes to avoid going
> > > > > > to jail for domestic violence.
>
> > > > > chx
> > > > > hi huck. i'm gonna copy this post to my personal files. you said so
> > > > > much here.
>
> > > > > hey dude, did you know about 80% of jail visitors are 'christians' ;)
>
> > > > > bwooaahahahah - i luv you man. hey bro, if it wasn't that i'm off the
> > > > > stuff fer so long (30+ years), i'd say we share a slo' boat to
> > > > > china ;) Durban poison dude, snap crackle pop! 'up in smoke' has
> > > > > nothing on it dude. you should post more of this shit.
>
> > > > > > On Dec 1, 9:40 am, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 10:20 AM, hucktunes <bob.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > I guess I post here because I've seen more than one group torn apart
> > > > > > > > by posts about religion. There are some real good folks in other
> > > > > > > > groups that are Christians and I really don't want to offend them with
> > > > > > > > my views about their wacky faith. Same with my friends and neighbors
> > > > > > > > around town. I think Christianity is a scourge that plagues humanity,
> > > > > > > > I'm shocked at all the innocent folks that have been drawn and
> > > > > > > > quartered and burned at the stake in order to spread the cursed faith
> > > > > > > > in Jesus, but I try to keep my views confined to this group. It's not
> > > > > > > > always easy. Just a few days ago I chased away a couple Mormons that
> > > > > > > > wanted to talk about Jesus. But Mormons are fair game. They're idiots.
> > > > > > > > Who are they trying to fool with their white shirts and ties? Dressing
> > > > > > > > like Young Republicans knocking on doors like it's their job. Morons,
> > > > > > > > that's what they are. Fair game.
>
> > > > > > > OK what I would like to know is what did you say to the Mormons! Any words
> > > > > > > of wisdom that would have them wondering about their faith? You see when
> > > > > > > you are confronted by someone of another viewpoint, can get you get them to
> > > > > > > start the questioning process that leads to understanding, or do you leave
> > > > > > > them in their misery?
>
> > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 6:55 am, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi Obs.
>
> > > > > > > > > Nice post!
>
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 5:43 AM, Observer <mayors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Why are you here supporting Christianity or positing an atheistic
> > > > > > > > > > stance?
>
> > > > > > > > > I was raised an atheist and when I did explore many different religions
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > philosophies, including Christianity, I found no compelling reason to
> > > > > > > > > believe.
>
> > > > > > > > > > If you are an atheist, do you want to see an end to Christianity?
>
> > > > > > > > > Eventually, yes. But it will take a very long time for the human race to
> > > > > > > > > grow out of their need for superstition.
>
> > > > > > > > > Hopefully, in the meantime, lunatic End of Timers won't take it upon
> > > > > > > > > themselves to bring on their own Armageddon.
>
> > > > > > > > > It takes patience and education. Already we are seeing an exponential
> > > > > > > > > increase in atheism amongst the under-30s.
>
> > > > > > > > > I believe theism realizes this and this is why they are pushing so hard
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > take us back into the dark ages of pre-secularism.
>
> > > > > > > > > > I need not ask a corresponding question of Christians.
>
> > > > > > > > > > What do you think of priests and preachers? Either group please
> > > > > > > > > > respond.
>
> > > > > > > > > They are pushing religion like drugs.
>
> > > > > > > > > > How, should children be protected from the influence of Christianity?
>
> > > > > > > > > Maintain complete separation of church and state. This concept is
> > > > > > > > > established in the US but is being weakened by constant violations. This
> > > > > > > > > needs to stop.
>
> > > > > > > > > Other countries to need to establish this as a fundamental requirement.
> > > > > > > > It
> > > > > > > > > currently isn't in many countries, allowing religion to encroach in areas
> > > > > > > > > they do not belong like education.
>
> > > > > > > > > People have every right to indoctrinate their children in their doctrine
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > choice, but it should be done in the privacy of their own homes and not
> > > > > > > > > imposed on the rest of society.
>
> > > > > > > > > > How, should, children be protected from the influence of atheism?
>
> > > > > > > > > They shouldn't and atheism isn't an influence it's simply a lack of
> > > > > > > > belief.
> > > > > > > > > The influence comes from theism. If people are left alone and don't adopt
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > theist belief system they are usually atheist.
>
> > > > > > > > > > What do you think of the obscene wealth of churches while millions
> > > > > > > > > > starve to death?
>
> > > > > > > > > Insane. They should be required to prove that their money goes to
> > > > > > > > charitable
> > > > > > > > > causes and those dollars that do not should be taxed.
>
> > > > > > > > > > If you are a Christian why do you believe that the bible is true?.
>
> > > > > > > > > > If you are an atheist why do you not believe that the bible is true?
>
> > > > > > > > > Because it isn't :-). There is little evidence to support the bible as a
> > > > > > > > > historical document. This would be required for it to be "true".
>
> > > > > > > > > > Why do you believe that there is a god (don't quote the bible as it is
> > > > > > > > > > the source of the myth)
>
> > > > > > > > > > Why do you not believe that there is a god?
>
> > > > > > > > > > There is no evidence to support this belief and therefore no compelling
>
> > > > > > > > > reason to believe.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Is religion harmful to the world? If so how do we stop its destructive
> > > > > > > > > > force?
>
> > > > > > > > > Yes. It's behind much of the strife, terrorism, and war in the world.
>
> > > > > > > > > Maintaining secular states and eliminating any influence of religion on
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > state and it's policies.
>
> > > > > > > > > Religion can and should remain a personal choice, a personal belief and
> > > > > > > > > that's it.
>
> > > > > > > > > > If you believe that religion is good for the world how do you think it
> > > > > > > > > > ought to be preserved.
>
> > > > > > > > > > If you are an atheist are you completely out of the closet? If not.
> > > > > > > > > > Why not?
>
> > > > > > > > > No. I had a serious problem in one workplace because of it and now I
> > > > > > > > don't
> > > > > > > > > talk about it.
>
> > > > > > > > > > If you are a Christian do you evangelize? If so why?
>
> > > > > > > > > > What value do you personally receive from posting here?
>
> > > > > > > > > It's interesting. I enjoy debating. I learn a lot from the other
> > > > > > > > atheists.
>
> > > > > > > > > > What are your responsibilities to your family, your community, and
> > > > > > > > > > your country in relation to these issues?
>
> > > > > > > > > I think my responses above have covered these things.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Regards to all
>
> > > > > > > > > > Psychonomist
>
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Witchy Woman, AvC Anti-Spam Brigade. AA Wolf Pack Member #7
> > > > > > > > > "Change is the only constant in the universe. Fear its' constant
> > > > > > > > companion.
> > > > > > > > > Overcoming fear is the key to unlocking its' gifts." --Trance Gemini,
> > > > > > > > > Andromeda- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Weird, yet strangely compelling French Army Cartoon
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/0c9a1bae0d243dcb?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 2:13 pm
From: Medusa

Very odd, but awesome animation! Thanks!

Medusa

On Dec 2, 12:49 pm, Eris <vith...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8e3_1228084617

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Vatican raises the white flag..
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/c0bfa2389b80f1a9?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 2:15 pm
From: Dag Yo

It's amazing that they'd rather have everyone believe lies about God
than not believe in any gods at all.

On Nov 30, 3:07 pm, Saint Onan <gigacy...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> ... and surrenders the Godbothering standard to the Muslims.
>
> http://richarddawkins.net/article,3377,Vatican-thanks-Muslims-for-ret...
>
> Apparently the Church hates heathens more than infidels. Perhaps we
> should rename this forum to Atheism vs Islam?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Another Theist bites the dust.
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/e4d18055d0abcf63?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Dec 2 2008 2:28 pm
From: "Turner Hayes"

On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 4:35 PM, checkers <mkoneill@telkomsa.net> wrote:

>
>
>
> On Dec 2, 10:41 pm, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 3:38 PM, checkers <mkone...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > thomas
> >
> > > > Sometimes I wish I were that kid in that Twilight Zone episode who
> could
> > > > send people to a cornfield in another dimension.
> >
> > > chx
> > > your wish is granted...now go build the machine and your'e on your
> > > way ;)
> >
> > ...
> >
> > ...
> >
> > Nope, it didn't work. You're still here.
>
> chx
> it was so simple a task. you cannot even get it to work, i was hoping
> you'd manage and send me to a better place than this. make it big for
> my family as well. we can call it the Arkporter. a cornfield sounds
> good, it means there is food and water. i withdraw the wish i granted,
> you are found not worthy.

You are, unsurprisingly, as lousy at granting wishes as you are at writing
coherent posts.

>
> >
>

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

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

Tuesday, December 2, 2008

Atheism-vs-Christianity - 25 new messages in 6 topics - digest

0 comments:

Blog Archive

Links