Atheism vs Christianity: Atheism-vs-Christianity - 26 new messages in 11 topics

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

Atheism-vs-Christianity@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Historical Jesus
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/47dc898e56d000c0?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:04 pm
From: Woodbridge

Christian Tertullian is very cunning like Christian LimaToo.
Also say VERY SIMILAR thing so very possible same person

On Dec 1, 6:06 pm, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 7:26 PM, Woodbridge <Woodbri...@archaeologist.com>wrote:
>
>
>
> > Tertillian changed own post like Christian LimaToo YES?
>
> Yup. Which is why I believe that Tertullian might be Christian Lima Too.
>
> What do you think?
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 1, 4:25 pm, Tertullian <RogerTertull...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > On Dec 1, 3:45 pm, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 6:36 PM, LedZepp <FledZeppe...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > > > Trance Gemini wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 5:34 PM, LedZepp <FledZeppe...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 29, 6:50 pm, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 3:14 PM, LedZepp <
> > FledZeppe...@yahoo.com>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > As an atheist, I believe in the historical Jesus. There's
> > > > > overwhelming
> > > > > > > > > evidence that he existed. His divinity though is for
> > Christians.
>
> > > > > > > > Still waiting to receive your "overwhelming evidence".
>
> > > > > > > I'm just again logging in again. Somehow, someone banned me too.
>
> > > > > > You weren't banned.
>
> > > > > > Why are you lying?
>
> > > > > > I just checked your membership record and you joined on November 13
> > and
> > > > > have
> > > > > > been a member consistently since then.
>
> > > > > Lying, I could not post for two days. Technical difficulties, maybe.
> > > > > Paranoid? that's another, but I couldn't post.
>
> > > > Well you shouldn't just assume things and then end up make false claims
> > > > based on them.
>
> > > > That's called lying.
>
> > > Opinions are not lying. Theist opinions are not lies.
>
> > > > > > > But
> > > > > > > for now, I'm deferring to the ones who at least believe in the
> > > > > > > historical Jesus.
>
> > > > > > Either you have "overwhelming" evidence or you don't.
>
> > > > > > If you do then you should present it after making the claim.
>
> > > > > > And frankly, if you do, then every biblical scholar in the world
> > will be
> > > > > on
> > > > > > their knees to you because they haven't got that evidence.
>
> > > > > I think I already mentioned to somebody here that I googled the first
> > > > > century historians or writers and at least found Pontius Pilate,
> > > > > Suetonius and Pliny the Younger who all wrote about Christians.
>
> > > > And this is your "overwhelming" evidence to to support the historiocity
> > of
> > > > Jesus?
>
> > > > You clearly didn't bother actually reading any of them did you?
>
> > > > --
> > > > 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 -
>
> --
> 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

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:13 pm
From: hucktunes

> Suetonius and Pliny the Younger who all wrote about Christians.

Writing about Christians is not the same as writing about some guy
named Jesus.

On Dec 1, 3:36 pm, LedZepp <FledZeppe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Trance Gemini wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 5:34 PM, LedZepp <FledZeppe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 29, 6:50 pm, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 3:14 PM, LedZepp <FledZeppe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > As an atheist, I believe in the historical Jesus. There's overwhelming
> > > > > evidence that he existed. His divinity though is for Christians.
>
> > > > Still waiting to receive your "overwhelming evidence".
>
> > > I'm just again logging in again. Somehow, someone banned me too.
>
> > You weren't banned.
>
> > Why are you lying?
>
> > I just checked your membership record and you joined on November 13 and have
> > been a member consistently since then.
>
> Lying, I could not post for two days. Technical difficulties, maybe.
> Paranoid? that's another, but I couldn't post.
>
>
>
> > > But
> > > for now, I'm deferring to the ones who at least believe in the
> > > historical Jesus.
>
> > Either you have "overwhelming" evidence or you don't.
>
> > If you do then you should present it after making the claim.
>
> > And frankly, if you do, then every biblical scholar in the world will be on
> > their knees to you because they haven't got that evidence.
>
> I think I already mentioned to somebody here that I googled the first
> century historians or writers and at least found Pontius Pilate,
> Suetonius and Pliny the Younger who all wrote about Christians.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Historical Precedence For Non-Violence in the Face of Irrational
Injustice
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/6e541b28803148ed?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:12 pm
From: Dev

On Dec 1, 7:00 pm, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 8:52 PM, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > I already responded to Drafterman--the same article (actually, book,
> > but I found part of it in the form of an article online for easy
> > linkage) anticipated that there were three potential "examples" that
> > would be given. You can see my response to Drafterman for the link,
> > but I would like to note one thing--if nonviolence was actually a
> > functioning success in human nature, and not a modern myth, why are
> > the three examples people predictably give all recent examples? Is
> > nonviolence as a response a recent invention of humans? Well, no--
> > there's turtles, snails... That clearly has nothing to do with human
> > history (or disagree with that, and articulate a case, anyone--explain
> > exactly how one explains the other).
>
> Why does it matter if they're recent? All it means that human beings are
> learning from experience and coming up alternatives to violence in order to
> resolve problems.
>
> I would think that was a good thing.

Okay. But for a truly nonviolent campaign to work, wouldn't that mean
it worked with no threat of violence? The three (and only three,
versus like thousands of major historical examples where violence
works) examples of whether nonviolence works exclusively all have, I
think, substantial arguments that the "non-cooperation" encompassed
riots and threats at the bare minimum, state force sometimes. So.
Three disputable examples of nonviolence versus three-hundred-thousand
of violence works, nonviolence wins?

>
>
> > But here's a serious question: what do you think the proportion is of
> > "insufficient violence" to "failure" in proportion to the proportion
> > to "absolute nonviolence" to "success"? What really drives history?
> > Name a country that exists because those who sucked at violence more
> > didn't lose.
>
> There is no such thing as absolutes.

> In any situation one has to use a mix of strategies based on the existing
> circumstances.

> Violence is the most unsuccessful unless one considers winning a War of
> Conquest a success.

> It depends on what the goals are.

Trance, none of the "great nonviolent leaders" achieved anything
historically without at least the threat of force behind them, and if
they were sincere, then they failed because of it.

> If the goals are to accomplish something in terms of resolving a problem,
> violence is rarely the right solution.

So you would argue that the minority of things in history that were
accomplished against adversity were accomplished with violence or the
threat of violence? Could you make, I dunno, lists to substantiate
this with facts, counterarguments taken into account?

I hate being the bad guy with you, but goddamn. I think we have to
start being realistic.

>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 1, 6:34 pm, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 7:28 PM, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > Let's go!
>
> > > Martin Luther King.
>
> > > Most Peace Marches in the 1960s (Canada).
>
> > > Mahatma Gandhi.
>
> > > --
> > > 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
>
> --
> 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 -

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:14 pm
From: Dev

Yeah, pooping on Max isn't violence either. I intended this thread for
actual people who understood the issue. Drafterman and Trance both
knew what I was talking about, which is why I'm debating them. You're
retarded and don't understand the question. Go die somewhere.

On Dec 1, 7:32 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> To change public opinion through democratic change which often leads
> to cajoling so called 'irrational injustice' out of it's position of
> influence. Means at our disposal have been (and are still available)
> e.g.
>
> anti war marches & demonstrations
> Documentary film making
> Internet publications
> Broader education
> Music
> Strikes
> Constitutional & legisllative protections for free speech
> Political lobbying
>
> etc etc etc
>
> Go here for more examples:
>
> http://www.starhawk.org/activism/198ways.html
>
> Tactics of non violent protest have been a mainstay for citizenry for
> years.
>
> Max
>
> On Dec 2, 9:28 am, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Let's go!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

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

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:12 pm
From: Answer_42

On 1 déc, 21:52, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 1, 2:17 pm, ObservantEye <mike.sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> Its clearly an insightful commentary on the limitations of the "new
> atheism".

Meanwhile, at least six times in the last 10 days I have called your
attention to nice examples of "new christianity" where invectives and
vitriol were abundant.
Yet, here you are, still spewing your bullshit about "new
atheism" (whatever that is), while never even once, commenting on the
same behaviour from theists.

Of course, you know what we call such a person as yourself.
A dishonest biased prick.
__________________________________________
Whenever morality is based on theology, whenever right is made
dependent on divine authority, the most immoral, unjust, infamous
things can be justified and established.
-- Ludwig Feuerbach

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Awakenings
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/c7bcb4123e4127f1?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:17 pm
From: Answer_42

On 1 déc, 16:46, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The invective and vitriol have not been welcome, but I frankly,

Really?
You are a dishonest biased prick about his, aren't you?
Where are you when exactly the same "tactics" are used by theists?
I have been calling your attention to those, I even changed a topic
subject to include your name to make sure you would see it.

Yet, as far as I can tell, you have ignored all those posts that
contain the same type of language because they were posted by
theists.
__________________________________________
Whenever morality is based on theology, whenever right is made
dependent on divine authority, the most immoral, unjust, infamous
things can be justified and established.
-- Ludwig Feuerbach

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:29 pm
From: Dev

Yeah, well, reasoning with them doesn't work. I guess we can either
start killing them or forfeit.

On Dec 1, 8:17 pm, Answer_42 <ipu.belie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1 déc, 16:46, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The invective and vitriol have not been welcome, but I frankly,
>
> Really?
> You are a dishonest biased prick about his, aren't you?
> Where are you when exactly the same "tactics" are used by theists?
> I have been calling your attention to those, I even changed a topic
> subject to include your name to make sure you would see it.
>
> Yet, as far as I can tell, you have ignored all those posts that
> contain the same type of language because they were posted by
> theists.
> __________________________________________
> Whenever morality is based on theology, whenever right is made
> dependent on divine authority, the most immoral, unjust, infamous
> things can be justified and established.
> -- Ludwig Feuerbach

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 8:01 pm
From: "Turner Hayes"

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Trance Gemini <trancegemini7@gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 4:46 PM, Brock <brockorgan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Nov 26, 6:42 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> > Just thought I'd give an opportunity for the posters, and I'm
>> > particularly targeting the nontheists although as always everyone is
>> > of course free to comment, to talk about how AvC may have--probably
>> > only slightly--transformed perspectives towards the nature of
>> > religiosity versus rationality. Who or what changed your perspective?
>>
>> I have enjoyed participating in the forum. Because of the feedback
>> from participants, I have learned how to articulate many doctrines
>> better and more consistently; in answering particular objections,
>> I've come away with a broader understanding of the history, background
>> and nature of how classical philosophical positions compare and
>> contrast with many biblical positions.
>>
>> The invective and vitriol have not been welcome, but I frankly,
>> consider it as close to a concession as I'm likely to receive on the
>> group. I've been reminded by atheist examples that there are a myriad
>> ways to reject a truth one does not wish to receive. Though it would
>> be an overstatement to imply universality, in my opinion much of what
>> passes for the "new atheism" is not much more than a wilful rejection
>> of the gospel message, articulated so well by Thomas Nagel:
>>
>> "It isn't just that I don't believe in God and, naturally, hope that
>> I'm right in my belief. It's that I hope there is no God! I don't want
>> there to be a God; I don't want the universe to be like that."
>>
>
> Nagel was considered a dualist and wrong on other things as well.
>

And beside that, that quote doesn't show what Fucktard wants it to show.
Nagel explicitly stated in the first statement that he doesn't believe in
God. The next statements are embellishments; rather than not believing in
God but wishing he could, or thinking that belief is a nice, optimistic
viewpoint, he states that it would be unpleasant IF it were true. But lies
and misrepresentation are a common tactic in the New Christian movement, and
they do not reflect well on it.

>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Brock
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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
>
>
> >
>

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Attention, Brock needed.
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/e6ee90a2ad693f5e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:18 pm
From: Dev

On Dec 1, 5:54 pm, Woodbridge <Woodbri...@archaeologist.com> wrote:
> This is very true
> Some Christians themself say they are hypocrites and are outward nice
> atleast and will help Judaist move furniture to new apartment.

"By the way, there's a gas leak." *locks door on way out*

> So some Christians like that are SMALL hypocrites

All theists are small.

> But Borgan is BIG hypocrite because he does not accept that he is
> doing hypocrisy even with PROOF like Answer_42 showed here

Borgan is a big hypocrite because he's literally big--a blubbery ball
of hypocrite and probably wears a diaper.

> On Dec 1, 4:45 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>
>
> > ALL Christians are hypocrites. It is literally impossible for a
> > Christian to be anything but a hypocrite because it will always find
> > fault with beliefs, actions and convictions more rational than its
> > own.
>
> > On Dec 1, 5:11 pm, Woodbridge <Woodbri...@archaeologist.com> wrote:
>
> > > Christian Borgan is BIG hypocrite
> > > Many Christians are hypocrites
>
> > > On Dec 1, 7:48 am, Answer_42 <ipu.belie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Nov 30, 10:44 am, I AM A TRUE CHRISTIAN <X...@OPERAMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
> > > > > Dear hopelessly confused sucker of Satan's cock,
> > > > > YOU DISTURBED HATEMONGERING FUCK! THE DARK PRINCE HAS HIS HAND FIRMLY
> > > > > INSERTED INTO YOUR ANUS AND IS USING YOU AS A PUPPET TO SPREAD HIS
> > > > > FEAR AND ODIUM. DO THE UNIVERSE A FAVOR AND END YOUR MISERABLE,
> > > > > DISTORTED EXISTENCE BEFORE YOUR INIQUITY SEEPS INTO AN UNSPOILED MIND.
> > > > > YOU ARE A FUNDAMENTALLY CORRUPT VEHICLE OF HATE AND YOU ARE BEYOND
> > > > > REDEMPTION. KILL YOURSELF. KILL YOURSELF. KILL YOURSELF YOU ROTTEN,
> > > > > UNEDUCATED, DISGUSTINGLY TAINTED GRATIFIER OF ALL THAT IS IMPURE.
>
> > > > Brock, you dishonest and deluded theist...
> > > > Where are you?
> > > > Why don't you tell him off the same way you tell off any atheist who
> > > > uses "invectives and vitriol"?
> > > > If atheists do it in order to propagate new atheism (according to
> > > > you), what does this theist do it for?
> > > > Why have you ignored the half dozen cases I highlighted since last
> > > > week or so?
> > > > __________________________________________
> > > > Whenever morality is based on theology, whenever right is made
> > > > dependent on divine authority, the most immoral, unjust, infamous
> > > > things can be justified and established.
> > > > -- Ludwig Feuerbach- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:23 pm
From: Answer_42

On 1 déc, 21:32, I AM A TRUE CHRISTIAN <X...@OPERAMAIL.COM> wrote:

> I just want to say that your website is the sickest website I have
> ever seen. You always complain that you are the victims but you are
> worse than the nazis themselves. I usually don't use profanity but
> what the fuck: you mother fuckers are the reason for all the sickness
> and the diseases in this world and someday you are going to fuked for
> god the face of this earth. its just a matter of time
>
> YOU GOD DAMN BASTARDS THINK YOU ARE GOING TO GET AWAY WITH ALL THIS
> HATE! YOU STUPID, ILLEGITIMATE PEOPLE! OUR POPULATION IS THAT OF 1.9
> BILLION! YES 1.9 BILLION, AND WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU? 20-30 MILLION
> (ARGUABLY)? HA! YOU HAVE 1 COUNTRY TO SCATTER TO, LIKE THE FILTHY
> PIGS YOU ARE! YOU ARE THE LITTER AND DIRT OF THIS WORLD. YOU KILLED
> JESUS! YOU WANT NOTHING MORE THAN TO KILL THE CHRISTIAN RACE! YOUR
> PEOPLE CONVERT DAILY BY SEEING YOUR BITCHES L ILL AND SLAUGHTER
> INNOCENT INDIVIDUALS. WE KNOW YOUR KIND ARE THOSE THAT WILL SUFFER IN
> THE FURY OF HELL. MAY YOU BE CONDEMNED AND THE ILLEGITIMATE INSTITUTE
> OF atheism

Brock, where are you?
__________________________________________
Whenever morality is based on theology, whenever right is made
dependent on divine authority, the most immoral, unjust, infamous
things can be justified and established.
-- Ludwig Feuerbach

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:32 pm
From: Woodbridge

Borgan is hiding because he tolerates Christian doing wrong things

On Dec 1, 7:23 pm, Answer_42 <ipu.belie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1 déc, 21:32, I AM A TRUE CHRISTIAN <X...@OPERAMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I just want to say that your website is the sickest website I have
> > ever seen. You always complain that you are the victims but you are
> > worse than the nazis themselves. I usually don't use profanity but
> > what the fuck: you mother fuckers are the reason for all the sickness
> > and the diseases in this world and someday you are going to fuked for
> > god the face of this earth. its just a matter of time
>
> > YOU GOD DAMN BASTARDS THINK YOU ARE GOING TO GET AWAY WITH ALL THIS
> > HATE! YOU STUPID, ILLEGITIMATE PEOPLE! OUR POPULATION IS THAT OF 1.9
> > BILLION! YES 1.9 BILLION, AND WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU? 20-30 MILLION
> > (ARGUABLY)? HA! YOU HAVE 1 COUNTRY TO SCATTER TO, LIKE THE FILTHY
> > PIGS YOU ARE! YOU ARE THE LITTER AND DIRT OF THIS WORLD. YOU KILLED
> > JESUS! YOU WANT NOTHING MORE THAN TO KILL THE CHRISTIAN RACE! YOUR
> > PEOPLE CONVERT DAILY BY SEEING YOUR BITCHES L ILL AND SLAUGHTER
> > INNOCENT INDIVIDUALS. WE KNOW YOUR KIND ARE THOSE THAT WILL SUFFER IN
> > THE FURY OF HELL. MAY YOU BE CONDEMNED AND THE ILLEGITIMATE INSTITUTE
> > OF atheism
>
> Brock, where are you?
> __________________________________________
> Whenever morality is based on theology, whenever right is made
> dependent on divine authority, the most immoral, unjust, infamous
> things can be justified and established.
> -- Ludwig Feuerbach

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

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:19 pm
From: Answer_42

On 1 déc, 21:48, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Veritas Christo et Ecclesiae

> I like how the Confession puts it:

> Obedience to the wishes of my beloved Lord Jesus Christ.

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.
__________________________________________
Whenever morality is based on theology, whenever right is made
dependent on divine authority, the most immoral, unjust, infamous
things can be justified and established.
-- Ludwig Feuerbach

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:25 pm
From: hucktunes

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?

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 -

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Hello
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/6d065aab595d7d5a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:31 pm
From: Answer_42

On 1 déc, 18:31, Tertullian <RogerTertull...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hello, I am a Christian. An atheist friend of mine is here in Simi
> Valley, California and challenged me to post here.
>
> He's quite sure that I will be banned because of my education in
> religious antiquity, so I accepted the challenge.

What challenge?
Your friend is either an idiot or ill-informed, I'll let you decide.
__________________________________________
Whenever morality is based on theology, whenever right is made
dependent on divine authority, the most immoral, unjust, infamous
things can be justified and established.
-- Ludwig Feuerbach

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

== 1 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:38 pm
From: Answer_42

On 1 déc, 20:56, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> So well said, Chris. The standard that measures the standard is the
> standard.

> And thus is the futility of humanistic "verification" exposed. Of
> course, I like how the Confession puts it:

== 2 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:48 pm
From: Bob Crowley

Actually I wasted several years in the mistake of thinking there was
no God. At least I've become aware of the most basic truth there is.

On Dec 1, 2:01 pm, Multiverse <cuta...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> your halfway there Bob. You concede the absurdity of you god
> beliefs. Obviously you have come to this conclusion after careful
> introspection. Good luck on your journey to free thought. Pay
> attention here and try not to feel so bad about wasting a large part
> of your life believing in a god.
>
> On Nov 30, 7:44 pm, Bob Crowley <bobcrow...@acenet.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > No more absurd than atheists thinking a highly complex universe sprang
> > out of nothing. Or that the highly complex molecular cellular
> > machinery necessary for life just "happened". Or that despite the fact
> > they are therefore meaningless by their own admissin, they insist on
> > debating their meaningless existence, as though it was really
> > important.
>
> > On Dec 1, 10:04 am, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > You're right. That is absurd.
>
> > > I agree also.
>
> > > > On Nov 30, 6:18 pm, Bob Crowley <bobcrow...@acenet.net.au> wrote:
> > > > > While we're on this topic, which I think is absurd anyway, since as
> > > > > God exists, He knows what our intentions are anyway. He may be a
> > > > > jealous God by His own admission, but at the same time, He knows our
> > > > > frame. He also keeps His covenants, as He has to be true to Himself.
>
> > > > > However one thing that sticks in my mind was my old Protestant pastor
> > > > > making two comments, which I found somewhat disconcerting.
>
> > > > > His first was that He "sometimes wondered if Protestants (of whom he
> > > > > was one) get into heaven". His second was that he thought Martin
> > > > > Luther was the False Prophet, commenting that "Some of the things
> > > > > Luther said and did weren't very Christian" and "The Reformation was
> > > > > easily the most violent episode in Church history.". Now that was
> > > > > from a wise old Protestant pastor. His comment was that he didn't
> > > > > think God was as easy going as we are about Church division.
>
> > > > > Yet some of the Christians who most demonstrate the work of the Holy
> > > > > Spirit today are by and large Protestants. For example if one reads
> > > > > books by a Brother Yun, the Chinese Christians are exploding in
> > > > > numbers. They're around 100 million by now, and he said that at one
> > > > > stage miracles were so commonplace, they didn't even taken any
> > > > > notice. By contrast both Catholic and Protestant western churches are
> > > > > almost spiritually dead. They're too bound up with their traditions
> > > > > and doctrines. One of Yun's complaints was that when it became easier
> > > > > for missionaries to get back into China, the first thing the
> > > > > Westerners started to do was pursue their own doctinal agendas. Give
> > > > > them enough time and Christians in China will be as divided as they
> > > > > are in the West.
>
> > > > > I don't have any doubt Christians are on the right track. The way the
> > > > > most effective groups are persecuted indicates the devil hates them,
> > > > > and hence they attract trouble by the ton. On the other hand, the
> > > > > near moribund Western churches almost fit hand in glove with secular
> > > > > society, and miracles are few and far between.
>
> > > > > Yet ringing in my ears is the old pastor's comment, and he was usually
> > > > > right, that he wondered about Protestants getting into heaven, and
> > > > > that Martin Luther was, in his opinion, the false prophet. I've read
> > > > > "Martin Luther - Adolf Hitler's spiritual ancestor" by Peter F. Wiener
> > > > > (which, ironically, I ordered from the American Atheist society,
> > > > > although it is available on the web), and it is very clear that most
> > > > > Protestants have only been told one side of the story about Luther.
> > > > > Even the old pastor gave "Luther" as the middle name of his second
> > > > > youngest son, so sometime between then and when he spoke to me, he
> > > > > must have done a bit of extra curricular reading of his own.
>
> > > > > So, do Christians go to Hell because they might be worshipping the
> > > > > wrong God? No, because they've got the right God. What I think a lot
> > > > > of them are going to be surprised about is that God is not very happy
> > > > > with the divided nature of His Church. It's His Church, not ours.
> > > > > Believing the Pope is the anti-Christ is heresy for a start.
>
> > > > > On Nov 30, 5:02 pm, LL <llp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Nov 29, 8:57 pm, Bob Crowley <bobcrow...@acenet.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Are you suggesting that when we worship Christ, God doesn't know who
> > > > > > > we're talking about?
>
> > > > > > LL: If such a being as you apparently believe in exists, he/she/it
> > > > > > would know. But if it is the god described in the bible--jealous,
> > > > > > barbaric and retaliatory-- anyone who believes the wrong way--
> > > > > > including Christians--will be facing eternal damnation. They have been
> > > > > > hoist by their own petard.
>
> > > > > > ******************************************************
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 30, 7:12 am, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
>
> > > > > > > <ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 5:23 pm, Chris <chrism3...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > if you're going to ask for ironclad proof of God, then you'd have
> > > > to
> > > > > > > > > be able to suggest what type of proof would qualify.
>
> > > > > > > > > Would God have to stand on the moon and wave?
>
> > > > > > > > Even if God were to stand on the Moon and wave, we would not know
> > > > that
> > > > > > > > it is the God of the Bible who is standing on the Moon and waving;
> > > > it
> > > > > > > > might be Thor who is waving. How are you able to tell whether you
> > > > > > > > worship the same God who said "You shall have no other gods before
> > > > me"?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 3 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:49 pm
From: Bob Crowley

It's called Free Will, and part of God's omnipotence is His own choice
to allow rebellion. Evil exists because of this freedom. Without it,
there would be no evil.

On Dec 2, 2:03 am, harry k <turnkey4...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 30, 3:18 pm, Bob Crowley <bobcrow...@acenet.net.au> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > I don't have any doubt Christians are on the right track. The way the
> > most effective groups are persecuted indicates the devil hates them,
> > and hence they attract trouble by the ton. On the other hand, the
> > near moribund Western churches almost fit hand in glove with secular
> > society, and miracles are few and far between.
>
> <snip>
>
> Do you have an answer to the puzzle in the bible?
>
> The bible states that He is all powerul.
>
> So how can there be a devil he can't control?
>
> That is just one of the many logical contradictions in the bible.
>
> Harrry K

== 4 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:51 pm
From: Bob Crowley

If you want proof of something,you put it to the test, even if you're
confident of the outcome. I would think that most modern aircraft are
confident their aircraft are going to fly, but they always test them
first.

On Dec 2, 6:08 am, ynot <ynota...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 1, 1:18 am, Bob Crowley <bobcrow...@acenet.net.au> wrote:
>
> >......jealous God by His own admission, but at the same time
> > He knows our frame.....
>
> No, he does not.
> He had to "test" Abraham to make sure that Abraham really
> obeyed him.
> "...neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know
> that thou fearest God, seeing thou...."
> genesis 22:12
>
> ynot

== 5 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 8:13 pm
From: harry k

On Dec 1, 7:49 pm, Bob Crowley <bobcrow...@acenet.net.au> wrote:
> It's called Free Will, and part of God's omnipotence is His own choice
> to allow rebellion. Evil exists because of this freedom. Without it,
> there would be no evil.
>
> On Dec 2, 2:03 am, harry k <turnkey4...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 30, 3:18 pm, Bob Crowley <bobcrow...@acenet.net.au> wrote:
>
> > <snip>
>
> > > I don't have any doubt Christians are on the right track. The way the
> > > most effective groups are persecuted indicates the devil hates them,
> > > and hence they attract trouble by the ton. On the other hand, the
> > > near moribund Western churches almost fit hand in glove with secular
> > > society, and miracles are few and far between.
>
> > <snip>
>
> > Do you have an answer to the puzzle in the bible?
>
> > The bible states that He is all powerul.
>
> > So how can there be a devil he can't control?
>
> > That is just one of the many logical contradictions in the bible.
>
> > Harrry K- Hide quoted text -
>

Pardon me while I roll around on the floor a bit.

Harry K

== 6 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 8:15 pm
From: harry k

So you have a god that is "all knowing, all seeing" but has to test
his "knowledge"? Uhuh.

On Dec 1, 7:51 pm, Bob Crowley <bobcrow...@acenet.net.au> wrote:
> If you want proof of something,you put it to the test, even if you're
> confident of the outcome. I would think that most modern aircraft are
> confident their aircraft are going to fly, but they always test them
> first.
>
> On Dec 2, 6:08 am, ynot <ynota...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 1, 1:18 am, Bob Crowley <bobcrow...@acenet.net.au> wrote:
>
> > >......jealous God by His own admission, but at the same time
> > > He knows our frame.....
>
> > No, he does not.
> > He had to "test" Abraham to make sure that Abraham really
> > obeyed him.
> > "...neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know
> > that thou fearest God, seeing thou...."
> > genesis 22:12
>
> > ynot- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Please help me understand.
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/4ccde3b062522deb?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:51 pm
From: Answer_42

On 1 déc, 16:55, checkers <mkone...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> chx
> i told you to stop digging. now you're a liar as well. you called me
> moronic and paranoid in the same post and not as you state in two
> seperate posts. it was in the very next post you replied to on this
> same page about one third down on the issue i called 'round two' after
> this i pointed it out - fool!.

You are so fucking moronic, it is not even funny anymore.

Recap:
In a post, I called you a moronic piece of shit, emphasis on piece of
shit.
Then, lower down, I stated you were paranoid.
There were no connection between the two statements.

You then accused me of being a hypocrite for allegedly making fun of
some hypothetical mental illness you never claimed to have.

Then I really called you a moron in response to that. And I did not
call you paranoid again.
That was the first time I actually called you moronic as such.

From that point you have been grasping at straws to try to insinuate I
was a hypocrite and so on.

I will not take the time to rewrite the last 6 posts to reexplain
everything again just because you are too moronic to understand
simple statements.
__________________________________________
Whenever morality is based on theology, whenever right is made
dependent on divine authority, the most immoral, unjust, infamous
things can be justified and established.
-- Ludwig Feuerbach
> gotcha!!!
>
>
>
> > Then, you replied to that by saying I was a hypocrite (for calling on
> > you for making fun of someone's mental health) by trying to accuse me
> > of doing the same (when I allegedly made fun of you by calling you
> > paranoid).
>
> > I then called you a moron for not being able to tell the difference.
>
> > This last reply of yours just serves to prove I was right in stating
> > you were a moron.
>
> > > > Also, I would be a hypocrite only if you freely admitted that you were
> > > > paranoid or had been paranoid. Then if I, hypothetically, made fun of
> > > > you based on the fat that you were paranoid (which I did not do here)
> > > > you might call me a hypocrite. My saying you are paranoid does not
> > > > automatically make it true.
>
> > > chx
> > > then what is your calling me moronic, fool?
>
> > The truth.
>
> > The proof is that you seem to be insisting that my calling you a moron
> > is in some way making fun of you as a paranoid person.
> > I will repeat:
> > All this can only be remotely related to what you did when, and only
> > when, you announce officialy that you are suffering from paranoia,
> > which you have not. If you do that, and after that I make fun of you
> > for making such a statement, then, and only then, will you have a
> > case.
>
> > So, I called you paranoid.
> > You reacted like a moron to that statement of mine.
> > So I then called you a moron.
> > You are still reacting like a moron, so you are a moron.
> > So I repeat:
> > I am only stating the truth.
>
> > > > So, I am not making fun of the fact you are paranoid.
> > > > You never admitted that you were or had been paranoid.
> > > > This absolutely does not correlate with the fact that you did make fun
> > > > of someone who admitted that they had had mental health problems.
>
> > > > So, you are still a moronic piece of shit, unless you apologize.
>
> > > chx
> > > this is so absurd, are you saying i will not be moronic all of a
> > > sudden if i apologise?
>
> > No.
> > More proof that you are a moron.You cannot comprehend simple
> > sentences.
> > If you apologize, you will not be such a piece of shit anymore.
> > You have demonstrated that you are a moron in the last few posts here,
> > so, sorry, there is nothing I, or anyone else, can do about that.
>
> > > my gawd, you are a fool!!!
> > > what happens to the piece of shit then, you lump of shit?
>
> > That was the whole point.
> > You got sidetracked by the "paranoid," and then the "moronic" bits.
> > Because you are a moron, you forgot my point at the beginning, a few
> > posts ago:
> > "
> > (...)
> > This is why I call you a moronic
> > piece of shit.
>
> > Prove me wrong by apologizing, even two weeks after the fact and after
> > I have had to explain the whole thing so many times, it will be
> > somewhat redeeming.
> > "
> > If, at that point you had let the matter drop and apologized, I would
> > have taken back the "moronic piece of shit", as stated.
>
> > But you went on and on, each post further demonstrating that you are a
> > moron.
> > So, if you were to apologize, I am afraid that my only option at this
> > point would be to take back, and never use it again, unless you
> > deserve it, that call (piece of shit) with you.
> > As for the moron, part, it is now a separate issue.
>
> > > a tip for you; stop digging, oops, too late!! har!
>
> > Right. You should take you own advice here.
> > __________________________________________
> > Whenever morality is based on theology, whenever right is made
> > dependent on divine authority, the most immoral, unjust, infamous
> > things can be justified and established.
> > -- Ludwig Feuerbach

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 8:10 pm
From: harry k

On Dec 1, 8:40 am, checkers <mkone...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> On Dec 1, 5:52 pm, harry k <turnkey4...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 1, 1:34 am, checkers <mkone...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 1, 6:09 am, Ruthie <willruthie1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > nothing in the Bible is horrible or scary. natural 'disasters' are
> > > exactly that, natural.
>
> > <snips>
>
> > Hmmm...what about:
>
> > 7 plagues?
> > Kill every first born?
> > Murder every person in the world down to babies in wombs save 7?
> > Okay to rape?
> > Kill a wife if she isn't a virgin?
>
> > etc. for innumerable examples.
>
> chx
> you did not even read the book, what's the point discussing it with
> you. you are obviously going on hearsay...7 plagues, bah!
>
>
>
>
>
> > Harry K- Hide quoted text -

I was heavily indoctrinated as a kid in that book but if you don't
want to answer pertinent questions that expose your error...

Harry K

==============================================================================
TOPIC: The Nicene Creed
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/0d394c723cc9d336?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 7:57 pm
From: Answer_42

On 1 déc, 20:31, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> http://www.reformed.org/documents/index.html

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 8:00 pm
From: Bob Crowley

It doesn't imply that they now obey. It simply says He preached to
them. What He said and what their response was we don't know.

I suppose they are shown what might be called the justification for
their situation. According to Catholic doctrine, souls in Hell can't
repent. However they also choose to go there. CS Lewis put it "the
gates of Hell are locked on the inside". If one takes a totally
depraved being, and tells it that it can leave Hell, if it is prepared
to forgo ALL it's depravity, the chances are that it will hold back,
since it must give up everything that previously defined it's
personality.

I've used my father too often as an example, but he had an extremely
bad temper. It would be close to the truth to say that by the time he
died, he WAS a bad temper. It had gotten to the stage where it
controlled him: he did not control it. To get out of Hell, he would
have to give up every last vestige of that bad temper, which by the
time he died, was in fact, him. It wouldn't take much of a prod by
the devil for him to forget his commitment to overcome his bad temper,
since he would have to give it up in an environment which was totatlly
opposed to his giving it up.

It would be like putting a criminal in the meanest penitentiary with
the meanest prisoners and the cruellest wardens and most dismal
regime, and then saying that he can get out, but only on the condition
his behaviour becomes saintly. What do you think would be the
reaction of the other prisoners and wardens as soon as they saw the
inmate making an attempt to sanctify his behaviour?

On Dec 2, 8:46 am, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
<ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Nov 27, 5:46 pm, philosophy <smwil...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > As a child I was sent to a Presbyterian Boarding School, and was made
> > to learn the Nicene Creed. I Googled it today, and found that what I
> > had to learn was actually called the Apostles Creed. The variety of
> > these creeds is staggering. This is the one I had to learn by heart:
>
> > Traditional English Version
> > I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.
> > And in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord; who was conceived by the
> > Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate,
> > was crucified, dead, and buried; he descended into hell; the third day
> > he rose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and sitteth on
> > the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence he shall come
> > to judge the quick and the dead.
> > I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy catholic Church; the communion
> > of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body; and
> > the life everlasting. AMEN.
>
> > Now, I do not believe one bit of it, but as this is a discussion
> > group, I would like to put forward a few questions.
> > As I said, I went to a Presbyterian school, which is Protestant. Yet,
> > in the creed it says "I believe in the.......holy catholic Church."
> > Please explain this to me. Does the little "c" for catholic make it
> > different from Catholic?
>
> ONE holy catholic church, not THE holy catholic church. Catholic means
> universal. It's like saying "I believe in one World Government".
>
> > Where in the NT does it state that Jesus descended into Hell?
>
> I Peter 3:19-20, where it says that in the spirit He preached to the
> souls in prison, who formerly did not obey in the days of Noah. That
> would seem to indicate that they now obey. How do souls in hell go
> about obeying?
>
>
>
> > What is the Holy Ghost?
> > What is the communion of saints?
> > I am presuming that the resurrection of the body means that once I get
> > my body back I will never die again? Besides the fact that I know of
> > nothing so unnatural, the whole concept is a tad bizarre, and I don't
> > really want a part of it. Anyway, all comments will be greatly
> > appreciated. Thank you.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 8:02 pm
From: Bob Crowley

The church based in Rome used to have the epithet "Mother Church" or
just "Church", but as a result of the Reformation, it wears the label
"Roman Catholic" to distinguish it from all the other denominations.

On Dec 2, 9:01 am, LedZepp <FledZeppe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Dec 1, 2:46 pm, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
>
>
>
>
>
> <ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 27, 5:46 pm, philosophy <smwil...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > As a child I was sent to a Presbyterian Boarding School, and was made
> > > to learn the Nicene Creed. I Googled it today, and found that what I
> > > had to learn was actually called the Apostles Creed. The variety of
> > > these creeds is staggering. This is the one I had to learn by heart:
>
> > > Traditional English Version
> > > I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.
> > > And in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord; who was conceived by the
> > > Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate,
> > > was crucified, dead, and buried; he descended into hell; the third day
> > > he rose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and sitteth on
> > > the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence he shall come
> > > to judge the quick and the dead.
> > > I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy catholic Church; the communion
> > > of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body; and
> > > the life everlasting. AMEN.
>
> > > Now, I do not believe one bit of it, but as this is a discussion
> > > group, I would like to put forward a few questions.
> > > As I said, I went to a Presbyterian school, which is Protestant. Yet,
> > > in the creed it says "I believe in the.......holy catholic Church."
> > > Please explain this to me. Does the little "c" for catholic make it
> > > different from Catholic?
>
> > ONE holy catholic church, not THE holy catholic church. Catholic means
> > universal. It's like saying "I believe in one World Government".
>
> Was there a Catholic Church in Rome at least when the Council of
> Nicaea was convened. That's where the Nicene Creed was extablished
> right?
>
>
>
> > > Where in the NT does it state that Jesus descended into Hell?
>
> > I Peter 3:19-20, where it says that in the spirit He preached to the
> > souls in prison, who formerly did not obey in the days of Noah. That
> > would seem to indicate that they now obey. How do souls in hell go
> > about obeying?
>
> > > What is the Holy Ghost?
> > > What is the communion of saints?
> > > I am presuming that the resurrection of the body means that once I get
> > > my body back I will never die again? Besides the fact that I know of
> > > nothing so unnatural, the whole concept is a tad bizarre, and I don't
> > > really want a part of it. Anyway, all comments will be greatly
> > > appreciated. Thank you.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Theism and Special Privilege
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/3cc405563ba2a0ae?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Dec 1 2008 8:04 pm
From: "Turner Hayes"

Fucktard (I'm looking for a better nickname--Bat/Horseshit already being
taken and all) gives replies like this, and then wonders why atheists are
frustrated and angry. I wonder if his lack of basic reasoning is congenital
or the result of some major trauma?

On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 9:19 PM, Brock <brockorgan@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Nov 30, 11:59 am, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Theists. A question. Please read the following article.
> >
> > Now, please explain to me why this Texas man was sent to a psychiatrist
> for
> > claiming that your god told him to hit this woman's car
>
> Check with the local district attorney who supervised the case for
> more specifics.
>
> > and why Bush was not
> > sent to a psychiatrist for claiming that your god told him to send the
> > troops into Iraq?
>
> Check with your local constitutional attorney who has supervised the
> case for more specifics.
>
> Regards,
>
> Brock
>
> >
>

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

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

Monday, December 1, 2008

Atheism-vs-Christianity - 26 new messages in 11 topics - digest

0 comments:

Blog Archive

Links