Atheism vs Christianity: November 2008

Sunday, November 30, 2008

Atheism-vs-Christianity - 25 new messages in 7 topics - digest

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

Atheism-vs-Christianity@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Please help me understand. - 5 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/4ccde3b062522deb?hl=en
* Wardens summary - 9 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/78b3d29f63d4239e?hl=en
* Why I Believe In God - 3 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/90eb802b81a4b99b?hl=en
* What came first: Time or Space (or God)? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/bd7525e99bb1766f?hl=en
* The universal goal of all religions - 2 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/91a5baee4c6f6c15?hl=en
* are you an atheist by choice? - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/c2b693c490978321?hl=en
* Would anyone like to answer a few questions to help me with an assignment? -
3 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/a75af2e0fdb0a477?hl=en

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

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:04 pm
From: Dag Yo

> The Bible is a book. It was written by people who sought the
> ultimate truth - God - and they failed because of their human
> limitations.
Of course they also failed because God is make-believe.

On Nov 30, 9:34 pm, Expulsive <TomAnders...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It is good that you're confused - if you are not confused then you
> have put your brain on a shelf somewhere.
> Your questions are excellent but what you ask could fill a thousand
> books and, indeed, an uncountable number of books have been written on
> the questions you pose. Take a walk through a good seminary library
> and read the titles of books on just one half of a shelf. Your
> questions are not new and the number of books written indicate that
> the answers you seek have been different for different people of
> different times.
> The Bible is a book. It was written by people who sought the
> ultimate truth - God - and they failed because of their human
> limitations. Those acts that have been attributed to God were, in
> reality, human and random acts that are natural to humans and nature,
> but were BLAMED on God. God did not do those horrible things, people
> or the environment did. People did horrible things in the name of God
> because they felt that they understood God better than others. People
> blamed God for their punishment after they did stupid things, not
> unlike today when we question God as a good friend dies of Cancer when
> we created the disease with our pollution and chemicals. The Cancer
> isn't God's fault, its ours. We were given this world and one another
> to take care of and, instead, we poison and pollute everything because
> of our pride and greed.
> If you want to be saved, don't look for someone to do it for
> you. There is no magic - but there is mystery and if you want to be
> saved you need to first know yourself.
>
> On Nov 30, 11:09 pm, Ruthie <willruthie1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I am just so confused. The bible never made sense to me. The things
> > written were horrible. Revelations makes me scared. Please someone
> > tell me how A god who loves us would treat us this way. Please someone
> > explaine the truth about other saviors with similar stories to christ.
> > I am tired of lies. I want the truth. Once someone can show me the
> > truth,that the bible is true than I will ask to be saved. I have
> > asked lots of times to be saved and nothing happened.

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:16 pm
From: Max

Hi Ruthie,

You're not alone when you say that the bible doesn't make any sense.
Does a fairy story make any sense? Look, people who proclaim that the
bible is the 'truth' are just blindly placing their faith in what many
of us regard as just silliness.

What are you actually trying to be saved from?

Sounds pretty heavy.

Max

On Dec 1, 2:09 pm, Ruthie <willruthie1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I am just so confused. The bible never made sense to me. The things
> written were horrible. Revelations makes me scared. Please someone
> tell me how A god who loves us would treat us this way. Please someone
> explaine the truth about other saviors with similar stories to christ.
> I am tired of lies. I want the truth. Once someone can show me the
> truth,that the bible is true than I will ask to be saved. I have
> asked lots of times to be saved and nothing happened.

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:19 pm
From: Ward Yung

Oh, I'm sure you'll straighten her out Max. You have such a fatherly
manner.

On Nov 30, 10:16 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Hi Ruthie,
>
> You're not alone when you say that the bible doesn't make any sense.
> Does a fairy story make any sense? Look, people who proclaim that the
> bible is the 'truth' are just blindly placing their faith in what many
> of us regard as just silliness.
>
> What are you actually trying to be saved from?
>
> Sounds pretty heavy.
>
> Max
>
> On Dec 1, 2:09 pm, Ruthie <willruthie1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I am just so confused. The bible never made sense to me. The things
> > written were horrible. Revelations makes me scared. Please someone
> > tell me how A god who loves us would treat us this way. Please someone
> > explaine the truth about other saviors with similar stories to christ.
> > I am tired of lies. I want the truth. Once someone can show me the
> > truth,that the bible is true than I will ask to be saved. I have
> > asked lots of times to be saved and nothing happened.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:21 pm
From: Max

Oh no.....I've got a stalker who's got his nose outta joint and he's
humping my leg again.

Max

On Dec 1, 4:19 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh, I'm sure you'll straighten her out Max. You have such a fatherly
> manner.
>
> On Nov 30, 10:16 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi Ruthie,
>
> > You're not alone when you say that the bible doesn't make any sense.
> > Does a fairy story make any sense? Look, people who proclaim that the
> > bible is the 'truth' are just blindly placing their faith in what many
> > of us regard as just silliness.
>
> > What are you actually trying to be saved from?
>
> > Sounds pretty heavy.
>
> > Max
>
> > On Dec 1, 2:09 pm, Ruthie <willruthie1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > I am just so confused. The bible never made sense to me. The things
> > > written were horrible. Revelations makes me scared. Please someone
> > > tell me how A god who loves us would treat us this way. Please someone
> > > explaine the truth about other saviors with similar stories to christ.
> > > I am tired of lies. I want the truth. Once someone can show me the
> > > truth,that the bible is true than I will ask to be saved. I have
> > > asked lots of times to be saved and nothing happened.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:22 pm
From: Ward Yung

In your dreams...la, la girl.

On Nov 30, 10:21 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Oh no.....I've got a stalker who's got his nose outta joint and he's
> humping my leg again.
>
> Max
>
> On Dec 1, 4:19 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Oh, I'm sure you'll straighten her out Max. You have such a fatherly
> > manner.
>
> > On Nov 30, 10:16 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > Hi Ruthie,
>
> > > You're not alone when you say that the bible doesn't make any sense.
> > > Does a fairy story make any sense? Look, people who proclaim that the
> > > bible is the 'truth' are just blindly placing their faith in what many
> > > of us regard as just silliness.
>
> > > What are you actually trying to be saved from?
>
> > > Sounds pretty heavy.
>
> > > Max
>
> > > On Dec 1, 2:09 pm, Ruthie <willruthie1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > I am just so confused. The bible never made sense to me. The things
> > > > written were horrible. Revelations makes me scared. Please someone
> > > > tell me how A god who loves us would treat us this way. Please someone
> > > > explaine the truth about other saviors with similar stories to christ.
> > > > I am tired of lies. I want the truth. Once someone can show me the
> > > > truth,that the bible is true than I will ask to be saved. I have
> > > > asked lots of times to be saved and nothing happened.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Wardens summary
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/78b3d29f63d4239e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:07 pm
From: Max

After you my good man....and do you have your KY with you.........from
what I've seen around here, you seem to have a fine appreciation of
bottoms!

You're just like one of them little hairy dogs that humps your leg and
no matter how much you try and shake the little bugger off, it just
hangs on and keeps on humping

Now go away Ward & leave my leg alone.

Max

On Dec 1, 4:01 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Max,
>
> check out the newbie who just came in, I'm sure with your weedling
> he'd be happy to drop his drawers in no time.
>
> ward
>
> On Nov 30, 9:59 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > No more mate..........you got me......your literary talent and acerbic
> > wit has done me in. I can't compete. You're just too good for me. I am
> > defeated. The master!!
>
> > So, do you want to drop it now, huh. Please!
>
> > I'd rather tackle Dev and a few lunatic theists for a bit, if that's
> > OK with you.
>
> > Another time perhaps.
>
> > Max
>
> > On Dec 1, 3:54 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Your so boring, you bore yourself.
>
> > > On Nov 30, 9:53 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > Not reading my posts again Ward....must be ESP
>
> > > > Max
>
> > > > On Dec 1, 3:51 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > max,
>
> > > > > blah--head nod, blah--head nod, blah--head nod,
>
> > > > > ward
>
> > > > > On Nov 30, 9:49 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Dev,
>
> > > > > > Scrapin' the bottom of the barrel with your new recruits now eh mate.
> > > > > > But I can talk all I like about Ward now, 'cause he don't read my
> > > > > > posts apparently. That's a plus. He was scary.
>
> > > > > > Are you going to answer my question. Scroll up.
>
> > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > On Dec 1, 3:43 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:31 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Ward, stop for a minute and think about what your saying here...
>
> > > > > > > > It was Dev who called you a 'stupid little cunt", not me. It's there
> > > > > > > > in print. We know this because I (& I feel a bit silly about it now)
> > > > > > > > actually remarked on it to Dev, in that it was an unnecessary thing to
> > > > > > > > do etc etc.
>
> > > > > > > > But since, I have seen no repudiation coming form you at all and all
> > > > > > > > smiles with him since. Now, I don't read every post or thread in this
> > > > > > > > GG, so I can't say for certain that you didn't cross swords with Dev
> > > > > > > > and give him a serve. But if you did, I said I'd apologise etc.
>
> > > > > > > > So you conclude this by saying I'm a coward (why) and previously a
> > > > > > > > Drama Queen. Good on ya!. So, if you like to do this silly stuff,
> > > > > > > > fine...I can waste a few minutes every now & again, however Ward, the
> > > > > > > > Dev issue is one that he & I are dealing with.
>
> > > > > > > > You don't need to stick your bib in. You really don't.
>
> > > > > > > > Oh lastly, How would I "see things different"?
>
> > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 3:18 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Well,
>
> > > > > > > > > Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
> > > > > > > > > a coward to do. You would see things different.
>
> > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> > > > > > > > > > haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> > > > > > > > > > incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> > > > > > > > > > I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> > > > > > > > > > But I didn't see it.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > > > > > > > > > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > > > > > > > > > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > > > > > > > > > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > > > > > > > > > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > > > > > > > > > > have managed.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > > > > > > > > > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > > > > > > > > > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > > > > > > > > > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Ay,
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > > > > > > > > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > ward
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 2 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:09 pm
From: Ward Yung

Any time, any place Maxy, me boy.

On Nov 30, 9:31 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Ward, stop for a minute and think about what your saying here...
>
> It was Dev who called you a 'stupid little cunt", not me. It's there
> in print. We know this because I (& I feel a bit silly about it now)
> actually remarked on it to Dev, in that it was an unnecessary thing to
> do etc etc.
>
> But since, I have seen no repudiation coming form you at all and all
> smiles with him since. Now, I don't read every post or thread in this
> GG, so I can't say for certain that you didn't cross swords with Dev
> and give him a serve. But if you did, I said I'd apologise etc.
>
> So you conclude this by saying I'm a coward (why) and previously a
> Drama Queen. Good on ya!. So, if you like to do this silly stuff,
> fine...I can waste a few minutes every now & again, however Ward, the
> Dev issue is one that he & I are dealing with.
>
> You don't need to stick your bib in. You really don't.
>
> Oh lastly, How would I "see things different"?
>
> Max
>
> On Dec 1, 3:18 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Well,
>
> > Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
> > a coward to do. You would see things different.
>
> > On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> > > haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> > > incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> > > I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> > > But I didn't see it.
>
> > > Max
>
> > > On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > > > have managed.
>
> > > > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > > > Max
>
> > > > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Ay,
>
> > > > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > > > ward
>
> > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 3 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:19 pm
From: Max

Look forward to it!

Max

On Dec 1, 4:09 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Any time, any place Maxy, me boy.
>
> On Nov 30, 9:31 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Ward, stop for a minute and think about what your saying here...
>
> > It was Dev who called you a 'stupid little cunt", not me. It's there
> > in print. We know this because I (& I feel a bit silly about it now)
> > actually remarked on it to Dev, in that it was an unnecessary thing to
> > do etc etc.
>
> > But since, I have seen no repudiation coming form you at all and all
> > smiles with him since. Now, I don't read every post or thread in this
> > GG, so I can't say for certain that you didn't cross swords with Dev
> > and give him a serve. But if you did, I said I'd apologise etc.
>
> > So you conclude this by saying I'm a coward (why) and previously a
> > Drama Queen. Good on ya!. So, if you like to do this silly stuff,
> > fine...I can waste a few minutes every now & again, however Ward, the
> > Dev issue is one that he & I are dealing with.
>
> > You don't need to stick your bib in. You really don't.
>
> > Oh lastly, How would I "see things different"?
>
> > Max
>
> > On Dec 1, 3:18 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Well,
>
> > > Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
> > > a coward to do. You would see things different.
>
> > > On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> > > > haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> > > > incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> > > > I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> > > > But I didn't see it.
>
> > > > Max
>
> > > > On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > > > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > > > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > > > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > > > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > > > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > > > > have managed.
>
> > > > > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > > > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > > > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > > > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > > > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > > > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > > > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > > > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Ay,
>
> > > > > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > > > > ward
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 4 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:20 pm
From: Ward Yung

Well then name it.

Time and place please.

ward

On Nov 30, 10:19 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Look forward to it!
>
> Max
>
> On Dec 1, 4:09 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Any time, any place Maxy, me boy.
>
> > On Nov 30, 9:31 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > Ward, stop for a minute and think about what your saying here...
>
> > > It was Dev who called you a 'stupid little cunt", not me. It's there
> > > in print. We know this because I (& I feel a bit silly about it now)
> > > actually remarked on it to Dev, in that it was an unnecessary thing to
> > > do etc etc.
>
> > > But since, I have seen no repudiation coming form you at all and all
> > > smiles with him since. Now, I don't read every post or thread in this
> > > GG, so I can't say for certain that you didn't cross swords with Dev
> > > and give him a serve. But if you did, I said I'd apologise etc.
>
> > > So you conclude this by saying I'm a coward (why) and previously a
> > > Drama Queen. Good on ya!. So, if you like to do this silly stuff,
> > > fine...I can waste a few minutes every now & again, however Ward, the
> > > Dev issue is one that he & I are dealing with.
>
> > > You don't need to stick your bib in. You really don't.
>
> > > Oh lastly, How would I "see things different"?
>
> > > Max
>
> > > On Dec 1, 3:18 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Well,
>
> > > > Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
> > > > a coward to do. You would see things different.
>
> > > > On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> > > > > haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> > > > > incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> > > > > I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> > > > > But I didn't see it.
>
> > > > > Max
>
> > > > > On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > > > > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > > > > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > > > > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > > > > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > > > > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > > > > > have managed.
>
> > > > > > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > > > > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > > > > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > > > > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > > > > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > > > > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > > > > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > > > > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Ay,
>
> > > > > > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > > > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > > > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > > > > > ward
>
> > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 5 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:38 pm
From: Max

Are you threatening me Ward? Not in this forum mind you, but outside
are you?

Max

On Dec 1, 4:20 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well then name it.
>
> Time and place please.
>
> ward
>
> On Nov 30, 10:19 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Look forward to it!
>
> > Max
>
> > On Dec 1, 4:09 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Any time, any place Maxy, me boy.
>
> > > On Nov 30, 9:31 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > Ward, stop for a minute and think about what your saying here...
>
> > > > It was Dev who called you a 'stupid little cunt", not me. It's there
> > > > in print. We know this because I (& I feel a bit silly about it now)
> > > > actually remarked on it to Dev, in that it was an unnecessary thing to
> > > > do etc etc.
>
> > > > But since, I have seen no repudiation coming form you at all and all
> > > > smiles with him since. Now, I don't read every post or thread in this
> > > > GG, so I can't say for certain that you didn't cross swords with Dev
> > > > and give him a serve. But if you did, I said I'd apologise etc.
>
> > > > So you conclude this by saying I'm a coward (why) and previously a
> > > > Drama Queen. Good on ya!. So, if you like to do this silly stuff,
> > > > fine...I can waste a few minutes every now & again, however Ward, the
> > > > Dev issue is one that he & I are dealing with.
>
> > > > You don't need to stick your bib in. You really don't.
>
> > > > Oh lastly, How would I "see things different"?
>
> > > > Max
>
> > > > On Dec 1, 3:18 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Well,
>
> > > > > Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
> > > > > a coward to do. You would see things different.
>
> > > > > On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> > > > > > haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> > > > > > incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> > > > > > I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> > > > > > But I didn't see it.
>
> > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > > > > > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > > > > > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > > > > > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > > > > > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > > > > > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > > > > > > have managed.
>
> > > > > > > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > > > > > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > > > > > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > > > > > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > > > > > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > > > > > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > > > > > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > > > > > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Ay,
>
> > > > > > > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > > > > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > > > > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > > > > > > ward
>
> > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > > > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > > > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > > > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > > > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 6 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:40 pm
From: Ward Yung

Max,

I was feeling threatened myself. Heightened tensions and all. But I
had no idea who you are.

ward

On Nov 30, 10:38 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Are you threatening me Ward? Not in this forum mind you, but outside
> are you?
>
> Max
>
> On Dec 1, 4:20 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Well then name it.
>
> > Time and place please.
>
> > ward
>
> > On Nov 30, 10:19 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > Look forward to it!
>
> > > Max
>
> > > On Dec 1, 4:09 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Any time, any place Maxy, me boy.
>
> > > > On Nov 30, 9:31 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > Ward, stop for a minute and think about what your saying here...
>
> > > > > It was Dev who called you a 'stupid little cunt", not me. It's there
> > > > > in print. We know this because I (& I feel a bit silly about it now)
> > > > > actually remarked on it to Dev, in that it was an unnecessary thing to
> > > > > do etc etc.
>
> > > > > But since, I have seen no repudiation coming form you at all and all
> > > > > smiles with him since. Now, I don't read every post or thread in this
> > > > > GG, so I can't say for certain that you didn't cross swords with Dev
> > > > > and give him a serve. But if you did, I said I'd apologise etc.
>
> > > > > So you conclude this by saying I'm a coward (why) and previously a
> > > > > Drama Queen. Good on ya!. So, if you like to do this silly stuff,
> > > > > fine...I can waste a few minutes every now & again, however Ward, the
> > > > > Dev issue is one that he & I are dealing with.
>
> > > > > You don't need to stick your bib in. You really don't.
>
> > > > > Oh lastly, How would I "see things different"?
>
> > > > > Max
>
> > > > > On Dec 1, 3:18 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Well,
>
> > > > > > Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
> > > > > > a coward to do. You would see things different.
>
> > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> > > > > > > haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> > > > > > > incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> > > > > > > I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> > > > > > > But I didn't see it.
>
> > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > > > > > > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > > > > > > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > > > > > > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > > > > > > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > > > > > > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > > > > > > > have managed.
>
> > > > > > > > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > > > > > > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > > > > > > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > > > > > > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > > > > > > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > > > > > > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > > > > > > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > > > > > > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Ay,
>
> > > > > > > > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > > > > > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > > > > > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > > > > > > > ward
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > > > > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > > > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > > > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 7 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:47 pm
From: Ward Yung

That would be the most difficult question of my life, Max.

== 8 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:52 pm
From: Max

Well don't take it all so seriously. Remember, as I said somewhere
else, it's just a google group. Mate, if you hang around long enough,
you will see the complete breadth of commentary here. From the
abysmally stupid to the sublime. But in the final anaysis, it's just a
bunch of anonymous individuals spruiking all kinds of things.

Take a breath...don't let it get to you.

You see, the Dev thing is really just about scoring some points. It
looks insane, but really it's just brinkmanship, that's all. Just
between you and me, I actually like Dev & what he does, but don't tell
him.

You see, he's not the only shit stirrer about.

Sometimes you have to kick the odd 'sacred cow' around eh :)

Go well Ward

Max

On Dec 1, 4:40 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Max,
>
> I was feeling threatened myself. Heightened tensions and all. But I
> had no idea who you are.
>
> ward
>
> On Nov 30, 10:38 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Are you threatening me Ward? Not in this forum mind you, but outside
> > are you?
>
> > Max
>
> > On Dec 1, 4:20 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Well then name it.
>
> > > Time and place please.
>
> > > ward
>
> > > On Nov 30, 10:19 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > Look forward to it!
>
> > > > Max
>
> > > > On Dec 1, 4:09 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Any time, any place Maxy, me boy.
>
> > > > > On Nov 30, 9:31 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Ward, stop for a minute and think about what your saying here...
>
> > > > > > It was Dev who called you a 'stupid little cunt", not me. It's there
> > > > > > in print. We know this because I (& I feel a bit silly about it now)
> > > > > > actually remarked on it to Dev, in that it was an unnecessary thing to
> > > > > > do etc etc.
>
> > > > > > But since, I have seen no repudiation coming form you at all and all
> > > > > > smiles with him since. Now, I don't read every post or thread in this
> > > > > > GG, so I can't say for certain that you didn't cross swords with Dev
> > > > > > and give him a serve. But if you did, I said I'd apologise etc.
>
> > > > > > So you conclude this by saying I'm a coward (why) and previously a
> > > > > > Drama Queen. Good on ya!. So, if you like to do this silly stuff,
> > > > > > fine...I can waste a few minutes every now & again, however Ward, the
> > > > > > Dev issue is one that he & I are dealing with.
>
> > > > > > You don't need to stick your bib in. You really don't.
>
> > > > > > Oh lastly, How would I "see things different"?
>
> > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > On Dec 1, 3:18 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Well,
>
> > > > > > > Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
> > > > > > > a coward to do. You would see things different.
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> > > > > > > > haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> > > > > > > > incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> > > > > > > > I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> > > > > > > > But I didn't see it.
>
> > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > > > > > > > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > > > > > > > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > > > > > > > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > > > > > > > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > > > > > > > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > > > > > > > > have managed.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > > > > > > > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > > > > > > > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > > > > > > > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > > > > > > > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Ay,
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > > > > > > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > > > > > > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > ward
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > > > > > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > > > > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 9 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:58 pm
From: Ward Yung

Max,

I wish we could compare notes, if for nothing else then to satisfy my
curiosity. I will always consider you as Max, unless you change your
name of course.

ward

On Nov 30, 10:52 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Well don't take it all so seriously. Remember, as I said somewhere
> else, it's just a google group. Mate, if you hang around long enough,
> you will see the complete breadth of commentary here. From the
> abysmally stupid to the sublime. But in the final anaysis, it's just a
> bunch of anonymous individuals spruiking all kinds of things.
>
> Take a breath...don't let it get to you.
>
> You see, the Dev thing is really just about scoring some points. It
> looks insane, but really it's just brinkmanship, that's all. Just
> between you and me, I actually like Dev & what he does, but don't tell
> him.
>
> You see, he's not the only shit stirrer about.
>
> Sometimes you have to kick the odd 'sacred cow' around eh :)
>
> Go well Ward
>
> Max
>
> On Dec 1, 4:40 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Max,
>
> > I was feeling threatened myself. Heightened tensions and all. But I
> > had no idea who you are.
>
> > ward
>
> > On Nov 30, 10:38 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > Are you threatening me Ward? Not in this forum mind you, but outside
> > > are you?
>
> > > Max
>
> > > On Dec 1, 4:20 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Well then name it.
>
> > > > Time and place please.
>
> > > > ward
>
> > > > On Nov 30, 10:19 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > Look forward to it!
>
> > > > > Max
>
> > > > > On Dec 1, 4:09 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Any time, any place Maxy, me boy.
>
> > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:31 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Ward, stop for a minute and think about what your saying here...
>
> > > > > > > It was Dev who called you a 'stupid little cunt", not me. It's there
> > > > > > > in print. We know this because I (& I feel a bit silly about it now)
> > > > > > > actually remarked on it to Dev, in that it was an unnecessary thing to
> > > > > > > do etc etc.
>
> > > > > > > But since, I have seen no repudiation coming form you at all and all
> > > > > > > smiles with him since. Now, I don't read every post or thread in this
> > > > > > > GG, so I can't say for certain that you didn't cross swords with Dev
> > > > > > > and give him a serve. But if you did, I said I'd apologise etc.
>
> > > > > > > So you conclude this by saying I'm a coward (why) and previously a
> > > > > > > Drama Queen. Good on ya!. So, if you like to do this silly stuff,
> > > > > > > fine...I can waste a few minutes every now & again, however Ward, the
> > > > > > > Dev issue is one that he & I are dealing with.
>
> > > > > > > You don't need to stick your bib in. You really don't.
>
> > > > > > > Oh lastly, How would I "see things different"?
>
> > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > On Dec 1, 3:18 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Well,
>
> > > > > > > > Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
> > > > > > > > a coward to do. You would see things different.
>
> > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> > > > > > > > > haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> > > > > > > > > incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> > > > > > > > > I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> > > > > > > > > But I didn't see it.
>
> > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > > > > > > > > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > > > > > > > > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > > > > > > > > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > > > > > > > > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > > > > > > > > > have managed.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > > > > > > > > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > > > > > > > > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > > > > > > > > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Ay,
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > > > > > > > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > > > > > > > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > ward
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > > > > > > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Why I Believe In God
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/90eb802b81a4b99b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:08 pm
From: Ward Yung

You should know.

On Nov 30, 8:33 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Is nite angel 86 there with you? "Missed by that much"
>
> Crack cocaine...........does it every time!
>
> (Dev disclaimer - not abuse - just ridicule)
>
> Max
>
> On Dec 1, 12:48 pm, niteangel99 <niteange...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I believe in God,not because of mommy are daddy.Are someone making me
> > believe.I know first hand experience how he saved me.How he came to
> > me,in dreams and visions. How I have the Holy Spirit.He is with me
> > now.No one will change my mind.Because he is real. I feel sorry for
> > those who don't believe. Do you believe their is and HELL,there is and
> > HEAVEN.
> > I would not push the guy aside ,His name is JESUS.....I welcome him
> > here....
> > Atheis don't scare me one bit..Get and LIfe....- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:34 pm
From: Max

Dev, can you call your toothless attack dog off please. He's gumming
me to death & the goo is buggering up my new shoes. He's been humping
my leg too & I can't shake him off.

Ward.....look I know you're very sad now & you're spitting the dummy,
but you're acting a bit like the 'loonie tunes theist' culture in my
petri dish. Get over it.

Mate, theists are supposed to act like fuckin' loons, not atheists,
but you're turning that premise on it's head.

Get your gums off me & go chase a theist or two will ya.

Max

On Dec 1, 4:08 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You should know.
>
> On Nov 30, 8:33 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Is nite angel 86 there with you? "Missed by that much"
>
> > Crack cocaine...........does it every time!
>
> > (Dev disclaimer - not abuse - just ridicule)
>
> > Max
>
> > On Dec 1, 12:48 pm, niteangel99 <niteange...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > I believe in God,not because of mommy are daddy.Are someone making me
> > > believe.I know first hand experience how he saved me.How he came to
> > > me,in dreams and visions. How I have the Holy Spirit.He is with me
> > > now.No one will change my mind.Because he is real. I feel sorry for
> > > those who don't believe. Do you believe their is and HELL,there is and
> > > HEAVEN.
> > > I would not push the guy aside ,His name is JESUS.....I welcome him
> > > here....
> > > Atheis don't scare me one bit..Get and LIfe....- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:38 pm
From: Ward Yung

They won't have me Max. I'm too devilish.

On Nov 30, 10:34 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Dev, can you call your toothless attack dog off please. He's gumming
> me to death & the goo is buggering up my new shoes. He's been humping
> my leg too & I can't shake him off.
>
> Ward.....look I know you're very sad now & you're spitting the dummy,
> but you're acting a bit like the 'loonie tunes theist' culture in my
> petri dish. Get over it.
>
> Mate, theists are supposed to act like fuckin' loons, not atheists,
> but you're turning that premise on it's head.
>
> Get your gums off me & go chase a theist or two will ya.
>
> Max
>
> On Dec 1, 4:08 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > You should know.
>
> > On Nov 30, 8:33 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > Is nite angel 86 there with you? "Missed by that much"
>
> > > Crack cocaine...........does it every time!
>
> > > (Dev disclaimer - not abuse - just ridicule)
>
> > > Max
>
> > > On Dec 1, 12:48 pm, niteangel99 <niteange...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > I believe in God,not because of mommy are daddy.Are someone making me
> > > > believe.I know first hand experience how he saved me.How he came to
> > > > me,in dreams and visions. How I have the Holy Spirit.He is with me
> > > > now.No one will change my mind.Because he is real. I feel sorry for
> > > > those who don't believe. Do you believe their is and HELL,there is and
> > > > HEAVEN.
> > > > I would not push the guy aside ,His name is JESUS.....I welcome him
> > > > here....
> > > > Atheis don't scare me one bit..Get and LIfe....- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

==============================================================================
TOPIC: What came first: Time or Space (or God)?
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/bd7525e99bb1766f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:10 pm
From: The Wonderer

Time and space in the universe are linked. This link is observed in
the behavior of photons. The beginning of the observable universe can
be explained as a random conversion of energy to matter in a quantum
flux event we call the big bang. Could the spark of energy the
universe emerged from have existed outside of the framework of time
and space? If the flux event is completely random then time-space
might be meaningless for the energy source. It might have no
beginning or end in time and have no relationship to space having no
spatial dimensions.

On Nov 30, 11:45 pm, Multiverse <cuta...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> interesting stuff you seemed to have familiarized yourself with here.
> perhaps beyond my pay grade but could you explain a little better what
> you mean by:
>
> >The problem is that time may not really exist,
>
> I see how you worked it into context, I think. Time does exist and
> has been aggressively studied via mathematics, physics, and other
> stuff I know even less about. Time dilation has been measured.
> Perhaps there is more to learn about time. From what I gather though,
> we are as certain as we are going to be for now that time does exist.
> Also the relationship between space and time has and continues to be
> probed.
>
> So how do you figure time may not exist?
>
> Also you stated:
>
> >As for a first cause, there can be no such thing, but we suspect a
> >causeless, eternal creator could conjour material existence.
>
> never mind who the we are that are suspecting this. Which causeless,
> eternal creators were included in this study and can I get their
> contact info?
>
> and as far as:
>
> >Without nothingness
> >there's no creator (and the human mind cannot conceive of either a
> >beginning or a no-beginning).
>
> I don't lose any sleep over the environmental constraints you may
> imagine apply to a creator due to the fact they do not exist. I
> know lots and lots of human minds that can conceive of a beginning and
> a no beginning. Just pointing that out.
>
> On Nov 30, 3:38 am, leebert <sregdor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 30, 2:03 am, "Ms. S. Goten" <SonnyGo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > @ Drafterman:
> > > You still haven't completely covered it yet. Before you can truly
> > > answer the question if space has always existed, you must also ask
> > > yourself:
> > > Can time exist without space?
> > > Because space cannot be without time, but that doesn't mean nessecary
> > > that time cannot be without space.
>
> > Dear Ms. S. Goten.
>
> > What you have is a paradox.
>
> > If time were an independent phenomenon it'd still constitute an
> > information frame, which - being dimensional - is a functional space
> > to itself. Whether it's temporal or not is irrelevant, we only elevate
> > "time" to something more independent b/c we are creatures of spatial
> > and temporal habit. The problem is that time may not really exist, but
> > information rate in experience does.
>
> > As for a first cause, there can be no such thing, but we suspect a
> > causeless, eternal creator could conjour material existence.
>
> > But to try to establish a creator in a frame separate from the thing
> > he would create establishes a paradox. Just like there being no
> > "nothingness," b/c there'd be no discrete boundary that'd allow for
> > such a thing, we can't use "nothingness" to define a creator b/c
> > there'd be no temporal or spatial boundary that would cast a creator
> > apart from his creation (creatio ex nihilo). Without nothingness
> > there's no creator (and the human mind cannot conceive of either a
> > beginning or a no-beginning).
>
> > One possible conclusion to this could be that creator & creation would
> > be one and the same, and both are eternal (the best solution to this
> > is some kind of pandeism). Or ex nihilo nihil fit.
>
> > The problem with both being eternal, however is, if they are one and
> > the same then creation doesn't need a creator.
>
> > /leebert

==============================================================================
TOPIC: The universal goal of all religions
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/91a5baee4c6f6c15?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:15 pm
From: Observer

On Nov 14, 7:33 am, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jesus is the Head of His Body, the Church. The Church is a living
> meta-organism, the next phase of the process of Evolution.

Once again Joe your Bearcat mouth has overloaded your canary
mentality.

What utter fucking superstitious trash.

Just as
> eons ago, individual single cells banded together to form colonies,
> and eventually became full organisms, so now, individual human
> organisms band together in groups, and one group, the Church, is
> actually a new meta-organism.

Observer
The church is the old superstitoious filth presently being crushed by
the universalization of education where in is contained critical
thinking, the availability of all up to date scientific data, (with
few exceptions) and a broad understanding of scientific method as the
only reliable source of usable information. Good riddence to foul
rubbish if there were a hell I would be temptred (but not follow
through) to send the entirity if the priest craft for an elongated
stay for crimes against humanity.

]
Those who will not come to Christ will
> miss out on this next phase of Evolution,

Observer
Your Christ is an imaginary creature and your Jesus is a god fraud .
If you disagree then offer us compelling reasons ( as proofs are
beyond your purview) that your incredibly stupid bible is the
inspired work of any god or that the stupidity of belief in things
metaphysical , such as , a devil, demons, angels, the sadomasochistic
fictive demon that you worship as a god, or any of the other ultra-
stupid concepts of things or conditions thought to be metaphysical
properly believed in by other than the village idiots of the world.

and die as individuals not
> united with the Body. Hell is the second death.

Observer
Hell is a product of primitive imagination nothing more. Prove
otherwise , Christian.
Your whole religion is simply superstitious filth . Time for it to be
crushed out of existence as is being done by the simple act of
expanding education to a level of universality.

Good Riddence.

Psychonomist

>
> On Nov 14, 10:27 am, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Stonethatbleeds <fb...@ncf.ca> wrote:
>
> > > LIFE =GOD
> > > LIFE> MANKIND that is life
> > > what part of that is too complicated for you?
>
> > Wrong -- *the life of an animal is in the Blood*
> > Jesus is our sacrifice on the Cross of Calvary - so His Blood can make us
> > acceptable to God the Father of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
>
> > I believe Sodom is coming again - because people like you are spouting what
> > you don't know anything about. Sodom didn't believe in the God of Abraham
> > and so were destroyed because of Apostacy.
>
> > You will be destroyed also, because you fail to understand that Jesus is the
> > only way to heaven!!
>
> > > On Nov 13, 11:30 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > But this sounds like racism.
>
> > > > On Nov 13, 8:26 pm, Stonethatbleeds <fb...@ncf.ca> wrote:
>
> > > > > There is only one single goal, and it transcends all the humans silly
> > > > > lesser mind games. The one goal is to seed life on new worlds that we
> > > > > find more and more of them all the time to thirst the mind of HUMANITY
> > > > > to reach them... in time. ALl focus away from that is cancer to life
> > > > > destroying the future of life from Earth...and massif sin.
>
> > > > > On Nov 13, 10:06 pm, student13 <pairam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > that is interesting.
>
> > > > > > you say that "there can be no universal goal(s).
>
> > > > > > if it is so, could it be a reasonable assumption that
> > > > > > "religion divides the human beings" instead of uniting them?
>
> > > > > > cheers
> > > > > > st13
>
> > > > > > On Nov 13, 5:24 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > My opinion on that. For what it's worth. The collection of my
> > > > > > > knowledge and experience on the matter, which has not been that
> > > high
> > > > > > > level. I'm not a scholar, nor a statesman, although that may be to
> > > my
> > > > > > > advantage. Because I have had formal training in college, but much
> > > of
> > > > > > > my education has been informal as well. An inquisitive mind.
> > > Anyway,
> > > > > > > the short answer is--there can be no universal goals. Religion is
> > > too
> > > > > > > intimately connected with culture and race, and any attempt to
> > > unify
> > > > > > > them will always end in failure.
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 13, 5:54 am, student13 <pairam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Can there be a "universal" goal, since there is no universality
> > > > > > > > in the religions - take any religion as an example and then also
> > > > > > > > consider marketing of religions - one better than the other !!
>
> > > > > > > > cheers
> > > > > > > > st13
>
> > > > > > > > On Nov 9, 9:34 am, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > The universal goal of all religions - including atheistic or
> > > > > > > > > apatheistic ones - is ego-transcendence.
>
> > > > > > > > > Comments?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:18 pm
From: Observer

On Nov 19, 10:42 pm, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 20, 12:48 am, Observer <mayors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 14, 9:34 am, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > There is One Being. Full stop.
>
> > Observer
> > Nonsense ; Full stop
>
> > > That Being --- we call God --- fills the universe with His Glory.
>
> > Observer
> > Nonsense !
>
> > All
>
> > > things, all times and seasons, obey His commands. The very wind and
> > > the sea do not question His commands.
>
> > Observer
> > Nonsense !
>
> > > There are beings, however, who question His commands. They are able
> > > to do so, because they are individuals. Some, but not all, of these
> > > creatures, question the Authority of the One Being. In order to be
> > > capable of questioning at all, requires what we call an individual
> > > soul. Some individual souls question and rebel against the Authority
> > > of the One Being. This rebellion is called sin.
>
> > Observer
> > More utter superstitious nonsense !
>
> > > The Word is the manifestation of the One Being as an individual, and
> > > in the Incarnation, that Word manifested as an individual human soul.
> > > That individual human soul who is the manifestation of the One Being
> > > is known to us as Jesus Christ. Since He is the One Being, He
> > > manifests as the Head of His Body, the Church. Since He is the One
> > > Being, even the wind and the sea do not question His commands; rather,
> > > they obey Him instantly. That is given as an example for us, who
> > > should also obey Him instantly. But Alas! We do not, quite often,
> > > and when we fail to obey the commands of the One, that is sin.
>
> > Observer
>
> > Yawn
>
> > > The Lamb of God, Jesus Christ, came to take away sin. Those who come
> > > to Him have their sins washed away by Him. Those who have their sins
> > > completely washed away enter His Kingdom, the Kingdom of Heaven.
>
> > > The Kingdom of Heaven is the full manifestation of the One Being, in
> > > all His Glory. There, there will be no more questioning of His
> > > Authority or rebellion, for all will be One.
>
> > > Now, you say, "The Body of Christ cannot be explained as a meta-
> > > organism!!" but Saint Paul disagrees with you, since he describes it
> > > in just that way, calling the Church the Body of Christ, and Jesus as
> > > the Head. I didn't make this up.
>
> > > Colossians 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the
> > > beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things he may hold
> > > the primacy: 19 Because in him, it hath well pleased the Father that
> > > all fulness should dwell: 20 And through him to reconcile all things
> > > unto himself, making peace through the blood of his cross, both as to
> > > the things that are on earth and the things that are in heaven. 21 And
> > > you, whereas you were some time alienated and enemies in mind in evil
> > > works: 22 Yet now he hath reconciled in the body of his flesh through
> > > death, to present you holy and unspotted and blameless before him: 23
> > > If so ye continue in the faith, grounded and settled, and immoveable
> > > from the hope of the gospel which you have heard, which is preached in
> > > all the creation that is under heaven: whereof I Paul am made a
> > > minister.
> > > 24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you and fill up those things
> > > that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for his
> > > body, which is the church:
>
> > > Why do you say something is not true, rather than be as love, which
> > > "believeth all things?" (1 Corinthians 13:6)
>
> > Observer
>
> > Joe I hope that you have scientifically verifiable substantiating data
> > for all of the mind vomit you posted here . If you do not then you are
> > to be ridiculed for the dimwitted superstitious village idiot you
> > appear to be.
>
> > Supply such or admit you know not where of you speak.
>
> > Psychonomist
>
> My words are not meant for the likes of you, psycho.

Observer
Do I strike such fear in your uneducated superstitious mind that you
would say such?

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

Psychonomist
>
> Matthew 7:6
>
>
>
> > > On Nov 14, 11:30 am, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 9:33 AM, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Jesus is the Head of His Body, the Church. The Church is a living
> > > > > meta-organism, the next phase of the process of Evolution. Just as
> > > > > eons ago, individual single cells banded together to form colonies,
> > > > > and eventually became full organisms, so now, individual human
> > > > > organisms band together in groups, and one group, the Church, is
> > > > > actually a new meta-organism. Those who will not come to Christ will
> > > > > miss out on this next phase of Evolution, and die as individuals not
> > > > > united with the Body. Hell is the second death.
>
> > > > Huh? Evolution has nothing to do with the second coming of Jesus!
> > > > What kind of -- huh?
> > > > Sorry, but Evolution has nothing to do with going to live with Jesus in
> > > > Eternity. It certainly cannot be explained as another way that Evolution
> > > > will be played out.
> > > > Evolution has to do with this old Earth.
> > > > According to prophecy - There will be a new heavens and a new earth!
> > > > The Body of Christ cannot be explained as a meta-organism!! Worshiping
> > > > Jesus in Spirit and in Truth does not an organism make?~
>
> > > > > On Nov 14, 10:27 am, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Stonethatbleeds <fb...@ncf.ca> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > LIFE =GOD
> > > > > > > LIFE> MANKIND that is life
> > > > > > > what part of that is too complicated for you?
>
> > > > > > Wrong -- *the life of an animal is in the Blood*
> > > > > > Jesus is our sacrifice on the Cross of Calvary - so His Blood can make us
> > > > > > acceptable to God the Father of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
>
> > > > > > I believe Sodom is coming again - because people like you are spouting
> > > > > what
> > > > > > you don't know anything about. Sodom didn't believe in the God of
> > > > > Abraham
> > > > > > and so were destroyed because of Apostacy.
>
> > > > > > You will be destroyed also, because you fail to understand that Jesus is
> > > > > the
> > > > > > only way to heaven!!
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 13, 11:30 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > But this sounds like racism.
>
> > > > > > > > On Nov 13, 8:26 pm, Stonethatbleeds <fb...@ncf.ca> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > There is only one single goal, and it transcends all the humans
> > > > > silly
> > > > > > > > > lesser mind games. The one goal is to seed life on new worlds that
> > > > > we
> > > > > > > > > find more and more of them all the time to thirst the mind of
> > > > > HUMANITY
> > > > > > > > > to reach them... in time. ALl focus away from that is cancer to
> > > > > life
> > > > > > > > > destroying the future of life from Earth...and massif sin.
>
> > > > > > > > > On Nov 13, 10:06 pm, student13 <pairam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > that is interesting.
>
> > > > > > > > > > you say that "there can be no universal goal(s).
>
> > > > > > > > > > if it is so, could it be a reasonable assumption that
> > > > > > > > > > "religion divides the human beings" instead of uniting them?
>
> > > > > > > > > > cheers
> > > > > > > > > > st13
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Nov 13, 5:24 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > My opinion on that. For what it's worth. The collection of my
> > > > > > > > > > > knowledge and experience on the matter, which has not been that
> > > > > > > high
> > > > > > > > > > > level. I'm not a scholar, nor a statesman, although that may be
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > my
> > > > > > > > > > > advantage. Because I have had formal training in college, but
> > > > > much
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > my education has been informal as well. An inquisitive mind.
> > > > > > > Anyway,
> > > > > > > > > > > the short answer is--there can be no universal goals. Religion
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > too
> > > > > > > > > > > intimately connected with culture and race, and any attempt to
> > > > > > > unify
> > > > > > > > > > > them will always end in failure.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 13, 5:54 am, student13 <pairam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Can there be a "universal" goal, since there is no
> > > > > universality
> > > > > > > > > > > > in the religions - take any religion as an example and then
> > > > > also
> > > > > > > > > > > > consider marketing of religions - one better than the other
> > > > > !!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > cheers
> > > > > > > > > > > > st13
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 9, 9:34 am, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > The universal goal of all religions - including atheistic
> > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > > > > > apatheistic ones - is ego-transcendence.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Comments?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

==============================================================================
TOPIC: are you an atheist by choice?
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/c2b693c490978321?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:26 pm
From: Observer

On Nov 30, 12:26 pm, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks, and enjoy your life.

Observer
I accuse you of abject cowardice and an unwillingness to attempt to
defend what you THINK you believe in .
What good is a Christian who will not fight to permute belief in his/
her superstitious filth? A great deal of good . You do us all a great
service for in doing so it shows how empty are your claims for your
superstitious filth. Run you craven coward help those of clean
atheistic minds crush out your filthy superstition. Run !

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha
>
> On Nov 30, 7:52 am, Observer <mayors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 29, 2:23 pm, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Observer, this is Joe. Your comments on my post properly belong
> > > directed to me, not Chris.
>
> > > Now, with more respect to you than you have given me, I am familiar
> > > with the psychological structures of my own mind and the human mind in
> > > general of which you speak. I know about behavior reinforcement by
> > > reward.
>
> > Observer
> > What do you know of endoginous opiates and their adictive nature?
>
> > I understand why I commit the sins I commit. I understand
>
> > > why it is not possible for me to overcome them all on my own.
>
> > Observer
> > Please delineate the specificity of events which disallow such
> > behavioral modifications in you when millions of people all over the
> > globe make such modifications each and every day.
>
> > Would you care to take a trip to the Scandinavian countries and
> > witness the good life produced by good thinking people among which are
> > the largest activist atheists in the world.
>
> > They do not live problem free but have eliminated many which you
> > Christians embrace as part of your human hating/original sin concept.
>
> > > I acknowledge in fact that it is not possible for me to anything at
> > > all "all on my own," as if I were some independent entity unconnected
> > > with the rest of the world.
>
> > Observer
> > Look Joe, you are lost in a world of idiotic concepts. You are
> > perfectly free to do whatever you wish with in the realm of personal
> > potentialities and the constraints of your environment.
>
> > I acknowledge that the whole world is
>
> > > profoundly interconnected and there is no such thing as an
> > > independently arising autonomous entity.
>
> > Observer
> > Well then , Joe It is time to signe over all that you own to the
> > church and lay down now for the humiliation that , by virtue of your
> > thoughts of helplesness have so richly earned. Or Joe, you could come
> > off of your high horse in relation to your supposed self knowledge ,
> > and equally suposed knowoledge of human behaviour and get some
> > professional help from those scientists who are actualy trained in the
> > mental health and medical field.
>
> > I cannot eat on my own; I
>
> > > have to obtain food from the world in order to eat. I cannot breathe
> > > all on my own, I have to inhale ambient air in order to breathe.
> > > Similarly for anything I might do. I cannot even come up with a
> > > solitary original thought; the most I can do is rearrange the atoms of
> > > thought with which I am already familiar into possibly new ways, new
> > > at least to my experience. I believe that anyone who does believe
> > > himself to be a completely separate entity is a fool. But I digress.
>
> > Observer
> > Get professional help Joe . You are truly fucked up and are in dire
> > need of such.
>
> > > I understand why I commit the behaviors I call sins; there is pleasure
> > > of some kind that I take in them. I understand why I desire to stop
> > > committing those behaviors; I perceive the potential of a deeper
> > > happiness involving psychological freedom.
>
> > Observer
> > You look into superstitious filth in search of psychological freedom?
> > That Joe is a symptome of the problems you are trying to solve.
>
> >   I have experienced the
>
> > > happiness of that freedom for finite periods of time, and I wish to
> > > extend those periods so as to more steadily experience that freedom.
>
> > Observer
> > You have experienced the powerful reactions to endogenous opiates
> > released into your body at the behest the central nervous system. But
> > let me tell you Joe, you don't have to give them up to deal with life
> > rationally and to direct your behavior to wards more reward inf
> > scenarios. All people who meditate experience these and can do so for
> > prolonged periods of time while living productive lives devoid of
> > superstitious filth and the utter stupidity of religions myths.
>
> > > I understand why it is difficult to overcome the sins I commit; there
> > > is a cyclic element in the experience of the pleasure and then the
> > > fading of that experience and then the desire for the sin again.
>
> > Observer
> > Nope ! Get a mental health evaluation from nonbiased trained
> > professionals with an MD after his/her/their name(s)
>
> > I
>
> > > perceive that the experience of freedom from that cycle for longer
> > > times does increase my deeper happiness.
>
> > Observer
> > You are just a drug junkie ,Joe.
> > And I find that the practice
>
> > > of Catholicism according to the methods of the Saints helps me to
> > > extend those periods of freedom for longer times.
>
> > Increases the flow of Peptides Joe. Catholicism is a really stupid
> > superstitious/Mafia/criminal organization . I escaped from the filth
> > of the sewer of Catholic/Christian morbidity and so can you. I have ,
> > for decades , lived a life of ethical relationships and productive
> > conduct sense I rejected this horrid filth. I no longer battle with
> > my self as to what is should or should not do and I am able to enjoy
> > the good life for its own sake with out the need of a threat or reward
> > from the fictive sadomasochistic monster you so mindlessly worship.
>
> > > It seems, from what you have said below, that you yourself practiced
> > > Catholicism and were disappointed at the results.
>
> > Observer
> > I was disappointed that I could have ever been so intellectually
> > maladroit as to believe the most completely stupid story ever told ,
> > The new testament upon which your superstitious filth and your god
> > fraud are based.
>
> > My experience has
>
> > > not been similar. I do not know what results you were seeking and
> > > whether you goals were similar to mine, and if they were, then why you
> > > did not experience results that match up with mine.
>
> > Observer
> > Oh but Joe they did match up I experienced the the reactions to the
> > endogenous opiates. Only I went further and found out just what was
> > going on and that there was no god necessary to the equation. For
> > Example I learned to produce these peptides by following instructions
> > given by the Aphorisms of Patañjali . (no god thing necessary) (and
> > incidentally if you are one of the really stupid I will explain that
> > no demons were necessary either) It is simply a natural biological
> > process.
>
> > I can only
>
> > > suggest that perhaps our goals may be different, and perhaps our
> > > methods may be different.
>
> > Observer
> > Oh yes our goals were different in that I had no desire to be consumed
> > by stupidity when rational applications of good sense and education
> > could resolve issues for me with out such.
>
> >   I take the goal and the method both from
>
> > > the writings of the Saints.
>
> > Observer
> > The saints were fucking morons who for the most part had no vague idea
> > as to the actualities of our world. Having read many of the works
> > attributed to your so called saints I find them a rather mindless
> > bunch of heathens who have been given a title which is neither
> > accurate nor has any counterpart in any actuality. (not acknowledging
> > the existence of such as a saint as even the concept of such is
> > stupidity)
>
> >   I do not believe Catholicism was designed
>
> > > with any other purpose in mind, so if you attempted to make it fulfill
> > > some other purpose, then perhaps your unsuccess is adequately
> > > explained in that way.
>
> > Observer
> > Joe Catholicism is just an other in a long line of idiotic
> > superstitious and represents the best and final bastion of human
> > ignorance which is the the greatest enemy of mankind.
>
> > If ever there was an aproximation of pure evil it would by this
> > hideous filth .
>
> > > Your language below is still derisive, still mocking of what you fail
> > > to understand, and you have less excuse than most because you claim to
> > > have been familiar with the very system of which I speak. But just as
> > > there are Londoners who have never in their lives visited Big Ben, so
> > > there are (apparently) Catholics who have never taken advantage of
> > > what the Church has to offer. But I will quote some of your comments
> > > from below here so as to reply to them, and I will do it with boots
> > > pulled up so as not to step in the bullshit of your mockery.
>
> > > You write:
>
> > > "These are not people who can turn a simple story of what they
> > > believed they accomplished through the "god magic" approach to living
> > > into a spell that you can use to do what they *allegedly * did."
>
> > > You refer to the Catholic Saints. Your phrase 'the "god magic"
> > > approach to living' should properly be rendered, "grace." Your term
> > > "spell" should properly be rendered "method."
>
> > Observer]
> > Sorry Joe but it is just as I have said . If you think otherwise then
> > supply us with scientifically verifiable substantiating data for the
> > existence or any act of any god ever. With out such your opinion of
> > grace is but speculation based on superstitious crap. Further ,Joe ,in
> > the absence of any substantiation of the existence of a god there is
> > only an appeal to incantations intended to evoke god spells .
>
> > > Then your statement is no longer rude and mocking, simply incorrect:
>
> > Observer
>
> > The burden of proof , Joe , falls to the superstitious believers in a
> > make believe god thing , in things metaphysical, and in the utter
> > stupidity of the new testament.
>
> > Why do you believe such unsupportable crap?
>
> > > "These are not people who can turn a simple story of what they
> > > believed they accomplished through grace into a method that you can
> > > use to do what they *allegedly * did."
>
> > > It is still clumsily worded and inaccurate, but I believe I get your
> > > gist.
>
> > Observer
> > Neither
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:30 pm
From: Ward Yung

I wish it were that simple, and I think world leaders are thinking the
same thing everywhere, "why don't we just nuclear holocaust this place
and start over, I'm sick of this American brand".

On Nov 30, 10:26 pm, Observer <mayors...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 30, 12:26 pm, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks, and enjoy your life.
>
> Observer
> I accuse you of abject cowardice and an unwillingness to attempt to
> defend what you THINK you believe in .
> What good is a Christian who will not fight to permute belief in his/
> her superstitious filth? A great deal of good . You do us all a great
> service for in doing so it shows how empty are your claims for your
> superstitious filth. Run you craven coward help those of clean
> atheistic minds crush out your filthy superstition. Run !
>
> Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 30, 7:52 am, Observer <mayors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 29, 2:23 pm, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Observer, this is Joe. Your comments on my post properly belong
> > > > directed to me, not Chris.
>
> > > > Now, with more respect to you than you have given me, I am familiar
> > > > with the psychological structures of my own mind and the human mind in
> > > > general of which you speak. I know about behavior reinforcement by
> > > > reward.
>
> > > Observer
> > > What do you know of endoginous opiates and their adictive nature?
>
> > > I understand why I commit the sins I commit. I understand
>
> > > > why it is not possible for me to overcome them all on my own.
>
> > > Observer
> > > Please delineate the specificity of events which disallow such
> > > behavioral modifications in you when millions of people all over the
> > > globe make such modifications each and every day.
>
> > > Would you care to take a trip to the Scandinavian countries and
> > > witness the good life produced by good thinking people among which are
> > > the largest activist atheists in the world.
>
> > > They do not live problem free but have eliminated many which you
> > > Christians embrace as part of your human hating/original sin concept.
>
> > > > I acknowledge in fact that it is not possible for me to anything at
> > > > all "all on my own," as if I were some independent entity unconnected
> > > > with the rest of the world.
>
> > > Observer
> > > Look Joe, you are lost in a world of idiotic concepts. You are
> > > perfectly free to do whatever you wish with in the realm of personal
> > > potentialities and the constraints of your environment.
>
> > > I acknowledge that the whole world is
>
> > > > profoundly interconnected and there is no such thing as an
> > > > independently arising autonomous entity.
>
> > > Observer
> > > Well then , Joe It is time to signe over all that you own to the
> > > church and lay down now for the humiliation that , by virtue of your
> > > thoughts of helplesness have so richly earned. Or Joe, you could come
> > > off of your high horse in relation to your supposed self knowledge ,
> > > and equally suposed knowoledge of human behaviour and get some
> > > professional help from those scientists who are actualy trained in the
> > > mental health and medical field.
>
> > > I cannot eat on my own; I
>
> > > > have to obtain food from the world in order to eat. I cannot breathe
> > > > all on my own, I have to inhale ambient air in order to breathe.
> > > > Similarly for anything I might do. I cannot even come up with a
> > > > solitary original thought; the most I can do is rearrange the atoms of
> > > > thought with which I am already familiar into possibly new ways, new
> > > > at least to my experience. I believe that anyone who does believe
> > > > himself to be a completely separate entity is a fool. But I digress.
>
> > > Observer
> > > Get professional help Joe . You are truly fucked up and are in dire
> > > need of such.
>
> > > > I understand why I commit the behaviors I call sins; there is pleasure
> > > > of some kind that I take in them. I understand why I desire to stop
> > > > committing those behaviors; I perceive the potential of a deeper
> > > > happiness involving psychological freedom.
>
> > > Observer
> > > You look into superstitious filth in search of psychological freedom?
> > > That Joe is a symptome of the problems you are trying to solve.
>
> > >   I have experienced the
>
> > > > happiness of that freedom for finite periods of time, and I wish to
> > > > extend those periods so as to more steadily experience that freedom.
>
> > > Observer
> > > You have experienced the powerful reactions to endogenous opiates
> > > released into your body at the behest the central nervous system. But
> > > let me tell you Joe, you don't have to give them up to deal with life
> > > rationally and to direct your behavior to wards more reward inf
> > > scenarios. All people who meditate experience these and can do so for
> > > prolonged periods of time while living productive lives devoid of
> > > superstitious filth and the utter stupidity of religions myths.
>
> > > > I understand why it is difficult to overcome the sins I commit; there
> > > > is a cyclic element in the experience of the pleasure and then the
> > > > fading of that experience and then the desire for the sin again.
>
> > > Observer
> > > Nope ! Get a mental health evaluation from nonbiased trained
> > > professionals with an MD after his/her/their name(s)
>
> > > I
>
> > > > perceive that the experience of freedom from that cycle for longer
> > > > times does increase my deeper happiness.
>
> > > Observer
> > > You are just a drug junkie ,Joe.
> > > And I find that the practice
>
> > > > of Catholicism according to the methods of the Saints helps me to
> > > > extend those periods of freedom for longer times.
>
> > > Increases the flow of Peptides Joe. Catholicism is a really stupid
> > > superstitious/Mafia/criminal organization . I escaped from the filth
> > > of the sewer of Catholic/Christian morbidity and so can you. I have ,
> > > for decades , lived a life of ethical relationships and productive
> > > conduct sense I rejected this horrid filth. I no longer battle with
> > > my self as to what is should or should not do and I am able to enjoy
> > > the good life for its own sake with out the need of a threat or reward
> > > from the fictive sadomasochistic monster you so mindlessly worship.
>
> > > > It seems, from what you have said below, that you yourself practiced
> > > > Catholicism and were disappointed at the results.
>
> > > Observer
> > > I was disappointed that I could have ever been so intellectually
> > > maladroit as to believe the most completely stupid story ever told ,
> > > The new testament upon which your superstitious filth and your god
> > > fraud are based.
>
> > > My experience has
>
> > > > not been similar. I do not know what results you were seeking and
> > > > whether you goals were similar to mine, and if they were, then why you
> > > > did not experience results that match up with mine.
>
> > > Observer
> > > Oh but Joe they did match up I experienced the the reactions to the
> > > endogenous opiates. Only I went further and found out just what was
> > > going on and that there was no god necessary to the equation. For
> > > Example I learned to produce these peptides by following instructions
> > > given by the Aphorisms of Patañjali . (no god thing necessary) (and
> > > incidentally if you are one of the really stupid I will explain that
> > > no demons were necessary either) It is simply a natural biological
> > > process.
>
> > > I can only
>
> > > > suggest that perhaps our goals may be different, and perhaps our
> > > > methods may be different.
>
> > > Observer
> > > Oh yes our goals were different in that I had no desire to be consumed
> > > by stupidity when rational applications of good sense and education
> > > could resolve issues for me with out such.
>
> > >   I take the goal and the method both from
>
> > > > the writings of the Saints.
>
> > > Observer
> > > The saints were fucking morons who for the most part had no vague idea
> > > as to the actualities of our world. Having read many of the works
> > > attributed to your so called saints I find them a rather mindless
> > > bunch of heathens who have been given a title which is neither
> > > accurate nor has any counterpart in any actuality. (not acknowledging
> > > the existence of such as a saint as even the concept of such is
> > > stupidity)
>
> > >   I do not believe Catholicism was designed
>
> > > > with any other purpose in mind, so if you attempted to make it fulfill
> > > > some other purpose, then perhaps your unsuccess is adequately
> > > > explained in that way.
>
> > > Observer
> > > Joe Catholicism is just an other in a long line of idiotic
> > > superstitious and represents the best and final bastion of human
> > > ignorance which is the the greatest enemy of mankind.
>
> > > If ever there was an aproximation of pure evil it would by this
> > > hideous filth .
>
> > > > Your language below is still derisive, still mocking of what you fail
> > > > to understand, and you have less excuse than most because you claim to
> > > > have been familiar with the very system of which I speak. But just as
> > > > there are Londoners who have never in their lives visited Big Ben, so
> > > > there are (apparently) Catholics who have never taken advantage of
> > > > what the Church has to offer. But I will quote some of your comments
> > > > from below here so as to reply to them, and I will do it with boots
> > > > pulled up so as not to step in the bullshit of your mockery.
>
> > > > You write:
>
> > > > "These are not people who can turn a simple story of what they
> > > > believed they accomplished through the "god magic" approach to living
> > > > into a spell that you can use to do what they *allegedly * did."
>
> > > > You refer to the Catholic Saints. Your phrase 'the "god magic"
> > > > approach to living' should properly be rendered, "grace." Your term
> > > > "spell" should properly be rendered "method."
>
> > > Observer]
> > > Sorry Joe but it is just as I have said . If you think otherwise then
> > > supply us with scientifically verifiable substantiating data for the
> > > existence or any act of any god ever. With out such your opinion of
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Would anyone like to answer a few questions to help me with an
assignment?
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/a75af2e0fdb0a477?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:40 pm
From: "kosterbrandon@gmail.com"

It's fun and all to have fun and call each other queers, but is anyone
willing to answer the questions?

On Nov 30, 10:02 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> And this, from queen queer.
>
> On Nov 30, 9:46 pm, Expulsive <TomAnders...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Ward has deep issues and probably is in need of psychiatric treatment
> > - just ignore that kind of no-intellect and no-talent poison. Ward is
> > dismissed and given to God in prayer. God Speed Ward, to wherever the
> > hell you're going - I'd wager its jail.
>
> > On Dec 1, 12:33 am, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > The standard response would be "fuck you, you're retarded, who the
> > > fuck are you, what possessed you to seek our help in the first place,
> > > don't you know we're a bunch of queer devil-worshipers, if you can put
> > > up with this abuse...", and watch out for that Maxy guy--he's got a
> > > mean streak, "...well, hey then welcome to the club. We're just a
> > > bunch of losers, who like ranking down all the other losers."
>
> > > Welcome to the ward.
>
> > > On Nov 30, 9:15 pm, "kosterbran...@gmail.com"
>
> > > <kosterbran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi, I'm new and I need to interview a non-Christian using the 20
> > > > questions I posted in the files section. I will use your responses to
> > > > write a paper. You can just give your response in the document and
> > > > send it it me if you like.
> > > > Thanks for the help,
> > > > Brandon- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:42 pm
From: "kosterbrandon@gmail.com"

Where did my document go? I don't see it in the files sections
anymore.

On Nov 30, 10:40 pm, "kosterbran...@gmail.com"
<kosterbran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's fun and all to have fun and call each other queers, but is anyone
> willing to answer the questions?
>
> On Nov 30, 10:02 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > And this, from queen queer.
>
> > On Nov 30, 9:46 pm, Expulsive <TomAnders...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Ward has deep issues and probably is in need of psychiatric treatment
> > > - just ignore that kind of no-intellect and no-talent poison. Ward is
> > > dismissed and given to God in prayer. God Speed Ward, to wherever the
> > > hell you're going - I'd wager its jail.
>
> > > On Dec 1, 12:33 am, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > The standard response would be "fuck you, you're retarded, who the
> > > > fuck are you, what possessed you to seek our help in the first place,
> > > > don't you know we're a bunch of queer devil-worshipers, if you can put
> > > > up with this abuse...", and watch out for that Maxy guy--he's got a
> > > > mean streak, "...well, hey then welcome to the club. We're just a
> > > > bunch of losers, who like ranking down all the other losers."
>
> > > > Welcome to the ward.
>
> > > > On Nov 30, 9:15 pm, "kosterbran...@gmail.com"
>
> > > > <kosterbran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi, I'm new and I need to interview a non-Christian using the 20
> > > > > questions I posted in the files section. I will use your responses to
> > > > > write a paper. You can just give your response in the document and
> > > > > send it it me if you like.
> > > > > Thanks for the help,
> > > > > Brandon- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:49 pm
From: "kosterbrandon@gmail.com"

My bad, I see it now

On Nov 30, 10:42 pm, "kosterbran...@gmail.com"
<kosterbran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Where did my document go? I don't see it in the files sections
> anymore.
>
> On Nov 30, 10:40 pm, "kosterbran...@gmail.com"
>
> <kosterbran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It's fun and all to have fun and call each other queers, but is anyone
> > willing to answer the questions?
>
> > On Nov 30, 10:02 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > And this, from queen queer.
>
> > > On Nov 30, 9:46 pm, Expulsive <TomAnders...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Ward has deep issues and probably is in need of psychiatric treatment
> > > > - just ignore that kind of no-intellect and no-talent poison. Ward is
> > > > dismissed and given to God in prayer. God Speed Ward, to wherever the
> > > > hell you're going - I'd wager its jail.
>
> > > > On Dec 1, 12:33 am, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > The standard response would be "fuck you, you're retarded, who the
> > > > > fuck are you, what possessed you to seek our help in the first place,
> > > > > don't you know we're a bunch of queer devil-worshipers, if you can put
> > > > > up with this abuse...", and watch out for that Maxy guy--he's got a
> > > > > mean streak, "...well, hey then welcome to the club. We're just a
> > > > > bunch of losers, who like ranking down all the other losers."
>
> > > > > Welcome to the ward.
>
> > > > > On Nov 30, 9:15 pm, "kosterbran...@gmail.com"
>
> > > > > <kosterbran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi, I'm new and I need to interview a non-Christian using the 20
> > > > > > questions I posted in the files section. I will use your responses to
> > > > > > write a paper. You can just give your response in the document and
> > > > > > send it it me if you like.
> > > > > > Thanks for the help,
> > > > > > Brandon- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Atheism-vs-Christianity@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Please help me understand. - 4 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/4ccde3b062522deb?hl=en
* Would anyone like to answer a few questions to help me with an assignment? -
7 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/a75af2e0fdb0a477?hl=en
* Wardens summary - 11 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/78b3d29f63d4239e?hl=en
* What do literalist Christians think of Deists? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/14ba79abce999a44?hl=en
* In defence of non-people - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/73819e9ca83577d0?hl=en
* The universal goal of all religions - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/91a5baee4c6f6c15?hl=en

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 8:09 pm
From: Ruthie

I am just so confused. The bible never made sense to me. The things
written were horrible. Revelations makes me scared. Please someone
tell me how A god who loves us would treat us this way. Please someone
explaine the truth about other saviors with similar stories to christ.
I am tired of lies. I want the truth. Once someone can show me the
truth,that the bible is true than I will ask to be saved. I have
asked lots of times to be saved and nothing happened.

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:29 pm
From: Dag Yo

Welcome Ruthie...I'm curious how anyone will respond.

On Nov 30, 8:09 pm, Ruthie <willruthie1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I am just so confused. The bible never made sense to me. The things
> written were horrible. Revelations makes me scared. Please someone
> tell me how A god who loves us would treat us this way. Please someone
> explaine the truth about other saviors with similar stories to christ.
> I am tired of lies. I want the truth. Once someone can show me the
> truth,that the bible is true than I will ask to be saved. I have
> asked lots of times to be saved and nothing happened.

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:34 pm
From: Expulsive

It is good that you're confused - if you are not confused then you
have put your brain on a shelf somewhere.
Your questions are excellent but what you ask could fill a thousand
books and, indeed, an uncountable number of books have been written on
the questions you pose. Take a walk through a good seminary library
and read the titles of books on just one half of a shelf. Your
questions are not new and the number of books written indicate that
the answers you seek have been different for different people of
different times.
The Bible is a book. It was written by people who sought the
ultimate truth - God - and they failed because of their human
limitations. Those acts that have been attributed to God were, in
reality, human and random acts that are natural to humans and nature,
but were BLAMED on God. God did not do those horrible things, people
or the environment did. People did horrible things in the name of God
because they felt that they understood God better than others. People
blamed God for their punishment after they did stupid things, not
unlike today when we question God as a good friend dies of Cancer when
we created the disease with our pollution and chemicals. The Cancer
isn't God's fault, its ours. We were given this world and one another
to take care of and, instead, we poison and pollute everything because
of our pride and greed.
If you want to be saved, don't look for someone to do it for
you. There is no magic - but there is mystery and if you want to be
saved you need to first know yourself.

On Nov 30, 11:09 pm, Ruthie <willruthie1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I am just so confused. The bible never made sense to me. The things
> written were horrible. Revelations makes me scared. Please someone
> tell me how A god who loves us would treat us this way. Please someone
> explaine the truth about other saviors with similar stories to christ.
> I am tired of lies. I want the truth. Once someone can show me the
> truth,that the bible is true than I will ask to be saved. I have
> asked lots of times to be saved and nothing happened.

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:04 pm
From: Dag Yo

> The Bible is a book. It was written by people who sought the
> ultimate truth - God - and they failed because of their human
> limitations.
Of course they also failed because God is make-believe.

== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:15 pm
From: "kosterbrandon@gmail.com"

Hi, I'm new and I need to interview a non-Christian using the 20
questions I posted in the files section. I will use your responses to
write a paper. You can just give your response in the document and
send it it me if you like.
Thanks for the help,
Brandon

== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:32 pm
From: Dag Yo

For anyone curious, the file is called: "Thank you to all who
responded to my post.doc".

On Nov 30, 9:15 pm, "kosterbran...@gmail.com"
<kosterbran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, I'm new and I need to interview a non-Christian using the 20
> questions I posted in the files section. I will use your responses to
> write a paper. You can just give your response in the document and
> send it it me if you like.
> Thanks for the help,
> Brandon

== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:33 pm
From: Ward Yung

The standard response would be "fuck you, you're retarded, who the
fuck are you, what possessed you to seek our help in the first place,
don't you know we're a bunch of queer devil-worshipers, if you can put
up with this abuse...", and watch out for that Maxy guy--he's got a
mean streak, "...well, hey then welcome to the club. We're just a
bunch of losers, who like ranking down all the other losers."

Welcome to the ward.

== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:57 pm
From: "kosterbrandon@gmail.com"

Thanks for the welcome:) I don't want to call you devil worshipers
and I can handle the abuse. I just need to have one more person
answer the questions. It is due Tuesday, but I need to still write a
response after others respond to the questions. Thanks for responding
to the post.

On Nov 30, 9:33 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The standard response would be "fuck you, you're retarded, who the
> fuck are you, what possessed you to seek our help in the first place,
> don't you know we're a bunch of queer devil-worshipers, if you can put
> up with this abuse...", and watch out for that Maxy guy--he's got a
> mean streak, "...well, hey then welcome to the club. We're just a
> bunch of losers, who like ranking down all the other losers."
>
> Welcome to the ward.
>
> On Nov 30, 9:15 pm, "kosterbran...@gmail.com"
>
> <kosterbran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi, I'm new and I need to interview a non-Christian using the 20
> > questions I posted in the files section. I will use your responses to
> > write a paper. You can just give your response in the document and
> > send it it me if you like.
> > Thanks for the help,
> > Brandon

== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:59 pm
From: Ward Yung

But your just not queer enough yet, so just hang around a little bit
longer and it will rub off on you, and then anyone would be just
jubilascious to help.

On Nov 30, 9:57 pm, "kosterbran...@gmail.com"
<kosterbran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the welcome:) I don't want to call you devil worshipers
> and I can handle the abuse. I just need to have one more person
> answer the questions. It is due Tuesday, but I need to still write a
> response after others respond to the questions. Thanks for responding
> to the post.
>
> On Nov 30, 9:33 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > The standard response would be "fuck you, you're retarded, who the
> > fuck are you, what possessed you to seek our help in the first place,
> > don't you know we're a bunch of queer devil-worshipers, if you can put
> > up with this abuse...", and watch out for that Maxy guy--he's got a
> > mean streak, "...well, hey then welcome to the club. We're just a
> > bunch of losers, who like ranking down all the other losers."
>
> > Welcome to the ward.
>
> > On Nov 30, 9:15 pm, "kosterbran...@gmail.com"
>
> > <kosterbran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi, I'm new and I need to interview a non-Christian using the 20
> > > questions I posted in the files section. I will use your responses to
> > > write a paper. You can just give your response in the document and
> > > send it it me if you like.
> > > Thanks for the help,
> > > Brandon- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:46 pm
From: Expulsive

Ward has deep issues and probably is in need of psychiatric treatment
- just ignore that kind of no-intellect and no-talent poison. Ward is
dismissed and given to God in prayer. God Speed Ward, to wherever the
hell you're going - I'd wager its jail.

On Dec 1, 12:33 am, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The standard response would be "fuck you, you're retarded, who the
> fuck are you, what possessed you to seek our help in the first place,
> don't you know we're a bunch of queer devil-worshipers, if you can put
> up with this abuse...", and watch out for that Maxy guy--he's got a
> mean streak, "...well, hey then welcome to the club. We're just a
> bunch of losers, who like ranking down all the other losers."
>
> Welcome to the ward.
>
> On Nov 30, 9:15 pm, "kosterbran...@gmail.com"
>
> <kosterbran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi, I'm new and I need to interview a non-Christian using the 20
> > questions I posted in the files section. I will use your responses to
> > write a paper. You can just give your response in the document and
> > send it it me if you like.
> > Thanks for the help,
> > Brandon

== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:02 pm
From: Ward Yung

And this, from queen queer.

On Nov 30, 9:46 pm, Expulsive <TomAnders...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ward has deep issues and probably is in need of psychiatric treatment
> - just ignore that kind of no-intellect and no-talent poison. Ward is
> dismissed and given to God in prayer. God Speed Ward, to wherever the
> hell you're going - I'd wager its jail.
>
> On Dec 1, 12:33 am, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > The standard response would be "fuck you, you're retarded, who the
> > fuck are you, what possessed you to seek our help in the first place,
> > don't you know we're a bunch of queer devil-worshipers, if you can put
> > up with this abuse...", and watch out for that Maxy guy--he's got a
> > mean streak, "...well, hey then welcome to the club. We're just a
> > bunch of losers, who like ranking down all the other losers."
>
> > Welcome to the ward.
>
> > On Nov 30, 9:15 pm, "kosterbran...@gmail.com"
>
> > <kosterbran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi, I'm new and I need to interview a non-Christian using the 20
> > > questions I posted in the files section. I will use your responses to
> > > write a paper. You can just give your response in the document and
> > > send it it me if you like.
> > > Thanks for the help,
> > > Brandon- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 1 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:18 pm
From: Ward Yung

Well,

Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
a coward to do. You would see things different.

On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> But I didn't see it.
>
> Max
>
> On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > have managed.
>
> > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > Max
>
> > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Ay,
>
> > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > ward
>
> > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > that
> > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > Max
>
> > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 2 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:31 pm
From: Max

Ward, stop for a minute and think about what your saying here...

It was Dev who called you a 'stupid little cunt", not me. It's there
in print. We know this because I (& I feel a bit silly about it now)
actually remarked on it to Dev, in that it was an unnecessary thing to
do etc etc.

But since, I have seen no repudiation coming form you at all and all
smiles with him since. Now, I don't read every post or thread in this
GG, so I can't say for certain that you didn't cross swords with Dev
and give him a serve. But if you did, I said I'd apologise etc.

So you conclude this by saying I'm a coward (why) and previously a
Drama Queen. Good on ya!. So, if you like to do this silly stuff,
fine...I can waste a few minutes every now & again, however Ward, the
Dev issue is one that he & I are dealing with.

You don't need to stick your bib in. You really don't.

Oh lastly, How would I "see things different"?

Max

On Dec 1, 3:18 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well,
>
> Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
> a coward to do. You would see things different.
>
> On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> > haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> > incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> > I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> > But I didn't see it.
>
> > Max
>
> > On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > > have managed.
>
> > > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > > Max
>
> > > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Ay,
>
> > > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > > ward
>
> > > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 3 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:35 pm
From: Ward Yung

Max,

Your a putz. I don't even read your drivel. I give you no credibility
whatsoever. Your a loser.

ward

== 4 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:41 pm
From: Max

You do read my posts Ward. You just won't answer this last one
honestly that's all. Seems to be catching. But that's OK, you're a
lightweight anyway.....and Dev at least has a bit stamina for the
rough & tumble here. You can serve it up, but can't cop it.

Run away.

Max

On Dec 1, 3:35 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Max,
>
> Your a putz. I don't even read your drivel. I give you no credibility
> whatsoever. Your a loser.
>
> ward
>
> On Nov 30, 9:31 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Ward, stop for a minute and think about what your saying here...
>
> > It was Dev who called you a 'stupid little cunt", not me. It's there
> > in print. We know this because I (& I feel a bit silly about it now)
> > actually remarked on it to Dev, in that it was an unnecessary thing to
> > do etc etc.
>
> > But since, I have seen no repudiation coming form you at all and all
> > smiles with him since. Now, I don't read every post or thread in this
> > GG, so I can't say for certain that you didn't cross swords with Dev
> > and give him a serve. But if you did, I said I'd apologise etc.
>
> > So you conclude this by saying I'm a coward (why) and previously a
> > Drama Queen. Good on ya!. So, if you like to do this silly stuff,
> > fine...I can waste a few minutes every now & again, however Ward, the
> > Dev issue is one that he & I are dealing with.
>
> > You don't need to stick your bib in. You really don't.
>
> > Oh lastly, How would I "see things different"?
>
> > Max
>
> > On Dec 1, 3:18 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Well,
>
> > > Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
> > > a coward to do. You would see things different.
>
> > > On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> > > > haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> > > > incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> > > > I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> > > > But I didn't see it.
>
> > > > Max
>
> > > > On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > > > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > > > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > > > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > > > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > > > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > > > > have managed.
>
> > > > > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > > > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > > > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > > > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > > > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > > > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > > > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > > > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Ay,
>
> > > > > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > > > > ward
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 5 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:43 pm
From: Ward Yung

blah, blah, blah...

== 6 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:49 pm
From: Max

Dev,

Scrapin' the bottom of the barrel with your new recruits now eh mate.
But I can talk all I like about Ward now, 'cause he don't read my
posts apparently. That's a plus. He was scary.

Are you going to answer my question. Scroll up.

Max

On Dec 1, 3:43 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> blah, blah, blah...
>
> On Nov 30, 9:31 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Ward, stop for a minute and think about what your saying here...
>
> > It was Dev who called you a 'stupid little cunt", not me. It's there
> > in print. We know this because I (& I feel a bit silly about it now)
> > actually remarked on it to Dev, in that it was an unnecessary thing to
> > do etc etc.
>
> > But since, I have seen no repudiation coming form you at all and all
> > smiles with him since. Now, I don't read every post or thread in this
> > GG, so I can't say for certain that you didn't cross swords with Dev
> > and give him a serve. But if you did, I said I'd apologise etc.
>
> > So you conclude this by saying I'm a coward (why) and previously a
> > Drama Queen. Good on ya!. So, if you like to do this silly stuff,
> > fine...I can waste a few minutes every now & again, however Ward, the
> > Dev issue is one that he & I are dealing with.
>
> > You don't need to stick your bib in. You really don't.
>
> > Oh lastly, How would I "see things different"?
>
> > Max
>
> > On Dec 1, 3:18 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Well,
>
> > > Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
> > > a coward to do. You would see things different.
>
> > > On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> > > > haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> > > > incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> > > > I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> > > > But I didn't see it.
>
> > > > Max
>
> > > > On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > > > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > > > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > > > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > > > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > > > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > > > > have managed.
>
> > > > > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > > > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > > > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > > > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > > > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > > > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > > > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > > > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Ay,
>
> > > > > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > > > > ward
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 7 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:51 pm
From: Ward Yung

max,

blah--head nod, blah--head nod, blah--head nod,

ward

On Nov 30, 9:49 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Dev,
>
> Scrapin' the bottom of the barrel with your new recruits now eh mate.
> But I can talk all I like about Ward now, 'cause he don't read my
> posts apparently. That's a plus. He was scary.
>
> Are you going to answer my question. Scroll up.
>
> Max
>
> On Dec 1, 3:43 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > On Nov 30, 9:31 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > Ward, stop for a minute and think about what your saying here...
>
> > > It was Dev who called you a 'stupid little cunt", not me. It's there
> > > in print. We know this because I (& I feel a bit silly about it now)
> > > actually remarked on it to Dev, in that it was an unnecessary thing to
> > > do etc etc.
>
> > > But since, I have seen no repudiation coming form you at all and all
> > > smiles with him since. Now, I don't read every post or thread in this
> > > GG, so I can't say for certain that you didn't cross swords with Dev
> > > and give him a serve. But if you did, I said I'd apologise etc.
>
> > > So you conclude this by saying I'm a coward (why) and previously a
> > > Drama Queen. Good on ya!. So, if you like to do this silly stuff,
> > > fine...I can waste a few minutes every now & again, however Ward, the
> > > Dev issue is one that he & I are dealing with.
>
> > > You don't need to stick your bib in. You really don't.
>
> > > Oh lastly, How would I "see things different"?
>
> > > Max
>
> > > On Dec 1, 3:18 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Well,
>
> > > > Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
> > > > a coward to do. You would see things different.
>
> > > > On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> > > > > haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> > > > > incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> > > > > I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> > > > > But I didn't see it.
>
> > > > > Max
>
> > > > > On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > > > > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > > > > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > > > > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > > > > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > > > > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > > > > > have managed.
>
> > > > > > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > > > > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > > > > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > > > > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > > > > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > > > > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > > > > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > > > > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Ay,
>
> > > > > > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > > > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > > > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > > > > > ward
>
> > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 8 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:53 pm
From: Max

Not reading my posts again Ward....must be ESP

Max

On Dec 1, 3:51 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> max,
>
> blah--head nod, blah--head nod, blah--head nod,
>
> ward
>
> On Nov 30, 9:49 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Dev,
>
> > Scrapin' the bottom of the barrel with your new recruits now eh mate.
> > But I can talk all I like about Ward now, 'cause he don't read my
> > posts apparently. That's a plus. He was scary.
>
> > Are you going to answer my question. Scroll up.
>
> > Max
>
> > On Dec 1, 3:43 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > On Nov 30, 9:31 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > Ward, stop for a minute and think about what your saying here...
>
> > > > It was Dev who called you a 'stupid little cunt", not me. It's there
> > > > in print. We know this because I (& I feel a bit silly about it now)
> > > > actually remarked on it to Dev, in that it was an unnecessary thing to
> > > > do etc etc.
>
> > > > But since, I have seen no repudiation coming form you at all and all
> > > > smiles with him since. Now, I don't read every post or thread in this
> > > > GG, so I can't say for certain that you didn't cross swords with Dev
> > > > and give him a serve. But if you did, I said I'd apologise etc.
>
> > > > So you conclude this by saying I'm a coward (why) and previously a
> > > > Drama Queen. Good on ya!. So, if you like to do this silly stuff,
> > > > fine...I can waste a few minutes every now & again, however Ward, the
> > > > Dev issue is one that he & I are dealing with.
>
> > > > You don't need to stick your bib in. You really don't.
>
> > > > Oh lastly, How would I "see things different"?
>
> > > > Max
>
> > > > On Dec 1, 3:18 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Well,
>
> > > > > Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
> > > > > a coward to do. You would see things different.
>
> > > > > On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> > > > > > haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> > > > > > incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> > > > > > I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> > > > > > But I didn't see it.
>
> > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > > > > > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > > > > > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > > > > > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > > > > > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > > > > > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > > > > > > have managed.
>
> > > > > > > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > > > > > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > > > > > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > > > > > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > > > > > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > > > > > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > > > > > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > > > > > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Ay,
>
> > > > > > > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > > > > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > > > > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > > > > > > ward
>
> > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > > > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > > > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > > > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > > > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 9 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:54 pm
From: Ward Yung

Your so boring, you bore yourself.

On Nov 30, 9:53 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Not reading my posts again Ward....must be ESP
>
> Max
>
> On Dec 1, 3:51 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > max,
>
> > blah--head nod, blah--head nod, blah--head nod,
>
> > ward
>
> > On Nov 30, 9:49 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > Dev,
>
> > > Scrapin' the bottom of the barrel with your new recruits now eh mate.
> > > But I can talk all I like about Ward now, 'cause he don't read my
> > > posts apparently. That's a plus. He was scary.
>
> > > Are you going to answer my question. Scroll up.
>
> > > Max
>
> > > On Dec 1, 3:43 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > On Nov 30, 9:31 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > Ward, stop for a minute and think about what your saying here...
>
> > > > > It was Dev who called you a 'stupid little cunt", not me. It's there
> > > > > in print. We know this because I (& I feel a bit silly about it now)
> > > > > actually remarked on it to Dev, in that it was an unnecessary thing to
> > > > > do etc etc.
>
> > > > > But since, I have seen no repudiation coming form you at all and all
> > > > > smiles with him since. Now, I don't read every post or thread in this
> > > > > GG, so I can't say for certain that you didn't cross swords with Dev
> > > > > and give him a serve. But if you did, I said I'd apologise etc.
>
> > > > > So you conclude this by saying I'm a coward (why) and previously a
> > > > > Drama Queen. Good on ya!. So, if you like to do this silly stuff,
> > > > > fine...I can waste a few minutes every now & again, however Ward, the
> > > > > Dev issue is one that he & I are dealing with.
>
> > > > > You don't need to stick your bib in. You really don't.
>
> > > > > Oh lastly, How would I "see things different"?
>
> > > > > Max
>
> > > > > On Dec 1, 3:18 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Well,
>
> > > > > > Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
> > > > > > a coward to do. You would see things different.
>
> > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> > > > > > > haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> > > > > > > incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> > > > > > > I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> > > > > > > But I didn't see it.
>
> > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > > > > > > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > > > > > > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > > > > > > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > > > > > > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > > > > > > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > > > > > > > have managed.
>
> > > > > > > > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > > > > > > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > > > > > > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > > > > > > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > > > > > > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > > > > > > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > > > > > > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > > > > > > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Ay,
>
> > > > > > > > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > > > > > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > > > > > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > > > > > > > ward
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > > > > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > > > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > > > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 10 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:59 pm
From: Max

No more mate..........you got me......your literary talent and acerbic
wit has done me in. I can't compete. You're just too good for me. I am
defeated. The master!!

So, do you want to drop it now, huh. Please!

I'd rather tackle Dev and a few lunatic theists for a bit, if that's
OK with you.

Another time perhaps.

Max

On Dec 1, 3:54 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Your so boring, you bore yourself.
>
> On Nov 30, 9:53 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Not reading my posts again Ward....must be ESP
>
> > Max
>
> > On Dec 1, 3:51 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > max,
>
> > > blah--head nod, blah--head nod, blah--head nod,
>
> > > ward
>
> > > On Nov 30, 9:49 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > Dev,
>
> > > > Scrapin' the bottom of the barrel with your new recruits now eh mate.
> > > > But I can talk all I like about Ward now, 'cause he don't read my
> > > > posts apparently. That's a plus. He was scary.
>
> > > > Are you going to answer my question. Scroll up.
>
> > > > Max
>
> > > > On Dec 1, 3:43 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > On Nov 30, 9:31 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Ward, stop for a minute and think about what your saying here...
>
> > > > > > It was Dev who called you a 'stupid little cunt", not me. It's there
> > > > > > in print. We know this because I (& I feel a bit silly about it now)
> > > > > > actually remarked on it to Dev, in that it was an unnecessary thing to
> > > > > > do etc etc.
>
> > > > > > But since, I have seen no repudiation coming form you at all and all
> > > > > > smiles with him since. Now, I don't read every post or thread in this
> > > > > > GG, so I can't say for certain that you didn't cross swords with Dev
> > > > > > and give him a serve. But if you did, I said I'd apologise etc.
>
> > > > > > So you conclude this by saying I'm a coward (why) and previously a
> > > > > > Drama Queen. Good on ya!. So, if you like to do this silly stuff,
> > > > > > fine...I can waste a few minutes every now & again, however Ward, the
> > > > > > Dev issue is one that he & I are dealing with.
>
> > > > > > You don't need to stick your bib in. You really don't.
>
> > > > > > Oh lastly, How would I "see things different"?
>
> > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > On Dec 1, 3:18 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Well,
>
> > > > > > > Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
> > > > > > > a coward to do. You would see things different.
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> > > > > > > > haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> > > > > > > > incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> > > > > > > > I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> > > > > > > > But I didn't see it.
>
> > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > > > > > > > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > > > > > > > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > > > > > > > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > > > > > > > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > > > > > > > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > > > > > > > > have managed.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > > > > > > > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > > > > > > > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > > > > > > > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > > > > > > > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Ay,
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > > > > > > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > > > > > > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > ward
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > > > > > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > > > > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 11 of 11 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:01 pm
From: Ward Yung

Max,

check out the newbie who just came in, I'm sure with your weedling
he'd be happy to drop his drawers in no time.

ward

On Nov 30, 9:59 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> No more mate..........you got me......your literary talent and acerbic
> wit has done me in. I can't compete. You're just too good for me. I am
> defeated. The master!!
>
> So, do you want to drop it now, huh. Please!
>
> I'd rather tackle Dev and a few lunatic theists for a bit, if that's
> OK with you.
>
> Another time perhaps.
>
> Max
>
> On Dec 1, 3:54 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Your so boring, you bore yourself.
>
> > On Nov 30, 9:53 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > Not reading my posts again Ward....must be ESP
>
> > > Max
>
> > > On Dec 1, 3:51 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > max,
>
> > > > blah--head nod, blah--head nod, blah--head nod,
>
> > > > ward
>
> > > > On Nov 30, 9:49 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > Dev,
>
> > > > > Scrapin' the bottom of the barrel with your new recruits now eh mate.
> > > > > But I can talk all I like about Ward now, 'cause he don't read my
> > > > > posts apparently. That's a plus. He was scary.
>
> > > > > Are you going to answer my question. Scroll up.
>
> > > > > Max
>
> > > > > On Dec 1, 3:43 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:31 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Ward, stop for a minute and think about what your saying here...
>
> > > > > > > It was Dev who called you a 'stupid little cunt", not me. It's there
> > > > > > > in print. We know this because I (& I feel a bit silly about it now)
> > > > > > > actually remarked on it to Dev, in that it was an unnecessary thing to
> > > > > > > do etc etc.
>
> > > > > > > But since, I have seen no repudiation coming form you at all and all
> > > > > > > smiles with him since. Now, I don't read every post or thread in this
> > > > > > > GG, so I can't say for certain that you didn't cross swords with Dev
> > > > > > > and give him a serve. But if you did, I said I'd apologise etc.
>
> > > > > > > So you conclude this by saying I'm a coward (why) and previously a
> > > > > > > Drama Queen. Good on ya!. So, if you like to do this silly stuff,
> > > > > > > fine...I can waste a few minutes every now & again, however Ward, the
> > > > > > > Dev issue is one that he & I are dealing with.
>
> > > > > > > You don't need to stick your bib in. You really don't.
>
> > > > > > > Oh lastly, How would I "see things different"?
>
> > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > On Dec 1, 3:18 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Well,
>
> > > > > > > > Max me boy, if he said it to me face, which I know you are too much of
> > > > > > > > a coward to do. You would see things different.
>
> > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:12 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
> > > > > > > > > haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
> > > > > > > > > incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
> > > > > > > > > I will stand corrected and will apologise.
>
> > > > > > > > > But I didn't see it.
>
> > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > blah, blah, blah...
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Attttenshun!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > > > > > > > > > > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > > > > > > > > > > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > > > > > > > > > > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > > > > > > > > > > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > > > > > > > > > > have managed.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > > > > > > > > > > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > > > > > > > > > > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > > > > > > > > > > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Ay,
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > > > > > > > > > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > > > > > > > > > > way there bloke.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > ward
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > > > > > > > > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

==============================================================================
TOPIC: What do literalist Christians think of Deists?
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/14ba79abce999a44?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:24 pm
From: Dag Yo

> > What specific scientific data has emerged in the last 150 years that
> > supports the concept of Intelligent Design.
>
> All of it. But here is some specific...
Things that are not properly understood is not data, and it's
definitely not data that supports any particular concept like
intelligent design.

Saying that you're confused about something simply means that you
personally are confused about it -- it's not evidence that the only
possible explanation is "magic".

On Nov 30, 8:40 pm, 4praise <4prai...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > What specific scientific data has emerged in the last 150 years that
> > supports the concept of Intelligent Design.
>
> All of it. But here is some specific things -http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/newproofs.shtml
>
> > Telling me things are complex and organized doesn't really cut it.
>
> Why not? The more that we learn, the more incredible it becomes.
>
> > You'll have to do better than that.
>
> I cannot prove that God exists. It is my contention that God proves
> His own existence and that anyone looking for Him will find Him -
> first by looking at what He has made and then by talking to Him. I
> don't expect to convince anyone with my weak arguments - I am counting
> on God to convince you.
>
> On Nov 30, 8:55 am, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 11:34 PM, 4praise <4prai...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > It's true, when I and other theists look at living things we see the
> > > attributes of God reflected while an atheist just sees the attributes
> > > of life. But Jesus said "I am the way, the truth and the LIFE..." So
> > > for us, even when you say that those are just the attributes of life,
> > > we are still thinking, yes, they are because Jesus is life.
>
> > Well I suspect you think that this answers my question as to what in the
> > scientific data supports ID but it's another poetic dodge.
>
> > The question is quite specific but I'll make it more specific.
>
> > What specific scientific data has emerged in the last 150 years that
> > supports the concept of Intelligent Design.
>
> > Telling me things are complex and organized doesn't really cut it.
>
> > You'll have to do better than that.
>
> > > Organic computing - hmm, we better turn Sarah Connor loose on them :)
>
> > > I have no doubt that computers will get smarter and in a sense be self
> > > organizing - but they would still at their roots have a designer.
>
> > > So even IF life did "organize itself" that would just imply a designer
> > > that is smart enough to build that type of system.
>
> > > On Nov 28, 4:33 am, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 10:42 PM, 4praise <4prai...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > About 1,940 years ago Paul wrote "... ever since the creation of the
> > > > > world His invisible nature and attributes, that is, His eternal power
> > > > > and divinity, have been made intelligible and clearly discernible in
> > > > > and through the things that have been made..."
>
> > > > So, let me get this straight. You've taken a vague statement written 2000
> > > > years ago which could mean pretty much anything and are applying it to
> > > DNA?
>
> > > > > The only thing that has changed since then is that we can look farther
> > > > > and deeper and with more understanding but these things like DNA
> > > > > continue to reveal His nature and attributes.
>
> > > > DNA provides us with a understanding of the nature and attributes of
> > > Life.
> > > > Haven't seen any god defined in it.
>
> > > > > I attribute these things to God and of course, I am not alone in ding
> > > > > that.
>
> > > > True. But the reality is that there is nothing to indicate any god(s)
> > > being
> > > > involved in it.
>
> > > > So this is speculation at best and delusion at worst.
>
> > > > > An atheist might just attribute it to "life" and so the
> > > > > question becomes where did life come from? And again, my answer is
> > > > > that life came from God.
>
> > > > And again, the key factor here is that there is nothing to indicate any
> > > god
> > > > except you jumping to conclusions based on your indoctrination and
> > > nothing
> > > > else.
>
> > > > If there was, then one might be able to claim some support for
> > > Creationism
> > > > or ID.
>
> > > > As it stands there isn't.
>
> > > > This is another interesting article about DNA that is not a theist
>
> > > > > article -
> > > > >http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2001/04/04/133634.htm?site=sci.
> > > ..
>
> > > > Thanks, I'll look at it when I get a chance.
>
> > > > > On Nov 26, 6:02 am, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > ...
>
> > > > > > read more »
>
> > > > > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 1:55 AM, 4praise <4prai...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Here is one example
>
> > > > > > >http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2192678&page=1
>
> > > > > > Still waiting for the case to be made on exactly how the scientific
> > > > > evidence
> > > > > > or any interpretation of it supports ID.
>
> > > > > > How does DNA or any interpretation of that discovery support ID?
>
> > > > > > > <http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2192678&page=1>
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 25, 8:17 pm, Dag Yo <sir_ro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Nov 25, 4:45 pm, 4praise <4prai...@gmail.com> wrote:> The
> > > data is
> > > > > > > beautiful,
>
> > > > > > > > Again, what data?
>
> > > > > > > > > the systems are beautiful. That drafterman can
> > > > > > > > > draft a seemingly "brilliant exposure" is beautiful.
> > > Ironically,
> > > > > > > > > drafterman's intellect undermines his predisposition.
>
> > > > > > > > > Nothing "proves" God's existence if we are allowed to define
> > > the
> > > > > word
> > > > > > > > > "proof". The beauty doesn't "prove" it - it just slaps us in
> > > the
> > > > > face
> > > > > > > > > with it.
>
> > > > > > > > > On Nov 25, 6:33 am, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 2:05 AM, 4praise <4prai...@gmail.com
>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Fair enough. What then in the existing data supports ID?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > The beauty of it.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Oh Come On 4Praise. This is where you guys lose and it's a
> > > clear
> > > > > > > dodge.
>
> > > > > > > > > > What has beauty got to do with it or the existing scientific
> > > > > data?
>
> > > > > > > > > > Is the data beautiful? Lol.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Did you see Drafterman's concise and brilliant exposure of
> > > the
> > > > > logic
> > > > > > > behind
> > > > > > > > > > this?
>
> > >http://groups.google.ca/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/msg/7be2e47c550.
> > > > > ..
>
> > > > > > > > > > You claimed that ID was based on a different interpretation
> > > of
> > > > > > > existing
> > > > > > > > > > scientific data.
>
> > > > > > > > > > I asked you to provide the existing scientific data, ID is
> > > based
> > > > > on.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 24, 10:47 am, "Trance Gemini" <
> > > trancegemi...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 11:27 PM, 4praise <
> > > > > 4prai...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > It's common for people to look at the same data and
> > > think
> > > > > > > differently
> > > > > > > > > > > > > about it. Scientific research causes some to doubt
> > > there
> > > > > is a
> > > > > > > God and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > causes others to marvel at God. Most likely there are
> > > > > other
> > > > > > > factors
> > > > > > > > > > > > > that have developed the persons paradigm besides the
> > > data
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > they
> > > > > > > > > > > > > are currently looking at.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Fair enough. What then in the existing data supports ID?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 22, 6:17 pm, "Trance Gemini" <
> > > > > trancegemi...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 8:07 PM, 4praise <
> > > > > 4prai...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are ignoring the research when the model
> > > they
> > > > > > > propose is an
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > antithesis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But it isn't. You have to separate the research
> > > from
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > interpretations and conclusions.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > In order for the interpretations and conclusions to
> > > make
> > > > > > > sense and be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > based
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > on the research they have to be consistent and inline
> > > > > with
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > research.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > If they aren't, they've been ignored. No?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 22, 4:45 am, "Trance Gemini" <
> > > > > > > trancegemi...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 1:13 AM, 4praise <
> > > > > > > 4prai...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Exactly what research in the last 150 years
> > > > > supports
> > > > > > > the ID
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Model?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I didn't say that it supported it - I said that
> > > > > those
> > > > > > > > > > > particular
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > christians were not "ignoring" the research.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are ignoring the research when the model
> > > they
> > > > > > > propose is an
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > antithesis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They publish a steady stream of articles that
> > > talk
> > > > > > > about out
> > > > > > > > > > > > > research
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that seems to imply a designer.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is one of the latest -
>
> > >http://www.reasons.org/tnrtb/2008/11/21/error-control-coding-in-biolo.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 21, 5:02 am, "Trance Gemini"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 1:39 AM, 4praise <
> > > > > > > 4prai...@gmail.com
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Irrelevant question.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The "need" for a god is felt by theists,
> > > not
> > > > > by
> > > > > > > rational
> > > > > > > > > > > > > people.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the case of Antony Flew, he
>
> ...
>
> read more »

==============================================================================
TOPIC: In defence of non-people
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/73819e9ca83577d0?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:29 pm
From: checkers

On Dec 1, 7:15 am, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Your a big-mouthed, whiney, phoney, looooooooser.

chx
so what is this noise about, are you lending support to Dev in
murdering all theists?

>
> On Nov 30, 7:50 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Well then.....that's one for Dev I suppose......Win some, lose some!
>
> > Max
>
> > On Nov 30, 1:52 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > max
>
> > > He's extreme. But what he is expressing in no uncertain terms, and
> > > quite dramatically I might add, which I give him points for by the
> > > way, how extreme the theists are getting.
>
> > > ward
>
> > > On Nov 29, 1:35 am, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > So Ward, having witnessed one of the more mature threads in recent
> > > > times (choke, cough, splutter), how do you assess Dev's approach. (Or
> > > > mine if you like) But at the heart of it, do you understand the
> > > > strategy Dev is using / defending. Is it plain for you to see?
>
> > > > Max
>
> > > > On Nov 29, 5:25 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Kip,
>
> > > > > There is nothing rational about this entire discussion group, except
> > > > > on very rare occasions when someone brings up a topic that hasn't
> > > > > already been super-charged for nuclear collision in the emotional
> > > > > vortex that is this group. Opening up an extended rant on dev has only
> > > > > made things uglier.
>
> > > > > On Nov 27, 5:25 am, Kippers <ro...@croft6942.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I felt I needed to write this in response to Dev's continued claim
> > > > > > that theists are not people and therefore it's ok to kill them. I
> > > > > > realize that in making a post disagreeing with Dev's position I will
> > > > > > be labelled a retard or a rapist of some sort but so be it.
>
> > > > > > For the purpose of this post I am going to allow the premise that
> > > > > > theists are not people but I want to make the case of why non-people
> > > > > > are still worthy of our moral concerns.
>
> > > > > > Of the planets non-people (those not capable of reason or ethics to
> > > > > > use Devs own definition) there many who are still sentient beings.
> > > > > > They have wants and needs, they can feel both physical and mental pain
> > > > > > and they can feel joy, sorrow, empathy, anger and even form bonds of
> > > > > > friendship. Such sentient beings include severely handicapped humans,
> > > > > > many non-human primates, dogs and wolves, dolphins, pigs, cats and so
> > > > > > on.
>
> > > > > > Now it is my position that the wants and needs of all sentient beings
> > > > > > should be subject to our moral concerns. Many non-people feel pain
> > > > > > just as intensely as people do, they feel the other emotions I listed
> > > > > > above (and many more) just as intently as humans do and as such I see
> > > > > > no reason why they should be excluded from our ethical concerns.
>
> > > > > > The fact that these sentient beings cannot match the rational powers
> > > > > > of people and the fact that they cannot evaluate ethical issues (even
> > > > > > though many of them do actually have a moral code) should not mean
> > > > > > that their pain, suffering or happiness should not matter to us.
>
> > > > > > Now I appreciate that Dev is not totally serious with his assertions
> > > > > > on this subject but that fact is he is arguing for that position and
> > > > > > he seems to think no good arguments exist against has moved me to
> > > > > > write this post.
>
> > > > > > His argument actually reminds me of the anthropocentric position of
> > > > > > many theists who elevate human attributes above all others. He takes
> > > > > > two of mankind's greatest attributes (rationality and ethics) then
> > > > > > assumes these are the greatest qualities possessed by any creature in
> > > > > > the animal kingdom and then argues for the destruction of all animals
> > > > > > which do not possess these qualities.
>
> > > > > > His argument displays a lack of rationality and a repulsive breed of
> > > > > > ethics which would mark out anyone who agreed with it a non-person as
> > > > > > defined by the argument itself.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:31 pm
From: Observer

On Nov 26, 7:46 am, leebert <sregdor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 26, 1:53 am, Observer <mayors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 20, 8:27 am, leebert <sregdor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 19, 11:43 pm, Observer <mayors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Observer
> > > > I wish the world would read and understand Siddhartha's work , it is
> > > > an for the most part methodology of healthful living. The filth from
> > > > the saddles of millions who ventured into his world have so soiled
> > > > the representations of his work as to make it necessary to do a great
> > > > deal of searching to find them in any pure and usable form.
>
> > > > An other source of beauty is The Compassionate Buddha .
>
> > > Yes, but there's a broad movement afoot to present the world a
> > > distilled Buddhism, founded in the original canon, ready to use.
>
> > Observer
> > And just what is distilled Buddhism ? I shall have no argument with
> > any who produce the endogenous opiates they seek by the application of
> > the relatively harmless application of Buddhist rituals. Do you?
>
> No. But that's not really the point of BUddhism. And if those are
> relatively harmelss rituals, then so is prayer to a non-existant god
> form.

Observer
Utter stupidity , as formulated by one in denial of the devastating
effect that belief in your dumb ass god concept, and the accompanying
superstitious filth, has let lose upon this earth and its people. I
have repeatedly posted records of the criminality produced as a direct
result of your hideous superstition starting with the infamous
Constantine use of your filthy superstition as a tool in insane rage
(remejmbering that he murdered his sone and had his wive boiled to
death) and quest for power, to 1700 years of holding all scientific
progress in abeyance , during which time we may have well learned to
stamp out many horrible diseases, become enabled to feed the worlds
starving , to the twentieth century alliance with the Christian nation
of Germany ,as they joyously participated in the slaughter of six
million Jews (reminded of course of the traditional Christian hatred
of Jews translated into German by this brilliant but heinous animal ,
Martin Luther.) Not to mention the Catholic churches slaughter of
700,000 men women and children in Croatia during the 1940s . I have
posted all of this for your perusal of you can goggle them all your
self.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > > > But whence does craving arise? From the ego. No ego, no craving. No
> > > > > craving, no suffering. Thus no ego, no suffering, since what would
> > > > > there be, to suffer, at all, except the ego?
>
> > > > Observer
> > > > Nonsense. Why not just euthanize your brain with external rather than
> > > > endogenous opiates it is much quicker.
>
> > > Actually Joe's correct. It's not that it can be dispensed with, just
> > > that the functional problems be acknowledged.
>
> > Observer
> > And those problems are? And please don't get all dreamy eyed and drift
> > in to the use of things for which no scientifically verifiable
> > substantiation is to be had.
>
> Do you have a self?

Observer
I like most sentient creatures have a concept of my own existence .
The label I and most others attach to such a conceptualization is
self.

That part of me that is anterior can readily percieve through your
senses. The interior parts should be obviated to you because of the
cominality of similar interiors relating to most all humans. And for
my actions of the body you can also pervieve them with your senses. As
for My thought process which are the produce of brain activity you
have not a clue as to how to witness them first hand. The postings I
make must surely give you some clue that an intelectual process
identified with ,observer, is functioning (Not withstanding the fact
that you haven't a clue what I am communicating to you due to the
exclusive nature of your blinding superstition.)

How can you show me it exists?

Where is it? Your
> experiences, your thoughts? Is that who you are? What were those? Do
> they still exist?

Observer
My poor Christian I have explained all that above. Do they send
Christians to a school for the production of idiotic anti reasoning
philosophy or does that just come along with the inanity necessary to
believe in your superstitious crap?

Such as thoughts and memories are predicates wherein The individual
is tha nomnitive. Why is that hard to understand?

Those were information, stored, made relevant by
> token of your neurobiological states. Phenomena are information (and
> this is demonstrated in Einstein's time dilation, whereby information
> is compressed, but experience is fixed). Self is just another
> phenomenon. So self is just information and experience.

Obnserver
WTF ?

"Twas brillig and the slivy tove did gyre and gimble in the wabe a
mimsy were the borrogrove and the mome wraths outgrabe."

Or may be you are just taken aback by the work of Lewis Carrol or
Charles Lutwidge Dodson ( his real name) and think the nonsense of
which he made fun is necessary to your attempts at the dialectic.

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

>
> Ego is our threat-assessment and problem-solving engine. Ego defends
> Self. But what is ego defending but a spook? And ego is based on self,
> so ego is a spook as well. It's a Ponzi Scheme, an ontological MLM.

Observer

Part of a series of articles on
Psychoanalysis

Concepts
Psychosexual development
Psychosocial development
Conscious • Preconscious • Unconscious
Psychic apparatus
Id, ego, and super-ego
Libido • Drive
Transference • Ego defenses • Resistance

Important figures
Alfred Adler • Nancy Chodorow
Erik Erikson • Ronald Fairbairn
Anna Freud • Sigmund Freud
Karen Horney • Ernest Jones
Carl Jung • Melanie Klein
Heinz Kohut • Jacques Lacan
Margaret Mahler • Otto Rank
Harry Stack Sullivan
Susan Sutherland Isaacs

Important works
The Interpretation of Dreams
Beyond the Pleasure Principle
Civilization and Its Discontents

Schools of thought
Self psychology • Lacanian
• Object relations
Interpersonal • Relational
Ego psychology

Psychology portal

Id, ego, and super-ego are the three parts of the "psychic apparatus"
defined in Sigmund Freud's structural model of the psyche; they are
the three theoretical constructs in terms of whose activity and
interaction mental life is described. According to this model, the
uncoordinated instinctual trends are the "id"; the organised realistic
part of the psyche is the "ego," and the critical and moralizing
function the "super-ego."

Even though the model is "structural" and makes reference to an
"apparatus", the id, ego, and super-ego are functions of the mind
rather than parts of the brain and do not necessarily correspond one-
to-one with actual somatic structures of the kind dealt with by
neuroscience.

Are you a follower of Sigmund Freud of of Christ ?

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

In either case you are a stone looser but at least Freud was bright
and creative where as your poor stupid Jesus was almost a total loss
intellectually. Some fictive god you seek out to worship , a stupid
criminal that was executed for crimes against the state and who though
you believe he was a god couldn't/didn't give mankind the knowledge to
live successfully and free of disease but allegedly simply abandoned
them to their Neolithic ignorance as would one who had not the
understanding to care for humanity. What a fucking creep this looser
would he have been were he a god.

I'm afraid that your Voodoo Hoodoo of god magic needs a new vessel if
you are going to manage to perpetuate its hideous ignorance.

>
> So again, the OT is functionally correct. He might be newagey, but I
> said "functionally," not spot-on.
>
> IOW, you're not helping him answer his questions, you're just taking a
> short cut to......
>
> > > Don't look at it as some kind of newagey (rhymes with sewagey) hokum.
> > > This is more akin to the philosophy of the stoics & Kant.
>
> > Observer
> > What ever do you mean by that. My position as an apatheist/ atheist is
> > simply that I care not if any god exists as there is no proof that it
> > ever interacted with the universe nor with human kind and is there for
> > (if it exists) irrelevant to humanity as are all teachings attributed
> > there to. Further the absence of any scientifically verifiable
> > substantiation of any god or action there of leaves me no choice but
> > atheism.
> > Secondly I see from long experience that the produce of scientific
> > method is extremely reliable in producing useful information and that
> > no other process has been so.
>
> .... the anti-theist argument.
>
> That's just a strawman against really grappling with existential
> quandaries.

Observer

Now that is the statement of a man who attempts to use words as
incantations when his understanding fails him completely.

You , Catholic/Christian believe that Scientific method is a straw
man ? Do you deny that it is the most perfect method ever developed by
which to extract useful information from our environment? Incidental
this too was written of by Epicurus 300 years be for your filthy
superstition began to erode human consciousness.

Or is it your inability to produce any tiny bit of scientifically
verifiable substantiating data for either the existence of or any
action of any god ever. All you have, Christian, is your quite stupid
fucking book of Neolithic myths. Even that you can not prove to have
been generated by other than superstitious goat herders.

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

Now I suggest that you take a deep breath , get your thoughts
together , and try to summon up a cogent argument for belief in the
buy bull.

I am betting that you can not .

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

Psychonomist

>
> > > > > The universe is a whole consisting of parts, which ideally should move
> > > > > together in harmony. The problem arises when one (or more than one)
> > > > > of the parts begins to see itself as an autonomous, independent
> > > > > entity.
>
> > > > Observer
>
> > > > Wrong see Heisenberg above.
>
> > > Why is he wrong? Heisenberg doesn't preclude emptiness & dependent
> > > origination.
>
> > Observer
> > Nor does he address it. If he does please correct me and I will be
> > grateful.
>
> He doesn't. I'm not sure how Heisenberg got into this discussion. Oh,
> yes, you brought it up as a counterpoint against dependent
> origination.
>
> > > Don't get hung up on the wistful beatification of interconnectedness &
> > > harmony, it's a novice's mistake, a dreamer's conceit, a thinking
> > > man's guilty pleasure ... ;-)
>
> > Observer
> > Oh please such is not in my bag of tricks as bullshit is bullshit no
> > matter hoe emotional one becomes about it.
>
> :-)
>
> I wasn't saying you would approve, after all....
>
> > > Here Joe & Observer are both being too facile. Joe, too expansive,
> > > Observer, too dismissive.
>
> > Observer
> > I offer you the same challenge that I offered Joe . Please give us any
> > verifiable substantiating data for any of the metaphysical nonsense
> > including gods , demons, angels, devils ,jinns, heavens, hells, or
> > any other stupid concept of actualities supposed to exist beyond the
> > realm of physics or that there is any realm beyond physics. I realize
> > that My challenge precludes any intelligent answer for which I
> > apologize but you are obviously quite bright and able to understand
> > the implications thereof.
>
> I'm not playing dialectics. Superstition is a poor strawman when
> someone is trying to understand the psychology of religion. The OP's
> point is to deconstruct religion via functional analysis.
>
> He's close.
>
> > > The whole interconnectedness bit isn't wrong in of itself, but it's
> > > awfully prone to expansive interpretations. It's a fine line between
> > > pantheistic notions and rank spiritualism.
>
> > Observer
> > I Care not about such differences between the two as neither are
> > supportable concepts.
>
> > Interconnectedness implies nothing but that our opinion of the
> > universe is that it can not be separated from its self or divided into
> > segments which no longer connect to the whole.
>
> Correct.
>
> I support neither, but then pantheistic splendor is a nice thing.
>
> > > Nagarjuna (aka the 2nd Buddha) took that nonsense apart. Spiritual
> > > growth - in the non-dualist sense - doesn't require Brahman-like
> > > notions of union, etc. Deconstructionism needn't be nihilistic, but
> > > eternalism isn't the antidote either.
>
> > Observer
> > Delusion born of a beautiful mind but delusion none the less.
> > If you disagree please prove me wrong and I shall be grateful.
>
> The human condition inheres delusion. Science as a nostrum to this is
> limited.
>
> /leebert- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Atheism-vs-Christianity - 26 new messages in 13 topics - digest

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

Atheism-vs-Christianity@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Oh, The Humanity!
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/8d76e9ba69ccc141?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:37 pm
From: trog69

The Anglican church in Nigeria sounds like a really sweet bunch of
hate-filled bigots.

On Nov 30, 2:40 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/30/nigeria-christians-muslim...
>
> The Friendly Atheist comments:
>
> "The headline on Reddit reads:
>
> 'Hundreds dead after Atheist and Agnostic gangs clash in Nigeria '
>
> You can see where that story leads…
>
> The question: Is that headline making a fair point?
>
> Some people will argue that this is not simply a religious conflict;
> there are plenty of other factors that go into it."
>
> I don't want to get into another clarification about the definitions
> of "atheist" and "agnostic"--I just thought this was funny.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:44 pm
From: Dev

It was during a discussion of Christians in Nigeria raping little
Muslim girls out of revenge that Chris made some of the comments
quoted on his "Liars of AvC" installment defending their actions.

On Nov 30, 8:37 pm, trog69 <tom.tro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The Anglican church in Nigeria sounds like a really sweet bunch of
> hate-filled bigots.
>
> On Nov 30, 2:40 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>
>
> >http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/30/nigeria-christians-muslim...
>
> > The Friendly Atheist comments:
>
> > "The headline on Reddit reads:
>
> > 'Hundreds dead after Atheist and Agnostic gangs clash in Nigeria '
>
> > You can see where that story leads…
>
> > The question: Is that headline making a fair point?
>
> > Some people will argue that this is not simply a religious conflict;
> > there are plenty of other factors that go into it."
>
> > I don't want to get into another clarification about the definitions
> > of "atheist" and "agnostic"--I just thought this was funny.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Hopefully with Mr Bush now firmly seated in the Whitehouse, America
will enter a new era of wholesome family entertainment and the Hollywood
pornographers will be claiming unemployment
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/e6ee90a2ad693f5e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:44 pm
From: Multiverse

why do you think this is an appropriate place to discuss your m d
penis fetish?

On Nov 30, 4:31 am, I AM A TRUE CHRISTIAN <X...@OPERAMAIL.COM> wrote:
> When I go to the movies I want to be entertained. I don't want to see
> Michael Douglas's aging erection. I am not a prude, but there is a
> time and a place for everything, and the place for Michael Douglas's
> penis is in his boxer shorts, not blown up to ludicrous proportions in
> a movie theater. It was bad enough having to look at his flabby
> buttocks in "Basic Instinct".
>
> As if that wasn't bad enough, I predict that the ongoing pornoization
> of Hollywood movies will lead to more expensive movie tickets, as the
> big stars demand extra 'nudity money' to compensate them for
> participating in the variety of depraved acts the perverted directors
> dream up. After all, if full blown intercourse is allowed past the
> censors, what next ? Teabagging ? Bagpiping ? Felching ? I don't even
> want to think about it.
>
> Before the moral collapse brought on by the liberal anything goes
> 'free love' culture of the sixties, America's movies were governed by
> something called the Hays Code. Amongst other things, this very fine
> set of rules protected our children by mandating that certain levels
> of decency prevailed on our screens. Here are some extracts to give
> you an idea of the moral strength of the code:
>
> # Excessive and lustful kissing, lustful embraces, suggestive postures
> and gestures, are not to be shown.
>
> # Pointed profanity (this includes the words, God, Lord, Jesus, Christ
> - unless used reverently - Hell, S.O.B., damn, Gawd), or every other
> profane or vulgar expression however used, is forbidden.
>
> # No film or episode may throw ridicule on any religious faith.
>
> # The use of the Flag shall be consistently respectful.
>
> # Impure love must not be presented as attractive and beautiful.
>
> Nowadays, modern cinematographers seem to take the Hays code, and
> invert it. They don't feel as if their movie is complete, unless it
> has scenes of impure love, disrespect for the flag, and blasphemy.
> This sorry state of affairs cannot be allowed to continue.
>
> In conclusion, this increasing permissiveness will cause movie ticket
> prices to rise, and you may be forced to view Michael Douglas's erect
> penis enlarged until it is 10 meters long. Now you can understand why
> the Hays code must be ressurected. Hopefully with Mr Bush now firmly
> seated in the Whitehouse, America will enter a new era of wholesome
> family entertainment and the Hollywood pornographers will be claiming
> unemployment

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:46 pm
From: Dev

I'm not sure there's such a thing as a guy having a "penis fetish".
The correct expression would just be "he's really, really gay".

On Nov 30, 8:44 pm, Multiverse <cuta...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> why do you think this is an appropriate place to discuss your m d
> penis fetish?
>
> On Nov 30, 4:31 am, I AM A TRUE CHRISTIAN <X...@OPERAMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
>
>
> > When I go to the movies I want to be entertained. I don't want to see
> > Michael Douglas's aging erection. I am not a prude, but there is a
> > time and a place for everything, and the place for Michael Douglas's
> > penis is in his boxer shorts, not blown up to ludicrous proportions in
> > a movie theater. It was bad enough having to look at his flabby
> > buttocks in "Basic Instinct".
>
> > As if that wasn't bad enough, I predict that the ongoing pornoization
> > of Hollywood movies will lead to more expensive movie tickets, as the
> > big stars demand extra 'nudity money' to compensate them for
> > participating in the variety of depraved acts the perverted directors
> > dream up. After all, if full blown intercourse is allowed past the
> > censors, what next ? Teabagging ? Bagpiping ? Felching ? I don't even
> > want to think about it.
>
> > Before the moral collapse brought on by the liberal anything goes
> > 'free love' culture of the sixties, America's movies were governed by
> > something called the Hays Code. Amongst other things, this very fine
> > set of rules protected our children by mandating that certain levels
> > of decency prevailed on our screens. Here are some extracts to give
> > you an idea of the moral strength of the code:
>
> > # Excessive and lustful kissing, lustful embraces, suggestive postures
> > and gestures, are not to be shown.
>
> > # Pointed profanity (this includes the words, God, Lord, Jesus, Christ
> > - unless used reverently - Hell, S.O.B., damn, Gawd), or every other
> > profane or vulgar expression however used, is forbidden.
>
> > # No film or episode may throw ridicule on any religious faith.
>
> > # The use of the Flag shall be consistently respectful.
>
> > # Impure love must not be presented as attractive and beautiful.
>
> > Nowadays, modern cinematographers seem to take the Hays code, and
> > invert it. They don't feel as if their movie is complete, unless it
> > has scenes of impure love, disrespect for the flag, and blasphemy.
> > This sorry state of affairs cannot be allowed to continue.
>
> > In conclusion, this increasing permissiveness will cause movie ticket
> > prices to rise, and you may be forced to view Michael Douglas's erect
> > penis enlarged until it is 10 meters long. Now you can understand why
> > the Hays code must be ressurected. Hopefully with Mr Bush now firmly
> > seated in the Whitehouse, America will enter a new era of wholesome
> > family entertainment and the Hollywood pornographers will be claiming
> > unemployment- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:02 pm
From: Multiverse

wow,...that uh...sounds serious. does that work like the Richter
scale? so the second "really" equates to like 10 times more gayness?
I hadn't been aware of the classifications they use. Perhaps that's
why, occasionally, a gay guy like him will think he has a good shot at
getting my penis into his mouth just because I've had a few drinks.
Next time I'll just say, no thanks, I am really, really, really,
really heterosexual. That's gotta be a magnitude 10 or better!

On Nov 30, 10:46 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> I'm not sure there's such a thing as a guy having a "penis fetish".
> The correct expression would just be "he's really, really gay".
>
> On Nov 30, 8:44 pm, Multiverse <cuta...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > why do you think this is an appropriate place to discuss your m d
> > penis fetish?
>
> > On Nov 30, 4:31 am, I AM A TRUE CHRISTIAN <X...@OPERAMAIL.COM> wrote:
>
> > > When I go to the movies I want to be entertained. I don't want to see
> > > Michael Douglas's aging erection. I am not a prude, but there is a
> > > time and a place for everything, and the place for Michael Douglas's
> > > penis is in his boxer shorts, not blown up to ludicrous proportions in
> > > a movie theater. It was bad enough having to look at his flabby
> > > buttocks in "Basic Instinct".
>
> > > As if that wasn't bad enough, I predict that the ongoing pornoization
> > > of Hollywood movies will lead to more expensive movie tickets, as the
> > > big stars demand extra 'nudity money' to compensate them for
> > > participating in the variety of depraved acts the perverted directors
> > > dream up. After all, if full blown intercourse is allowed past the
> > > censors, what next ? Teabagging ? Bagpiping ? Felching ? I don't even
> > > want to think about it.
>
> > > Before the moral collapse brought on by the liberal anything goes
> > > 'free love' culture of the sixties, America's movies were governed by
> > > something called the Hays Code. Amongst other things, this very fine
> > > set of rules protected our children by mandating that certain levels
> > > of decency prevailed on our screens. Here are some extracts to give
> > > you an idea of the moral strength of the code:
>
> > > # Excessive and lustful kissing, lustful embraces, suggestive postures
> > > and gestures, are not to be shown.
>
> > > # Pointed profanity (this includes the words, God, Lord, Jesus, Christ
> > > - unless used reverently - Hell, S.O.B., damn, Gawd), or every other
> > > profane or vulgar expression however used, is forbidden.
>
> > > # No film or episode may throw ridicule on any religious faith.
>
> > > # The use of the Flag shall be consistently respectful.
>
> > > # Impure love must not be presented as attractive and beautiful.
>
> > > Nowadays, modern cinematographers seem to take the Hays code, and
> > > invert it. They don't feel as if their movie is complete, unless it
> > > has scenes of impure love, disrespect for the flag, and blasphemy.
> > > This sorry state of affairs cannot be allowed to continue.
>
> > > In conclusion, this increasing permissiveness will cause movie ticket
> > > prices to rise, and you may be forced to view Michael Douglas's erect
> > > penis enlarged until it is 10 meters long. Now you can understand why
> > > the Hays code must be ressurected. Hopefully with Mr Bush now firmly
> > > seated in the Whitehouse, America will enter a new era of wholesome
> > > family entertainment and the Hollywood pornographers will be claiming
> > > unemployment- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

==============================================================================
TOPIC: How are people led to Jesus?
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/369bfcb2ebdaf424?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:44 pm
From: trog69

Don't give them any ideas, please. We know that now at least, they
wouldn't dare try any of those tactics, right? So, as long as
Christians remain rational thinkers, we should be alright.

On Nov 30, 2:43 pm, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 29, 10:56 pm, sdanders <newbergfamily...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > What prompts the unchurched to accept Jesus? How can we more
> > effectively witness to others?
>
> I'd say, hone your indoctrination techniques - use the strap if
> necessary to beat children into obedience. Bring back the Inquisition.
> Rig elections so that only Christian candidates get elected. Relocate
> ministers and priests if they get caught diddling children. That sort
> of thing.
>
> > As a full-time minister, I have often
> > been struck with the difficulty people have in reaching the unchurched
> > (myself included). As a result, I am always looking for ways to lead
> > people to Jesus.
>
> > I am launching this discussion topic so that we can learn from each
> > other. How can we lead a life that pursues the Great Commission? What
> > has worked for you? What obstacles have you overcome? It would be good
> > to hear some practical success stories.
>
> > You can also take a brief survey to help answer these questions at:http://docshawn.com
>
> > Once the survey is completed, you will have the option of having the
> > results sent to you.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Prayer in School
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/61de5e1264f75c8d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:48 pm
From: trog69

Any other time I'd have said Kelsey shut the thread down, but your
comment will be accepted this time. ;)

On Nov 30, 1:41 pm, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 7:34 AM, tit...@gmail.com <tit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I am new to this site but I would like to know why there is no more
> > prayer is public school?
>
> There is prayer (unfortunately), just not prayer led by school authority
> figures. Why? Because of a little thing called the First Amendment to the
> Constitution of the United States, specifically the Establishment Clause.
>
> > Is my God dead to you?
>
> Is my pet unicorn dead to you?
>
> > And do you realize
> > that there is so much crime in the Schools? Food for thought.
>
> Do you realize that cactus' spines are actually modified leaves? Food for
> those with a very short attention span.
>
>

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:49 pm
From: Observer

On Nov 30, 6:25 pm, leebert <sregdor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 30, 8:09 am, Observer <mayors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 26, 7:26 am, leebert <sregdor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 26, 1:53 am, Observer <mayors...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Here's a quandary to consider: Where does mind stop?
>
> > > > Observer
> > > > With the individual ! If you think that mind extends beyond the
> > > > individual or exerts some metaphysical power over the actualities of
> > > > the universe please explain and offer some proof thereof.
>
> > > Good grief, no. None of that.
>
> > > But naive materialism doesn't answer the OP's questions.
>
> > > > Mind is a predicate the individual is the nominative or what is done
> > > > by that individual as part of the produce of the neurological system .
>
> > > But exterior phenomena drive the experience of the neurological
> > > system, and its system states are dependent upon them. A prenate has
> > > experiences in the womb.
>
> > > Photons hit the eyes which lead to neural corpusals of data going to
> > > the brain, which in turn arise as electrochemically-based qualia in
> > > the conscious mind. But mind is not just that, it's an emergent
> > > property of a complex interaction of phenomena. But so are all
> > > phenomena, internal or external.
>
> > > So what is mind? Where is it? Where does it stop or start? Show me
> > > where it is.
>
> > > /leebert
>
> > You try very hard to appear scholarly but if you just relax you will
> > see that no mind has ever been demonstrated minus a living creature
> > with in which it is a function.
>
> > So where does a mind begin and end within the creature . No creature
> > no mind.
>
> Naive materialism, 101.
>
> Again, from other thread: "Mind," in the Buddhist sense, means
> experience of information, and surprisingly parallel to the
> Einsteinian sense.

You display both arrogance and ignorance in your sophomoric
statememnt.
If ytou were able to supply scientifically verifiable substantiative
data for your foolish beliefs then one would be inclined to listen and
view your positions as other than just superstitious nonsense.

As for Buddhism they have never demonstrated tha actuality of their
belief sustems so why refer to them. In relation To Dr Albert
Einsteuin I suggest you reconcile the following quote with your claim
of his positions of which you obviously know very little.

Quote: But before mankind could be ripe for a science which takes in
the
whole of reality, a second fundamental truth was needed, which only
became common property among philosophers with the advent of Kepler
and Galileo. Pure logical thinking cannot yield us any knowledge of
the empirical world; all knowledge of reality starts form experience
and ends in it. Propositions arrived at by purely logical means are
completely empty as regards reality. (Albert Einstein)

Take note of his statement "science which takes in the whole of
reality" and the final sentence "Propositions arrived at by purely
logical means are completely empty as regards reality" You are
apparently not well prepared to produce intelligent argumentation or
you would recognize that a failed appeal to authority is even more
devastating than just the appeal alone. Logic 101.

So spare us mindless, unsubstantial dissertations based on
superstitious nonsense 101 and give us scientifically verifiable
substantiating data or admit that you know not where of you speak and
that your positions are based entirely on superstitious beliefs. In a
word NONSENSE !

Regards

Psychonomist

>
> /leebert- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:50 pm
From: Max

Well then.....that's one for Dev I suppose......Win some, lose some!

Max

On Nov 30, 1:52 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> max
>
> He's extreme. But what he is expressing in no uncertain terms, and
> quite dramatically I might add, which I give him points for by the
> way, how extreme the theists are getting.
>
> ward
>
> On Nov 29, 1:35 am, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > So Ward, having witnessed one of the more mature threads in recent
> > times (choke, cough, splutter), how do you assess Dev's approach. (Or
> > mine if you like) But at the heart of it, do you understand the
> > strategy Dev is using / defending. Is it plain for you to see?
>
> > Max
>
> > On Nov 29, 5:25 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Kip,
>
> > > There is nothing rational about this entire discussion group, except
> > > on very rare occasions when someone brings up a topic that hasn't
> > > already been super-charged for nuclear collision in the emotional
> > > vortex that is this group. Opening up an extended rant on dev has only
> > > made things uglier.
>
> > > On Nov 27, 5:25 am, Kippers <ro...@croft6942.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > > > I felt I needed to write this in response to Dev's continued claim
> > > > that theists are not people and therefore it's ok to kill them. I
> > > > realize that in making a post disagreeing with Dev's position I will
> > > > be labelled a retard or a rapist of some sort but so be it.
>
> > > > For the purpose of this post I am going to allow the premise that
> > > > theists are not people but I want to make the case of why non-people
> > > > are still worthy of our moral concerns.
>
> > > > Of the planets non-people (those not capable of reason or ethics to
> > > > use Devs own definition) there many who are still sentient beings.
> > > > They have wants and needs, they can feel both physical and mental pain
> > > > and they can feel joy, sorrow, empathy, anger and even form bonds of
> > > > friendship. Such sentient beings include severely handicapped humans,
> > > > many non-human primates, dogs and wolves, dolphins, pigs, cats and so
> > > > on.
>
> > > > Now it is my position that the wants and needs of all sentient beings
> > > > should be subject to our moral concerns. Many non-people feel pain
> > > > just as intensely as people do, they feel the other emotions I listed
> > > > above (and many more) just as intently as humans do and as such I see
> > > > no reason why they should be excluded from our ethical concerns.
>
> > > > The fact that these sentient beings cannot match the rational powers
> > > > of people and the fact that they cannot evaluate ethical issues (even
> > > > though many of them do actually have a moral code) should not mean
> > > > that their pain, suffering or happiness should not matter to us.
>
> > > > Now I appreciate that Dev is not totally serious with his assertions
> > > > on this subject but that fact is he is arguing for that position and
> > > > he seems to think no good arguments exist against has moved me to
> > > > write this post.
>
> > > > His argument actually reminds me of the anthropocentric position of
> > > > many theists who elevate human attributes above all others. He takes
> > > > two of mankind's greatest attributes (rationality and ethics) then
> > > > assumes these are the greatest qualities possessed by any creature in
> > > > the animal kingdom and then argues for the destruction of all animals
> > > > which do not possess these qualities.
>
> > > > His argument displays a lack of rationality and a repulsive breed of
> > > > ethics which would mark out anyone who agreed with it a non-person as
> > > > defined by the argument itself.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 8:00 pm
From: Max

Good for you.....!! Don't forget to wipe your bottom and wash your
hands.

Max

On Dec 1, 1:32 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Max,
>
> > If you don't understand the nuances behind the exchanges that Dev & I
> > are having, don't worry.....because it doesn't really concern you
>
> Nuances, huh, I have more nuances in my bowel movements.
>
> ward
>
> On Nov 30, 7:26 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Who rattled your cage Ward?......You've been here for all of three
> > minutes & have managed to gain a full appreciation of the dynamics
> > between all the participants, past & present in this group have you?
>
> > If you don't understand the nuances behind the exchanges that Dev & I
> > are having, don't worry.....because it doesn't really concern you
> > anyway.
>
> > If you do understand the tenor of the exchanges, then make a
> > 'pertinant' comment regarding the issue. No one is stopping you.
>
> > If you want to post on another issue, please, be my guest.....But if
> > your'e just attention seeking......ask for your mummy.
>
> > Max
>
> > On Dec 1, 1:07 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Max, your a drama queen just admit it.
>
> > > On Nov 30, 5:37 am, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > Ward, it's a google group mate! I don't have my AK47 at the ready.
>
> > > > Max
>
> > > > On Nov 30, 10:29 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Whenever there is conflict tension builds up until there is a
> > > > > catharsis. There is no way you can repess this conflict. It is no
> > > > > longer even thinly veiled hostility. The lst vistages of civility have
> > > > > left this discussion. That is what war is. After the smoke clears the
> > > > > battlefield, and we sift through the rubble we'll see who won. And
> > > > > we'll see who the partisan's are.
>
> > > > > On Nov 30, 5:21 am, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Bingo..no argument with Dev's commitment and vigour, that's for sure.
> > > > > > Problem is that he's just a conceited little shit to think that it's
> > > > > > his way or the highway. We (atheism) need measured, practical and
> > > > > > intelligent work done at the macro level & occassionally the odd
> > > > > > brownshirt to hit the streets at the micro. Not the sledgehammer
> > > > > > schoolboy tactics employed by our little man Dev. Personally, I just
> > > > > > think that Dev, (in between squeezing a pimple or two) gets his
> > > > > > jollies being the tough dude on the net. Bit of a juvenile power trip
> > > > > > me thinks.
>
> > > > > > Anyway, Dev really can only manage the latter on the net, as I suspect
> > > > > > he's the kid who got sand kicked in his face, so the 'cause' don't
> > > > > > need little fuckers like him doing the smarter, more subtle work when
> > > > > > dealing with theists. I mean, Dev's a big tough boy on the net and the
> > > > > > kiddies run and hide when he's on the prowl, but based on his cry baby
> > > > > > antics, he's really just a fuckin' little sook, so he's more of a
> > > > > > liability than an asset given his infantile behaviour.
>
> > > > > > And Dev if you're reading this, I don't need Rapp's cover story in any
> > > > > > way. If I say you're a self centred, middle class little fuck, from
> > > > > > nowheresville, who sooks like a fuckin' two year old when challenged,
> > > > > > then I'm more than happy to say it. Why, because I just think it's
> > > > > > accurate, that's all. No cowardly cover story necessary. It ain't a
> > > > > > chicken shit strategy to mimic 'theists' obnoxious arguments either.
> > > > > > I'm just calling the shots as I see it with you.
>
> > > > > > And you little turd,
>
> > > > > > 1. If my argument is buggered because of your assertions that I
> > > > > > committed the sin of calling you names and was a meany, and because I
> > > > > > said you shouldn't bully Ward, how come you sprayed Kippers who didn't
> > > > > > give you any cause to do so? - Because he challenged you, that's why.
> > > > > > Which highlights the falsity of your argument with me numbnuts, 'cause
> > > > > > that's what your hanging your entire argument on.
>
> > > > > > 2. Why will you not concede that Rapp's & my argument is one & the
> > > > > > same? - because your ego won't allow you too - I've asked you many
> > > > > > times, but you refuse to acknowledge it. Why, cause it will fuck your
> > > > > > argument up. Go on, yes or no you little sook.
>
> > > > > > 3. I'll keep this one in the back pocket. No need to blast away with
> > > > > > everything just yet. I kinda figure what your next response will be
> > > > > > (or at least when it's poked out of you) so I'll hang back here.
>
> > > > > > Cheers you little turd
>
> > > > > > But I still love you, you know that don't you Dev. This is all just
> > > > > > part of the game pal. Surely you can see the strategy can't you.
>
> > > > > > Max
>
> > > > > > On Nov 30, 9:21 pm, TLC <tlc.tere...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Trance,
>
> > > > > > > I find it strange that you think Dev's rednecked, childish echoing of
> > > > > > > supremist ideology by calling religious believers sub-human,
> > > > > > > (Untermensch) is a strategy against theism!
>
> > > > > > > If you think Dev's so-called 'shock tactics' do periodically make them
> > > > > > > think, mmm, about what does it make the religious think? That there
> > > > > > > are atheists, like Dev, who are and can be as irrational and small
> > > > > > > minded as their own religious fanatics. What a tactic! Fighting
> > > > > > > religious IDIOCY with even more childish IDIOCY!
>
> > > > > > > Personally, I think Dev's stupid comments harm atheism more than
> > > > > > > religion and can you show me any intelligent atheist who is in
> > > > > > > agreement with Dev, or who even wants to be associated with the
> > > > > > > exAnyway. smatreme reactionary trash he is posting?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:15 pm
From: Ward Yung

Your a big-mouthed, whiney, phoney, looooooooser.

On Nov 30, 7:50 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Well then.....that's one for Dev I suppose......Win some, lose some!
>
> Max
>
> On Nov 30, 1:52 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > max
>
> > He's extreme. But what he is expressing in no uncertain terms, and
> > quite dramatically I might add, which I give him points for by the
> > way, how extreme the theists are getting.
>
> > ward
>
> > On Nov 29, 1:35 am, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > So Ward, having witnessed one of the more mature threads in recent
> > > times (choke, cough, splutter), how do you assess Dev's approach. (Or
> > > mine if you like) But at the heart of it, do you understand the
> > > strategy Dev is using / defending. Is it plain for you to see?
>
> > > Max
>
> > > On Nov 29, 5:25 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Kip,
>
> > > > There is nothing rational about this entire discussion group, except
> > > > on very rare occasions when someone brings up a topic that hasn't
> > > > already been super-charged for nuclear collision in the emotional
> > > > vortex that is this group. Opening up an extended rant on dev has only
> > > > made things uglier.
>
> > > > On Nov 27, 5:25 am, Kippers <ro...@croft6942.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > > > > I felt I needed to write this in response to Dev's continued claim
> > > > > that theists are not people and therefore it's ok to kill them. I
> > > > > realize that in making a post disagreeing with Dev's position I will
> > > > > be labelled a retard or a rapist of some sort but so be it.
>
> > > > > For the purpose of this post I am going to allow the premise that
> > > > > theists are not people but I want to make the case of why non-people
> > > > > are still worthy of our moral concerns.
>
> > > > > Of the planets non-people (those not capable of reason or ethics to
> > > > > use Devs own definition) there many who are still sentient beings.
> > > > > They have wants and needs, they can feel both physical and mental pain
> > > > > and they can feel joy, sorrow, empathy, anger and even form bonds of
> > > > > friendship. Such sentient beings include severely handicapped humans,
> > > > > many non-human primates, dogs and wolves, dolphins, pigs, cats and so
> > > > > on.
>
> > > > > Now it is my position that the wants and needs of all sentient beings
> > > > > should be subject to our moral concerns. Many non-people feel pain
> > > > > just as intensely as people do, they feel the other emotions I listed
> > > > > above (and many more) just as intently as humans do and as such I see
> > > > > no reason why they should be excluded from our ethical concerns.
>
> > > > > The fact that these sentient beings cannot match the rational powers
> > > > > of people and the fact that they cannot evaluate ethical issues (even
> > > > > though many of them do actually have a moral code) should not mean
> > > > > that their pain, suffering or happiness should not matter to us.
>
> > > > > Now I appreciate that Dev is not totally serious with his assertions
> > > > > on this subject but that fact is he is arguing for that position and
> > > > > he seems to think no good arguments exist against has moved me to
> > > > > write this post.
>
> > > > > His argument actually reminds me of the anthropocentric position of
> > > > > many theists who elevate human attributes above all others. He takes
> > > > > two of mankind's greatest attributes (rationality and ethics) then
> > > > > assumes these are the greatest qualities possessed by any creature in
> > > > > the animal kingdom and then argues for the destruction of all animals
> > > > > which do not possess these qualities.
>
> > > > > His argument displays a lack of rationality and a repulsive breed of
> > > > > ethics which would mark out anyone who agreed with it a non-person as
> > > > > defined by the argument itself.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:50 pm
From: Ward Yung

I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
here. Thanks.

== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:54 pm
From: Dev

Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
Kippers):

http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-deal-with-zombie-invasion-politically-correct-version

Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.

On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> here. Thanks.

== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:58 pm
From: Ward Yung

No waste of time dev; this is for my own "edification".

On Nov 30, 7:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> Kippers):
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 8:24 pm
From: Max

Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.

Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!

"I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
that
that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."

Yes or No. If no, why?

I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
enough, you always knew where to find him :)

Max

On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> Kippers):
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 8:49 pm
From: Ward Yung

Ay,

Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
way there bloke.

ward

On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> that
> that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> Max
>
> On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > Kippers):
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:01 pm
From: Max

Attttenshun!

Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
have managed.

Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.

Quiiiiick March.

Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.

Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.

(Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)

Max

On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ay,
>
> Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> way there bloke.
>
> ward
>
> On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > that
> > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > Max
>
> > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > Kippers):
>
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:03 pm
From: Ward Yung

blah, blah, blah...

On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> Attttenshun!
>
> Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> have managed.
>
> Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> Quiiiiick March.
>
> Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> Max
>
> On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Ay,
>
> > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > way there bloke.
>
> > ward
>
> > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > that
> > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > Max
>
> > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > Kippers):
>
> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:12 pm
From: Max

Well, if a bloke called me a "stupid little cunt" (which he did) I'd
haul him up on it. You just kissed his arse for the honour. If I'm
incorrect & you did in fact arc up and haul him up, then I'm wrong and
I will stand corrected and will apologise.

But I didn't see it.

Max

On Dec 1, 3:03 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> blah, blah, blah...
>
> On Nov 30, 9:01 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Attttenshun!
>
> > Corporal Yung......Today you have cleaned Field Marshall Dev's boots,
> > made his bed, fed his war dogs, dusted off his seventeen posters of
> > himself, shook his knob after his morning widdle, made his brekky and
> > massaged his balls, but despatches just in have it that you have
> > failed to kiss his arse for the requisite 12 minutes not the 8 you
> > have managed.
>
> > Off you go to the officers mess lad, where you will find Field
> > Marshall Dev, currently regailing his retinue of junior officers and
> > their respective bum boys and you will apologise profusely, genuflect
> > accordingly and kiss the exhulted bottom for the balance of 4 minutes.
>
> > Quiiiiick March.
>
> > Deary me Ward, it does look obvious.
>
> > Maybe you can prompt your boss to answer my question.
>
> > (Dev disclaimer - observational humour, not abuse)
>
> > Max
>
> > On Dec 1, 2:49 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Ay,
>
> > > Just got back from the store there matey. Oh Frankey boy, I know him,
> > > he was nuttin' but a blounder, an I'm sure you got rid o' him strait
> > > way there bloke.
>
> > > ward
>
> > > On Nov 30, 8:24 pm, Max <a...@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> > > > Oooh! Still out there lobbying mate....doing a great job.
>
> > > > Any chance for an answer from you here perhaps. Go on, be a devil!!
>
> > > > "I can now safely assume you acknowldege that we are in agreement
> > > > that
> > > > that both Rapp & I have the same opinion as to your strategy."
>
> > > > Yes or No. If no, why?
>
> > > > I'll keep this up you know! Frank tried the same thing, but funnily
> > > > enough, you always knew where to find him :)
>
> > > > Max
>
> > > > On Dec 1, 1:54 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > > > Just in case this thread will turn out to be kind of a waste of time
> > > > > otherwise, please check out this page (dedicated to Max, TLC and
> > > > > Kippers):
>
> > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/web/how-to-dea...
>
> > > > > Stirring up shit, stirring up shit, yes I am.
>
> > > > > On Nov 30, 8:50 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@mail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I'm sure I will pick up steam on this as time goes by, and you can
> > > > > > count on this topic popping up on a regular basis. I don't feel like
> > > > > > summarizing my daily activities right now because I am just too
> > > > > > pissed off about the cosmic energy stream of apathy--eg. bitch,
> > > > > > rag...etc, you know the rest. Anyway, if you want to include your
> > > > > > summary here, I couldn't imagine why from such a gruesome, unfriendly
> > > > > > lot as yourselves, but if you do--feel free to include your summary
> > > > > > here. Thanks.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

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

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 8:01 pm
From: Multiverse

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 -

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 8:25 pm
From: harry k

On Nov 30, 11:01 am, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
<ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Nov 30, 8:32 am, harry k <turnkey4...@hotmail.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?
>
> > > On Nov 30, 7:12 am, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
> > Can you explain why he refers to 'other' gods? Your religion insists
> > there is only one.
>
> > Seems that as a true believer you are risking your eternal soul by
> > worshipping the wrong one. You should worship all of them to be sure
> > you have included the _right_ one.
>
> The right one must be worshipped *first* (no other gods BEFORE me).

Aha!!

Harry K

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 8:33 pm
From: Max

Is nite angel 86 there with you? "Missed by that much"

Crack cocaine...........does it every time!

(Dev disclaimer - not abuse - just ridicule)

Max

On Dec 1, 12:48 pm, niteangel99 <niteange...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I believe in God,not because of mommy are daddy.Are someone making me
> believe.I know first hand experience how he saved me.How he came to
> me,in dreams and visions. How I have the Holy Spirit.He is with me
> now.No one will change my mind.Because he is real. I feel sorry for
> those who don't believe. Do you believe their is and HELL,there is and
> HEAVEN.
> I would not push the guy aside ,His name is JESUS.....I welcome him
> here....
> Atheis don't scare me one bit..Get and LIfe....

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 8:40 pm
From: 4praise <4praise2@gmail.com>

> What specific scientific data has emerged in the last 150 years that
> supports the concept of Intelligent Design.

All of it. But here is some specific things -
http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/newproofs.shtml

> Telling me things are complex and organized doesn't really cut it.

Why not? The more that we learn, the more incredible it becomes.

> You'll have to do better than that.

I cannot prove that God exists. It is my contention that God proves
His own existence and that anyone looking for Him will find Him -
first by looking at what He has made and then by talking to Him. I
don't expect to convince anyone with my weak arguments - I am counting
on God to convince you.

On Nov 30, 8:55 am, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 11:34 PM, 4praise <4prai...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It's true, when I and other theists look at living things we see the
> > attributes of God reflected while an atheist just sees the attributes
> > of life. But Jesus said "I am the way, the truth and the LIFE..." So
> > for us, even when you say that those are just the attributes of life,
> > we are still thinking, yes, they are because Jesus is life.
>
> Well I suspect you think that this answers my question as to what in the
> scientific data supports ID but it's another poetic dodge.
>
> The question is quite specific but I'll make it more specific.
>
> What specific scientific data has emerged in the last 150 years that
> supports the concept of Intelligent Design.
>
> Telling me things are complex and organized doesn't really cut it.
>
> You'll have to do better than that.
>
> > Organic computing - hmm, we better turn Sarah Connor loose on them :)
>
> > I have no doubt that computers will get smarter and in a sense be self
> > organizing - but they would still at their roots have a designer.
>
> > So even IF life did "organize itself" that would just imply a designer
> > that is smart enough to build that type of system.
>
> > On Nov 28, 4:33 am, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 10:42 PM, 4praise <4prai...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > About 1,940 years ago Paul wrote "... ever since the creation of the
> > > > world His invisible nature and attributes, that is, His eternal power
> > > > and divinity, have been made intelligible and clearly discernible in
> > > > and through the things that have been made..."
>
> > > So, let me get this straight. You've taken a vague statement written 2000
> > > years ago which could mean pretty much anything and are applying it to
> > DNA?
>
> > > > The only thing that has changed since then is that we can look farther
> > > > and deeper and with more understanding but these things like DNA
> > > > continue to reveal His nature and attributes.
>
> > > DNA provides us with a understanding of the nature and attributes of
> > Life.
> > > Haven't seen any god defined in it.
>
> > > > I attribute these things to God and of course, I am not alone in ding
> > > > that.
>
> > > True. But the reality is that there is nothing to indicate any god(s)
> > being
> > > involved in it.
>
> > > So this is speculation at best and delusion at worst.
>
> > > > An atheist might just attribute it to "life" and so the
> > > > question becomes where did life come from? And again, my answer is
> > > > that life came from God.
>
> > > And again, the key factor here is that there is nothing to indicate any
> > god
> > > except you jumping to conclusions based on your indoctrination and
> > nothing
> > > else.
>
> > > If there was, then one might be able to claim some support for
> > Creationism
> > > or ID.
>
> > > As it stands there isn't.
>
> > > This is another interesting article about DNA that is not a theist
>
> > > > article -
> > > >http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2001/04/04/133634.htm?site=sci.
> > ..
>
> > > Thanks, I'll look at it when I get a chance.
>
> > > > On Nov 26, 6:02 am, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > ...
>
> > > > > read more »
>
> > > > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 1:55 AM, 4praise <4prai...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Here is one example
>
> > > > > >http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2192678&page=1
>
> > > > > Still waiting for the case to be made on exactly how the scientific
> > > > evidence
> > > > > or any interpretation of it supports ID.
>
> > > > > How does DNA or any interpretation of that discovery support ID?
>
> > > > > > <http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=2192678&page=1>
>
> > > > > > On Nov 25, 8:17 pm, Dag Yo <sir_ro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > On Nov 25, 4:45 pm, 4praise <4prai...@gmail.com> wrote:> The
> > data is
> > > > > > beautiful,
>
> > > > > > > Again, what data?
>
> > > > > > > > the systems are beautiful. That drafterman can
> > > > > > > > draft a seemingly "brilliant exposure" is beautiful.
> > Ironically,
> > > > > > > > drafterman's intellect undermines his predisposition.
>
> > > > > > > > Nothing "proves" God's existence if we are allowed to define
> > the
> > > > word
> > > > > > > > "proof". The beauty doesn't "prove" it - it just slaps us in
> > the
> > > > face
> > > > > > > > with it.
>
> > > > > > > > On Nov 25, 6:33 am, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 2:05 AM, 4praise <4prai...@gmail.com
>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Fair enough. What then in the existing data supports ID?
>
> > > > > > > > > > The beauty of it.
>
> > > > > > > > > Oh Come On 4Praise. This is where you guys lose and it's a
> > clear
> > > > > > dodge.
>
> > > > > > > > > What has beauty got to do with it or the existing scientific
> > > > data?
>
> > > > > > > > > Is the data beautiful? Lol.
>
> > > > > > > > > Did you see Drafterman's concise and brilliant exposure of
> > the
> > > > logic
> > > > > > behind
> > > > > > > > > this?
>
> >http://groups.google.ca/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/msg/7be2e47c550.
> > > > ..
>
> > > > > > > > > You claimed that ID was based on a different interpretation
> > of
> > > > > > existing
> > > > > > > > > scientific data.
>
> > > > > > > > > I asked you to provide the existing scientific data, ID is
> > based
> > > > on.
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Nov 24, 10:47 am, "Trance Gemini" <
> > trancegemi...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 11:27 PM, 4praise <
> > > > 4prai...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > It's common for people to look at the same data and
> > think
> > > > > > differently
> > > > > > > > > > > > about it. Scientific research causes some to doubt
> > there
> > > > is a
> > > > > > God and
> > > > > > > > > > > > causes others to marvel at God. Most likely there are
> > > > other
> > > > > > factors
> > > > > > > > > > > > that have developed the persons paradigm besides the
> > data
> > > > that
> > > > > > they
> > > > > > > > > > > > are currently looking at.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Fair enough. What then in the existing data supports ID?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 22, 6:17 pm, "Trance Gemini" <
> > > > trancegemi...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 8:07 PM, 4praise <
> > > > 4prai...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are ignoring the research when the model
> > they
> > > > > > propose is an
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > antithesis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > But it isn't. You have to separate the research
> > from
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > interpretations and conclusions.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > In order for the interpretations and conclusions to
> > make
> > > > > > sense and be
> > > > > > > > > > > > based
> > > > > > > > > > > > > on the research they have to be consistent and inline
> > > > with
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > research.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > If they aren't, they've been ignored. No?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 22, 4:45 am, "Trance Gemini" <
> > > > > > trancegemi...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 1:13 AM, 4praise <
> > > > > > 4prai...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Exactly what research in the last 150 years
> > > > supports
> > > > > > the ID
> > > > > > > > > > > > Model?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I didn't say that it supported it - I said that
> > > > those
> > > > > > > > > > particular
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > christians were not "ignoring" the research.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are ignoring the research when the model
> > they
> > > > > > propose is an
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > antithesis
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to it.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They publish a steady stream of articles that
> > talk
> > > > > > about out
> > > > > > > > > > > > research
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that seems to imply a designer.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is one of the latest -
>
> >http://www.reasons.org/tnrtb/2008/11/21/error-control-coding-in-biolo.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 21, 5:02 am, "Trance Gemini"
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 1:39 AM, 4praise <
> > > > > > 4prai...@gmail.com
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Irrelevant question.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The "need" for a god is felt by theists,
> > not
> > > > by
> > > > > > rational
> > > > > > > > > > > > people.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In the case of Antony Flew, he was an
> > atheist
> > > > that
> > > > > > became a
> > > > > > > > > > > > deist
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > endorsed the teaching of Intelligent Design
> > in
> > > > > > British
> > > > > > > > > > schools
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > primarily because of recent advances in
> > > > > > understanding DNA.
> > > > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > > > think
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that atheists feel a need for God, but are
> > just
> > > > > > convinced
> > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > > > it's
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > silly thing and should be ignored.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You disagree with RTB's model and their
> > > > conclusions
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > predictions
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but I think it's obvious that they haven't
> > > > ignored
> > > > > > 150
> > > > > > > > > > years of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > research - they just don't have the same
> > model,
> > > > > > predictions
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > conclusions that you have based on the
> > > > research.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Exactly what research in the last 150 years
> > > > supports
> > > > > > the ID
> > > > > > > > > > > > Model?
>
> ...
>
> read more »

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 8:45 pm
From: Multiverse

interesting stuff you seemed to have familiarized yourself with here.
perhaps beyond my pay grade but could you explain a little better what
you mean by:

>The problem is that time may not really exist,

I see how you worked it into context, I think. Time does exist and
has been aggressively studied via mathematics, physics, and other
stuff I know even less about. Time dilation has been measured.
Perhaps there is more to learn about time. From what I gather though,
we are as certain as we are going to be for now that time does exist.
Also the relationship between space and time has and continues to be
probed.

So how do you figure time may not exist?

Also you stated:

>As for a first cause, there can be no such thing, but we suspect a
>causeless, eternal creator could conjour material existence.

never mind who the we are that are suspecting this. Which causeless,
eternal creators were included in this study and can I get their
contact info?

and as far as:

>Without nothingness
>there's no creator (and the human mind cannot conceive of either a
>beginning or a no-beginning).

I don't lose any sleep over the environmental constraints you may
imagine apply to a creator due to the fact they do not exist. I
know lots and lots of human minds that can conceive of a beginning and
a no beginning. Just pointing that out.

On Nov 30, 3:38 am, leebert <sregdor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 30, 2:03 am, "Ms. S. Goten" <SonnyGo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > @ Drafterman:
> > You still haven't completely covered it yet. Before you can truly
> > answer the question if space has always existed, you must also ask
> > yourself:
> > Can time exist without space?
> > Because space cannot be without time, but that doesn't mean nessecary
> > that time cannot be without space.
>
> Dear Ms. S. Goten.
>
> What you have is a paradox.
>
> If time were an independent phenomenon it'd still constitute an
> information frame, which - being dimensional - is a functional space
> to itself. Whether it's temporal or not is irrelevant, we only elevate
> "time" to something more independent b/c we are creatures of spatial
> and temporal habit. The problem is that time may not really exist, but
> information rate in experience does.
>
> As for a first cause, there can be no such thing, but we suspect a
> causeless, eternal creator could conjour material existence.
>
> But to try to establish a creator in a frame separate from the thing
> he would create establishes a paradox. Just like there being no
> "nothingness," b/c there'd be no discrete boundary that'd allow for
> such a thing, we can't use "nothingness" to define a creator b/c
> there'd be no temporal or spatial boundary that would cast a creator
> apart from his creation (creatio ex nihilo). Without nothingness
> there's no creator (and the human mind cannot conceive of either a
> beginning or a no-beginning).
>
> One possible conclusion to this could be that creator & creation would
> be one and the same, and both are eternal (the best solution to this
> is some kind of pandeism). Or ex nihilo nihil fit.
>
> The problem with both being eternal, however is, if they are one and
> the same then creation doesn't need a creator.
>
> /leebert

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Is there a atheist out there who would like to be interviewed?
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/77e979a454735392?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 8:41 pm
From: "kosterbrandon@gmail.com"

Hi, I'm new, and I am trying to find people to interview for a
project. I have to interview people of different beliefs for a Bible
class assignment in a Christian high school. I already found one
person and I just need one more. It is 20 questions regarding the
universe, morals, God, and the Bible. I don't really want to debate
anyone, maybe another day. I just would like everyone to know that
the assignment is to go and find people to answer the questions, you
are not doing the assignment for me, I will use your responses to
write a paper. On Yahoo Answers I was accused of asking people to do
my work for me, that is not the case. This is simply an interview.
If you are interested you can email me and I will send you the
questions. Thanks for the help.

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 8:09 pm
From: Ruthie

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

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 - 25 new messages in 8 topics - digest

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

Atheism-vs-Christianity@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Christians, please define what you mean by God.
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/6e79397d59ea1ce0?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 6:50 pm
From: niteangel99

Are you on something??

On Nov 25, 5:16 am, TLC <tlc.tere...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I think christians have a problem defining their god. Firstly, they
> say it's one god, but it has a son who is also the same god and then
> they throw in a holy spirit thing which is also the same god!
>
> Secondly, the Jesus god, who is also supposed to be the same god in
> the old testament, sounds like It had a personality transplant. In
> the old testament it's a murdurous, sadistic thing which hates
> everyone, in the new testament it's supposed to be all loving! Yet,
> it then spoils this new attitude by wanting everyone, including those
> who have never even heard about it, slowly tortured for eternity!
>
> Not only that, but christians then say that all other religions,
> including other christian sects and those who worship their one god
> without its son, will be tortured for eternity.
>
> And you expect christians to define their god thing? You must be
> joking!

== 2 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 6:52 pm
From: niteangel99

Ok,smark guy,Do you believe in HELL?

On Nov 25, 7:09 am, Lawrey <lawrenc...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> philosophy,
>
> There is and can only be one definition of the thing called a god
> and I am so tired of repeating it, but here goes one more time.
>
> The superstitious, superhuman myth christians are want to
> refer to as god/s is nothing more than Thought.
>
> It is that which the individual mind wills it to be, but it is
> nothing that anyone can establish as fact, in short the
> godthing is nothing, there is no such thing known to have
> existed in over 6000, years of recorded history, because
> there is nothing to record.
>
> On Nov 25, 7:44 am, philosophy <smwil...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>
> > Ok people. I have an idea of what/who God is supposed to be, but I am
> > not a Christian. I understand him, from a Christian point of view, to
> > be the big Skydaddy who rules over all. Maybe I am wrong. Please
> > enlighten me. Thanks.

== 3 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 6:53 pm
From: niteangel99

Read the most famous book in the world.IT's called the BIBLE

On Nov 25, 12:05 pm, Lawrey <lawrenc...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Liam Too,
>
> You are wrong Aristotle did not define god as the first cause.
> If you are going to quote ancient philosophers, get it right,
> He defind god/s as thought.
>
> On Nov 25, 3:26 pm, LiamToo <liamtoo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 24, 11:44 pm, philosophy <smwil...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > Ok people. I have an idea of what/who God is supposed to be, but I am
> > > not a Christian. I understand him, from a Christian point of view, to
> > > be the big Skydaddy who rules over all. Maybe I am wrong. Please
> > > enlighten me. Thanks.
>
> > God is the "First Cause" or the Uncaused Cause" or the "Unmoved Mover"
> > as defined by Aristotle, Aquinas, Flew and believed now by Richard
> > Dawkins.

== 4 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 6:54 pm
From: niteangel99

Oh,and I thought the sabbath day was on and Saturday,,,Sunday is the
first of the week,,,,read on,,,,,

On Nov 25, 12:40 pm, Alan Wostenberg <awo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ypu write "big Skydaddy who rules over all". Not a bad start. Let's
> work with it. Contrast it with the opening line of the creed said
> every Sunday around the world:
>
> We believe in God, the Father Almighty.
>
> Now "daddy" is not a bad substitute for "father"; I've always thought
> Father is rather stern and german. God, the Daddy Almighty is not bad.
>
> But consider your adjective "Big" contrasted with the actual adjective
> of "almighty". However big the big sky daddy is, we can add a unit an
> get an even bigger one. Your big daddy could not possibly rule over
> all. You've thought a contradiction, philosophy.
>
> If you want to make sure the God in whom you lack belief is the One in
> whom we believe, stick to the creedal formula:
>
> God, the Father Almighty.
>
> Realize that Almighty God has not the limits making space necessary,
> which is why we don't say he's big, but do say He's Immense.
>
> On Nov 24, 11:44 pm, philosophy <smwil...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>
> > Ok people. I have an idea of what/who God is supposed to be, but I am
> > not a Christian. I understand him, from a Christian point of view, to
> > be the big Skydaddy who rules over all. Maybe I am wrong. Please
> > enlighten me. Thanks.

== 5 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 6:56 pm
From: niteangel99

Everyone has their right to believe the way they do.,,am i right...

On Nov 25, 12:56 pm, Answer_42 <ipu.belie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 25, 10:26 am, LiamToo <liamtoo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Ok people. I have an idea of what/who God is supposed to be, but I am
> > > not a Christian. I understand him, from a Christian point of view, to
> > > be the big Skydaddy who rules over all. Maybe I am wrong. Please
> > > enlighten me. Thanks.
>
> > God is the "First Cause" or the Uncaused Cause" or the "Unmoved Mover"
> > as defined by Aristotle, Aquinas, Flew and believed now by Richard
> > Dawkins.
>
> Bull shit.
>
> I listen to that Dawkins interview, he said no such thing.
>
> If you think I am wrong, do some work and prove your own claim.
> _____________________________________
> The fact -- not theory -- that evolution has occurred and the
> Darwinian theory as to how it occurred have become so confused in
> popular opinion that the distinction must be stressed.
> -- George Gaylord Simpson

== 6 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 6:59 pm
From: niteangel99

It is not meant to no everything about God,until the Day comes,Every
eye will see,and every knee will bow.
Am and human,you call your self finite human.Sorry bud,,,you had to
many..
On Nov 25, 3:14 pm, "Brock Organ" <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 4:01 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 25, 11:35 am, "Brock Organ" <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> > IBut then again, I love comedy. I find it particularly humourous to
> >> > note that the Confession goes into minute detail about God, including
> >> > knowledge of his body parts, yet in the same sentence declares God to
> >> > be "incomprehensible."
>
> >> Not exhaustively knowing all things about God (incomprehensible) does
> >> not imply that finite humans are unable to know any thing about God.
>
> > incomprehensible (from the dictionary link onhttp://bible.cc/, the
> > site that you provide a link for below):
>
> > (a.) Not capable of being understood; inconceivable; beyond the reach
> > of the human intellect.
>
> > Clearly if you even know one thing about God then God is not
> > "incomprehensible,"
>
> Or rather, to know some things about God does not imply that one can
> know all things about God.
>
> Regards,
>
> Brock

== 7 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:04 pm
From: niteangel99

Let me answer this for you,I don't claim nothin from God,He ask more
of thee. You already know there is and God,why not say it.I think I
will join the christian site..this site is very boring.Christians have
something to live for...Do YOU?

On Nov 25, 4:33 pm, philosophy <smwil...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
> Lawrey says
> The superstitious, superhuman myth christians are want to
> refer to as god/s is nothing more than Thought.
>
> I know where you are coming from Lawrey, and I agree with you.
> However, the Christians from their various denominations claim a
> lot from their "God". I was wanting to know if it is some super
> spirit, or if it's a super man, or what the hell is it.
>
> On Nov 25, 11:09 pm, Lawrey <lawrenc...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> > philosophy,
>
> > There is and can only be one definition of the thing called a god
> > and I am so tired of repeating it, but here goes one more time.
>
> > The superstitious, superhuman myth christians are want to
> > refer to as god/s is nothing more than Thought.
>
> > It is that which the individual mind wills it to be, but it is
> > nothing that anyone can establish as fact, in short the
> > godthing is nothing, there is no such thing known to have
> > existed in over 6000, years of recorded history, because
> > there is nothing to record.
>
> > On Nov 25, 7:44 am, philosophy <smwil...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > Ok people. I have an idea of what/who God is supposed to be, but I am
> > > not a Christian. I understand him, from a Christian point of view, to
> > > be the big Skydaddy who rules over all. Maybe I am wrong. Please
> > > enlighten me. Thanks.

== 8 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:08 pm
From: niteangel99

Hehe you make me laugh,you know why,how silly you sound, It's your
life,not mind..

On Nov 30, 6:33 am, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Joe,
>
> > everything He has revealed at any time will still be nothing compared
> > with the infinity that lies still hidden in Love.
>
> This is something you would tell a child. I would be completely
> insulted if someone told me this. They would have to hold a sword to
> my throat to get me to acknowledge it, "Hmm, ok, maybe your right,
> maybe there is a god, and maybe that god is love", but I would be
> crossing my fingers behind my back, and swearing under my breath to
> get even, and I would be sorely tempted to say under this sword,
> "...but can I think it over first?" Insufferable.
>
> ward
>
> On Nov 29, 11:21 pm, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 28, 7:32 pm, philosophy <smwil...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > Actually Joe, I was using it purely as a definition.
> > > It seems to me that when people believe in God, God is different
> > > for every person who believes in him/her. Some people believe
> > > God is a person and has human form. Others say, no, God is a
> > > spirit, and the third lot suggest that God is both.
> > > Then there is the metaphysical side of things, where people don't
> > > relate to God as anything like a human entity, but more like the
> > > power of life, or the consciousness of the universe, the oneness
> > > of all life, etc. My question was limited to asking what Christians
> > > thought their God was, hence my asking for a definition from
> > > them. There is no ulterior motive - just being respectful of
> > > something I can't relate to, or believe in.
>
> > I wold say that all the above descriptions are limited ideas of
> > attributes of God. Limited ideas are the only ideas we can have, of
> > an infinite Entity, so I prefer to acknowledge that for the most part
> > God is Unknown. I believe He has revealed Himself to us in Jesus
> > Christ, as previously as the Word to the prophets of old. I believe
> > the Word remains with us, in the Holy Eucharist, so that there is no
> > limit to how much Love will reveal both now and forever, and yet
> > everything He has revealed at any time will still be nothing compared
> > with the infinity that lies still hidden in Love. He will always be
> > for the most part Unknown to us as the Infinite Mystery, but He has
> > revealed enough for us to know Him as Love, and that is Enough, for
> > Love is Infinite. And the infinity of Love is Incarnate, in the
> > Eucharist.
>
> > > On Nov 29, 5:28 am, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:> No, it is your move. Where do we go with this?
>
> > > > Or did you actually only honestly want to know what God is?
>
> > > > On Nov 27, 12:01 am, philosophy <smwil...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > So far?
> > > > > Do you want more?
> > > > > If so, please add.
>
> > > > > On Nov 27, 1:10 pm, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Nov 26, 5:42 pm, philosophy <smwil...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Okay Joe
> > > > > > > Let's try and get some sense here.
> > > > > > > So, your definition of God is going to be:
> > > > > > > God is:
> > > > > > > Unique (in that there is only one God).
> > > > > > > Universal (in that he is the God of All).
> > > > > > > Life-generating (in that he is the Origin of all life).
> > > > > > > Personal (in that he may be characterized as a Person rather than an
> > > > > > > impersonal force or principle.)
> > > > > > > Omnipotent (in that he is able to exercise power over any part of the
> > > > > > > universe or over the universe as a whole.
> > > > > > > Benevolent (in that god is Kind to His children.)
> > > > > > > Incomprehensible (in that he is infinite).
> > > > > > > In short, Joe is postulating:
> > > > > > > God is the unique, universal, all-powerful, benevolent Person
> > > > > > > who is the source of all life.
> > > > > > > Have I got this right Joe, or have I got it wrong?
>
> > > > > > So far, so good.
>
> > > > > > > On Nov 27, 5:53 am, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:> First of all, I am amazed to see some possible progress in a thread
> > > > > > > > like this. Bravo to you both, philosopher and Alan, for bringing it
> > > > > > > > this far. My hope is restored!
>
> > > > > > > > I too was struck by the nearness of the miss in the opening post.
>
> > > > > > > > "the big Skydaddy who rules over all."
>
> > > > > > > > Skydaddy is a common derogatory form of "Heavenly Father." The
> > > > > > > > thought is that "Heavenly Father" sounds too normal, since we often
> > > > > > > > pray to our heavenly Father, in fact, Our Lord began the Lord's Prayer
> > > > > > > > with "Our Father who art in Heaven." Had His words instead been
> > > > > > > > historically rendered into the common English as "Our Daddy who art in
> > > > > > > > the Sky," no doubt atheists would choose a different phrase to mock
> > > > > > > > that. Maybe philosopher would have said, "I understand him to be the
> > > > > > > > big Cloud Stud. . ." or something that sounds equally mocking.
>
> > > > > > > > But I understand that to be cursed with atheism is to suffer a social
> > > > > > > > handicap, so I'll let it slide. After all, there isn't anyone here
> > > > > > > > more socially backwards than yours truly --- ask any atheist.
>
> > > > > > > > Anyway, analyzing phil's phrase for content, I find, mocking
> > > > > > > > phraseology aside, he has done a passable job.
>
> > > > > > > > "the" not "a" --- indicating this entity is Unique.
>
> > > > > > > > "big" not "small" --- indicating this unique entity is important
> > > > > > > > rather than inconsequential.
>
> > > > > > > > "Skydaddy" --- a compound we should break down:
> > > > > > > > "Sky" --- indicating that this entity is associated with the vastness
> > > > > > > > of the universe rather than just the local planet.
> > > > > > > > "daddy" --- indicating that this entity has the power to generate new
> > > > > > > > life.
>
> > > > > > > > "who" --- indicating a Person rather than an impersonal force or
> > > > > > > > principle.
>
> > > > > > > > "rules" --- indicating that this unique, important, universal, life-
> > > > > > > > generating Person has the power of control.
>
> > > > > > > > "over" --- a preposition joining said power of control with its object
>
> > > > > > > > "all" --- the object-set over which the entity has control --- in this
> > > > > > > > case, what is being asserted is omnipotence, "power over all."
>
> > > > > > > > So we have a pretty good picture of God, from an atheist. Not bad.
> > > > > > > > "Big" seems redundant given omnipotence. But God, according to this
> > > > > > > > understanding is:
>
> > > > > > > > 1. unique --- there is only one God.
> > > > > > > > 2. universal --- He is the God of All.
> > > > > > > > 3. life-generating --- He is the Origin of all life.
> > > > > > > > 4. personal --- He may be characterized as a Person rather than an
> > > > > > > > impersonal force or principle.
> > > > > > > > 5. omnipotent --- He is able to exercise power over any part of the
> > > > > > > > universe or over the universe as a whole.
>
> > > > > > > > There is some redundancy here, since to be able to exercise power
> > > > > > > > already does indicate a personal nature. We could say that a lake
> > > > > > > > behind a dam *has* a lot of power, but we would not say that the lake
> > > > > > > > *exercises* that power when its pressure is used to generate
> > > > > > > > electricity. Rather, we would attribute the use of the power of the
> > > > > > > > lake to those human beings who took advantage of its potential.
> > > > > > > > Still, it is possible --- as in the case of the lake --- to attribute
> > > > > > > > great power to an impersonal entity. We associate potential with
> > > > > > > > impersonal entities, but not potency. The attribute of omnipotence
> > > > > > > > means the ability to exercise infinite power, not merely to possess
> > > > > > > > it. God has infinite potency, not merely infinite potential.
>
> > > > > > > > Nevertheless, there is obvious overlap, and it may be unclear that any
> > > > > > > > entity could possess any one of these attributes without
> > > > > > > > simultaneously possessing all the others.
>
> > > > > > > > I would add another attribute that is included in the definition but
> > > > > > > > that I passed over initially: "Father," or more accurately,
> > > > > > > > "Daddy," ("Daddy" more accurately renders the Hebrew "Abba") indicates
> > > > > > > > not only one who can generate life, but one who affectionately regards
> > > > > > > > the life he generates, and cares for it in a personal way. This might
> > > > > > > > also be derived from the combination of omnipotence, generativity, and
> > > > > > > > personality, but in case that derivation might be missed, it is O.K.
> > > > > > > > to state it separately:
>
> > > > > > > > 6. benevolent --- God is Kind to His children.
>
> > > > > > > > I think we have now arrived at a fairly accurate definition of my God,
> > > > > > > > or at least a fair description. He is the unique, universal, all-
> > > > > > > > powerful, benevolent Person who is the source of all life.
>
> > > > > > > > On Nov 26, 11:38 am, Alan Wostenberg <awo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > God is spirit? Yes. Incomprehensible? I confess don't know with any
> > > > > > > > > precision term incomprehensible, since it's not used in the modern
> > > > > > > > > creeds or catechisms. Yet here it is in the ancient Athanasian creed
> > > > > > > > > (*)
>
> > > > > > > > > "The Father Incomprehensible, the Son Incomprehensible, and the Holy
> > > > > > > > > Ghost Incomprehensible".
>
> > > > > > > > > I share Neils' question. It seems if one says God is Incomprehensible
> > > > > > > > > it contradicts saying other things of God, such as God is Spirit. On
> > > > > > > > > the surface it seems to contradict itself. How do we know enough
> > > > > > > > > about God to say He's Incomphrehensible? Well as always, we have to
> > > > > > > > > begin with term definitions. What is meant by incomprehensible?
>
> ...
>
> read more »

== 9 of 9 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:09 pm
From: niteangel99

For you it may be

On Nov 30, 4:01 pm, xeno <69black...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 30, 12:15 pm, Joe <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > But
> > there is no other way to enter the Kingdom.
>
> what kingdom? it's just a fairy tale.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Read the Official Vatican Policy on Covering Up Kiddie Rape
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/bf60dbae19b165b3?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 6:52 pm
From: trog69

I stand corrected. :)

On Nov 30, 1:44 pm, "Turner Hayes" <lordlacol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 3:23 PM, trog69 <tom.tro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I forgot you're a squiddy, too. I came here to post it, but you beat
> > me to it.
>
> > As usual, the theists here will glom on the "religious expert"s little
> > suck ass dance at the end of the item, where he tries to give the
> > Vatican some wiggle room. But Ratso kinda fucked things up by
> > reiterating the document as still in force in 2001. Just looking at a
> > picture of ol' Ratzinger makes me think we are all living some weird
> > Kafka novel. He's like a walking caricature of a big fucking Rat
> > wearing a big fucking hat, and wringing his little fucking rat hands
> > together as he squints at the little boy's asses.
>
> Really? He's much more of an Emperor Palpatine to me. I can almost see the
> lightning shooting out of his clawlike fingers.
>
>
>
> > On Nov 30, 10:47 am, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > > Not a surprise to anyone, but it offers a nice retort to those who
> > > argue that just because Catholic Priests like raping kids does not
> > > mean that the Catholic Church is officially a child rape organization.
> > > Yes, it is, since it officially favors protecting rapists over
> > > victims.
>
> > >http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/aug/17/religion.childprotection/...
>
> > > "The Vatican instructed Catholic bishops around the world to cover up
> > > cases of sexual abuse or risk being thrown out of the Church.
>
> > > The Observer has obtained a 40-year-old confidential document from the
> > > secret Vatican archive which lawyers are calling a 'blueprint for
> > > deception and concealment'. One British lawyer acting for Church child
> > > abuse victims has described it as 'explosive'.
>
> > > The 69-page Latin document bearing the seal of Pope John XXIII was
> > > sent to every bishop in the world. The instructions outline a policy
> > > of 'strictest' secrecy in dealing with allegations of sexual abuse and
> > > threatens those who speak out with excommunication."
>
> > > "It focuses on sexual abuse initiated as part of the confessional
> > > relationship between a priest and a member of his congregation. But
> > > the instructions also cover what it calls the 'worst crime', described
> > > as an obscene act perpetrated by a cleric with 'youths of either sex
> > > or with brute animals (bestiality)'.
>
> > > Bishops are instructed to pursue these cases 'in the most secretive
> > > way... restrained by a perpetual silence... and everyone... is to
> > > observe the strictest secret which is commonly regarded as a secret of
> > > the Holy Office... under the penalty of excommunication'."
>
> > > You can also read a .pdf of the document on the page. I'd imagine
> > > theists are going to make the argument that it's from 1962, and since
> > > then the Catholic Church has all apologized for it's position and no
> > > longer takes money for the legal defense of rapists and has released a
> > > whole bunch of other documents officially resigning their policies
> > > and...you know how child rapists are. They'll make up all sorts of
> > > lies.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: The benefits of religion
http://groups.google.com/group/Atheism-vs-Christianity/t/60eb38b8557ee920?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 6:52 pm
From: Ward Yung

Well, I'll let you in on a little secret. I can tell by the context,
what the tone should be. A Buddhist monk, or even a master, to a
western ego, would come off as quite passive, and not-so grand-
masterly. And also, I noticed a waver in the tone half way through the
comp--a literary observation.

On Nov 30, 7:44 am, "Trance Gemini" <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 10:46 PM, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > This ones good. But a real Buddhist would never use that tone.
>
> I made a similar comment to one one of Leeberts posts and then I realized,
> what do I know about buddhism, buddhists and what they may or may not say
> ;-)
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 29, 7:40 pm, Jing Jing <J.C.74Rami...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Mr. Yung,
>
> > > I think your ideas are very good but do somewhat have some
> > > disagreement.
> > > Religion in no way guarentees a family structure
> > > You only have comfort in the faith that there is a heaven and that you
> > > will go there.
> > > You should not even ponder the word enemy for those who may be deemed
> > > so should be shown love and compassion.Putting you do not have to
> > > think and the Bible in the same sentence is seriously concerning. It
> > > is our place to investigate our own personal truths and decide what is
> > > the best path for us.
> > > Leaving things to the powers that be is a cop-out..."I cannot do
> > > anything, maybe God can." each person is responsible for self and what
> > > they put into the flow of life. No act shall ever be forgiven, but
> > > shall be repaid in the flow of karma.
>
> > > Technically Sunday is the first day, therefore the Sabbath is actually
> > > Saturday, already illustrating the misinterpretations of the Bible.
> > > You do not have to think about morality ???? You should think about
> > > morality, for this is a decision we make and should be mindful of all
> > > actions and thoughts.
> > > To create such blind slaves to your teachings will only contribute to
> > > their fall at the hands of your devil.
>
> > > Over all I think what you are saying is benevolent but does not do
> > > anything to help or improve humanity. I may be out of place here
> > > because I am neither an atheist or a Christian. To me we have two
> > > different sides of the same guilty coin, each claiming to know the
> > > infinite with their finite knowledge, yet what is being done to
> > > increase knowledge and harmony on Earth ?
>
> > > The only way into complete heaven or nirvana is through the
> > > elimination of earthly suffering. The Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold
> > > Path and the moral code of the five Precepts.
> > > as people we must take responsibility for our actions and thoughts
> > > towards others , we cannot live lives of scoundrels and expect
> > > forgiveness from Jesus Christ, this has created a irresponsible and
> > > hypocritical society.
>
> > > I think what you are doing is wonderful, I just ask you to teach with
> > > more complexity and have people learn instead of surrender. teach them
> > > to fish my friend, for you will have better followers.
>
> > > Thank you for your time and Blessings to you
>
> > > J.C.
>
> > > On Nov 28, 11:15 pm, Ward Yung <wardeny...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Some of the benefits I can think of...
> > > > -You have a ready made family in a structured envirment.
> > > > -You are comforted knowing that when this life is over, heaven awaits.
> > > > -You don't have to think about who your enemies are, it's right there
> > > > in the bible.
> > > > -You don't have to think about who your leaders are, it's the "powers
> > > > that be".
> > > > -There is always something to do on Sunday.
> > > > -You don't have to think about moraltiy it's all right there in the
> > > > bible.
> > > > -If there are any problems understanding something, just ask the
> > > > pastor.
> > > > -You are comforted knowing that god is your buckler, your strength,
> > > > your courage.
> > > > -You don't have to worry about conversation, just think of some
> > > > scriptures to talk about.
> > > > -You don't have to plan anything, just pray, god will take care of it.
> > > > -All you have to do is work, and say hail marys.
> > > > -Such rejoicing at the thought of his coming, "can I join the choir?".
> > > > Any others?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> --
> Witchy Woman, AvC Anti-Spam Brigade.
> "Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech and
> assembly. Men feared witches and burned women. It is the function of speech
> to free men from the bondage of irrational fears." --Louis D. Brandeis, US
> Supreme Court Justice- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

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

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 6:58 pm
From: trog69

Hypothesis #1 does sound as logical as anything else I've heard about
carpenter boy.

On Nov 29, 9:28 pm, scenario_dave <scenario_d...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Nov 29, 11:09 pm, Dag Yo <sir_ro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 29, 6:44 pm, scenario_dave <scenario_d...@yahoo.com> wrote:> I believe that Jesus, the man, existed because its simpler.
>
> > > Option 1: Jesus preached for a while and then was executed. His
> > > followers told his story over and over and exagurated and added to it
> > > constantly to fit the audience. By the time it was written down most
> > > of the stores were either exagurated, added to make a point, or taken
> > > from other stories.
>
> > > Option 2: Someone invented Jesus and then spent his entire life
> > > telling the lie over and over again and convinced enough people to
> > > start a religion.
>
> > > If the hypothesis requires that a big conspiracy to work, I tend to
> > > doubt it. Option one had no conspiracy, the Jesus legend just kinda
> > > grew.
>
> > I tend to agree but I wouldn't say I that I do believe that "Jesus,
> > the man" (leader of a small jewishy cult) actually existed...merely
> > that I believe it to be fairly probable that he did. It's at least as
> > probable to me as a real Mithras, the man, existing.
>
> Fair enough. If I wanted to be more accurate, I'd say that I
> tentatively accept hypothesis one pending additional information.
> There's belief and BELIEF. I believe in hypothesis one because it
> seems more reasonable to me. This is an argument which will probably
> never be proved.
>
> A lot of science is like that. In order to get anything done, you
> need to take a stand and believe in something but be willing to change
> your position when more evidence comes in. For example, If I think I
> have discovered a new species, I work with the belief that I have and
> search for data to prove or disprove the hypothesis and make my final
> determinaton based on the data. If I did not tentitively believe, why
> search at all? You need to have the belief in order to better direct
> your search, however, a good scientist will abandon the belief if the
> evidence proves it wrong.
>
>
>
> > > Even stories like Hercules and Arthur probably have a real man behind
> > > them. Its just that the legend overtook the man so much that there is
> > > little or nothing left of the real person in the story.
>
> > > On Nov 29, 8:11 pm, Dag Yo <sir_ro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > As an atheist,
>
> > > > No one believes you're an atheist.
>
> > > > On Nov 29, 12:14 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.
>
> > > > > Are there any atheist here who does not believe that the man Jesus
> > > > > existed?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:00 pm
From: trog69

I was speaking generally; I have no opinion about his posting here.

On Nov 30, 7:41 pm, hucktunes <bob.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I really doubt that the ancient people, those around the time of
> Alexander, Augustus et al, were the superstitious idiots that people
> suppose. The religious wackos were probably a fringe group, like
> today. Josephus seems to give lip service, and nothing more, to the
> religious folk of his day. Nobody really believed the emperor was a
> god, including the emperor. Those that did were nuts.
>
> On Nov 30, 12:36 pm, trog69 <tom.tro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I like ranjit's stuff, and his posts make me think about how other
> > cultures think about things.
>
> > On Nov 30, 11:11 am, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > > I don't really get ranjit. Is he actually trying to be thought-
> > > provoking by posting stupid non-arguments like this? I get the
> > > impression sometimes that he is, because he gets so into the process
> > > of a debate sometimes and seems sincere. But it really comes across
> > > more like a stupid joke sometimes, and there's no way of drawing a
> > > line between when he's supposedly serious and when he might be kidding
> > > because it's all stupid and a waste of time.
>
> > > On Nov 29, 9:32 pm, Answer_42 <ipu.belie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On 29 nov, 16:15, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
>
> > > > <ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Nov 29, 12:28 pm, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Nov 29, 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.
>
> > > > > > What is the "overwhelming" evidence?
>
> > > > > If no one named Jesus existed, from where do we get the name Jesus?
>
> > > > If no one named Han Solo existed, from where do we get the name Han
> > > > Solo?
>
> > > > This has to be one of your dumbest post yet.
> > > > __________________________________
> > > > To no form of religion is woman indebted for one impulse of freedom.
> > > > -- Susan B Anthony

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:20 pm
From: Dev

His posts really just make me think about how retarded people think
about things. This is the guy who defended Keith MacNevins--saying we
were trying to run all the Christians away because we called him a
dumbass.

On Nov 30, 1:36 pm, trog69 <tom.tro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I like ranjit's stuff, and his posts make me think about how other
> cultures think about things.
>
> On Nov 30, 11:11 am, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I don't really get ranjit. Is he actually trying to be thought-
> > provoking by posting stupid non-arguments like this? I get the
> > impression sometimes that he is, because he gets so into the process
> > of a debate sometimes and seems sincere. But it really comes across
> > more like a stupid joke sometimes, and there's no way of drawing a
> > line between when he's supposedly serious and when he might be kidding
> > because it's all stupid and a waste of time.
>
> > On Nov 29, 9:32 pm, Answer_42 <ipu.belie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On 29 nov, 16:15, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"
>
> > > <ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > On Nov 29, 12:28 pm, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Nov 29, 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.
>
> > > > > What is the "overwhelming" evidence?
>
> > > > If no one named Jesus existed, from where do we get the name Jesus?
>
> > > If no one named Han Solo existed, from where do we get the name Han
> > > Solo?
>
> > > This has to be one of your dumbest post yet.
> > > __________________________________
> > > To no form of religion is woman indebted for one impulse of freedom.
> > > -- Susan B Anthony- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:21 pm
From: Dag Yo

I'll happily agree with what your saying, but i'd like to comment that
the analogy isn't perfect.

Unlike all the stories we have of Jesus, not everything written about
other historical leaders (who were supposed by some to have magical
powers, or at the least claimed to have some bit of divinity in them)
there are many accounts of such leaders' existence written by people
who clearly believe them to be non-divine, there are plenty of
accounts of them which demonstrate just how not-divine they actually
are, and there doesn't seem to be much in the way of (as far as I
know) evidence that they are divine - in accounts which purport these
leaders to be so. Which is simply not the case when it comes to
Jesus.

On Nov 30, 10:03 am, scenario_dave <scenario_d...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I understand your point about historical Jesus. But there are a lot
> of things in writing about known historical figures that are not
> considered accurate. Most of the Roman Emperors were considered gods
> after their deaths and many rulers were considered Gods while they
> lived. Today, very few people believe their leaders are gods with the
> possible exception of some far right wing zelots,(and far left wing
> zelots to be fair).
>
> When we write a new history book about a Roman Emperor we say that
> people believed he was a god but we don't say he was a god. A new
> history book about Jesus the man would attempt to do the same thing.
> Strictly speaking, most ancient rulers were considered magical.
>
> On Nov 29, 11:20 pm, Dag Yo <sir_ro...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > I believe in the historical Jesus.
>
> > Properly speaking, history are those things recorded in written form.
> > Other issues aside, because history ONLY describes the magical Jesus;
> > the "historical Jesus" is the magical Jesus. And while we can imagine
> > a plausible non-magical Jesus inspiring a cult that would spread
> > across the world, such a non-magical is not recorded anywhere in
> > history; it would not be at all accurate to describe such a person as
> > the "historical Jesus".
>
> > Perhaps you could call such a person the "plausible conjecture Jesus".
>
> > On Nov 29, 12:14 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.
>
> > > Are there any atheist here who does not believe that the man Jesus
> > > existed?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:02 pm
From: trog69

> Atheis don't scare me one bit..Get and LIfe....

Obviously, school scared the living shit out of you.

On Nov 30, 7:48 pm, niteangel99 <niteange...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I believe in God,not because of mommy are daddy.Are someone making me
> believe.I know first hand experience how he saved me.How he came to
> me,in dreams and visions. How I have the Holy Spirit.He is with me
> now.No one will change my mind.Because he is real. I feel sorry for
> those who don't believe. Do you believe their is and HELL,there is and
> HEAVEN.
> I would not push the guy aside ,His name is JESUS.....I welcome him
> here....

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:04 pm
From: Ward Yung

what kind of lame-ass shit is this.

On Nov 30, 6:48 pm, niteangel99 <niteange...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I believe in God,not because of mommy are daddy.Are someone making me
> believe.I know first hand experience how he saved me.How he came to
> me,in dreams and visions. How I have the Holy Spirit.He is with me
> now.No one will change my mind.Because he is real. I feel sorry for
> those who don't believe. Do you believe their is and HELL,there is and
> HEAVEN.
> I would not push the guy aside ,His name is JESUS.....I welcome him
> here....
> Atheis don't scare me one bit..Get and LIfe....

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:15 pm
From: Dev

"Are someone making me believe?"

Certainly a question every schizophrenic theist asks themselves at one
point or anot