Is the bible true or false?

[Microraptor]

If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth, status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different. The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.

I suppose some Conservatives are social liberals but conservative with economics.
It is just better to aspire to be an intellectual and get out of the dictatorship mind set. Evolution is the name of the game and we are all mutants to a varying degree. So long as people accept Adam and Eve and resign themselves to being simple then education has been a disaster.

[The Chief Castrator Of The Jews]

You will be more depressed on your deathbed...That is the truth

[Freedom Man]

"Microraptor" <david...@talk21.com> wrote in message
news:c31fa49e-288a-4926...@googlegroups.com...

If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth,
status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different. The story of Jesus
is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.

---
Because the many "Holy Books" are no more than collections of myths,
superstitions, and the ravings of lunatic fanatics!

See what RELIGION does to peoples' minds?

Adults no longer believe in the Tooth Fairy - but they still torture and
kill each other over ancient myths and superstitions.

"We all remember how many religious wars were fought for a religion of love
and gentleness; how many bodies were burned alive with the genuinely kind
intention of saving souls from the eternal fire of hell." --- Karl Popper

"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many
people suffer from a delusion, it is called Religion."
--- Robert M. Pirsig

Either God wants to abolish evil and cannot, or he can but does not want to.
If he wants to but cannot he is impotent. If he can but does not want to, he
is wicked. If he neither can nor wants to, then he is both powerless and
wicked.
--- Epicurus, Greek philosopher, circa 300 B.C.

"Act of God" disasters like the Japanese earthquake expose the myth. Either
God can do nothing to stop catastrophes like this, or he doesn't care to, or
he doesn't exist. He is thus either impotent, evil, or imaginary.
--- CNN Belief Blog, 3-20-11

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and
evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that
takes religion."
--- Steven Weinberg, quoted in The New York Times, April 20, 1999

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false,
and by rulers as useful."
--- Seneca the Younger (4? BC - 65 AD)

"Religion once ruled the world. It was called the Dark Ages." --- Ruth
Green.

"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings." ---
Victor Stenger.

"I don't believe in God because I don't believe in Mother Goose." ---
Clarence Darrow

"As my ancestors are free from slavery, I am free from the slavery of
religion." --- Butterfly McQueen

"Religion was invented when the first con-man met the first fool." - Mark
Twain

"Faith is believing what you know ain't so." --- Mark Twain

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in
all fiction." --- Richard Dawkins

"Cult today, religion tomorrow."

The Freedom From Religion Foundation: http://ffrf.org/
The Secular Coalition for America: www.secular.org
Secular Student Alliance: www.secularstudents.org
www.infidels.org
www.humaniststudies.org
www.atheistalliance.org
www.americanhumanist.org

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:03:40 -0800 (PST), Microraptor
<david...@talk21.com> wrote:

What a remarkably stupid question to ask non-Christians let alone
atheists.

And even to ask non-literalist Christians.

[Adam]

On 11/12/2012 11:03 AM, Microraptor wrote:
> If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth,
> status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different.

But not contradictory. Merely different angles on the same event. Some
people say the same about the story of David's census, and yet the
explanation is there in the story.

> The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.

Not nearly as much as mine and my wife's. Then there was all of the
intervening history between that and when the seed was finally born.
You have no idea how hopeless things were for non Jews until Jesus came
and completed the work of redemption.

The Lord's story isn't what is depressing. It's what he had to do in
order to free you atheists to sit there behind your computers and allow
your imaginations to float in all sorts of perverse directions to
complain about how oppressed you are by religion, while your true goals
are to recreate the ideological hopelessness that once enslaved man
before the coming of our Lord.

If you were to emulate even the parts of his life that you find the most
depressing most of you would be hundreds of times better on - in this
life - than you are now.

> I suppose some Conservatives are social liberals but conservative with economics.
> It is just better to aspire to be an intellectual and get out of the dictatorship
>mind set. Evolution is the name of the game and we are all mutants to a
varying
>degree. So long as people accept Adam and Eve and resign themselves to
being
>simple then education has been a disaster.

You are a spoiled child who has yet to experience true dictatorship.

Adam & Eve

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 14:42:56 -0500, Adam
<adam7days6...@creation.org> wrote:

>On 11/12/2012 11:03 AM, Microraptor wrote:
>> If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth,
> > status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different.
>
>But not contradictory. Merely different angles on the same event. Some
>people say the same about the story of David's census, and yet the
>explanation is there in the story.
>
> > The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.
>
>Not nearly as much as mine and my wife's. Then there was all of the
>intervening history between that and when the seed was finally born.
>You have no idea how hopeless things were for non Jews until Jesus came
>and completed the work of redemption.

Idiot.

>The Lord's

Idiot.

> story isn't what is depressing. It's what he had to do in

Idiot.

>order to free you atheists to sit there behind your computers and allow
>your imaginations to float in all sorts of perverse directions to
>complain about how oppressed you are by religion, while your true goals
>are to recreate the ideological hopelessness that once enslaved man
>before the coming of our Lord.

Not just an idiot but a liar too.

>If you were to emulate even the parts of his life that you find the most
>depressing most of you would be hundreds of times better on - in this
>life - than you are now.

Where did you demonstrate your pretend fiend ever existed before
rudely and stupidly presuming it outside your religion, imbecile?

>> I suppose some Conservatives are social liberals but conservative with economics.
>> It is just better to aspire to be an intellectual and get out of the dictatorship
>>mind set. Evolution is the name of the game and we are all mutants to a
>varying
>>degree. So long as people accept Adam and Eve and resign themselves to
>being
>>simple then education has been a disaster.
>
>You are a spoiled child who has yet to experience true dictatorship.

You are a total idiot living in a world of deluded fantasy.

>Adam & Eve

Idiot.

[Adam]

On 11/12/2012 02:47 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 14:42:56 -0500, Adam
> <adam7days6...@creation.org> wrote:
>
>> On 11/12/2012 11:03 AM, Microraptor wrote:
>>> If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth,
>>> status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different.
>>
>> But not contradictory. Merely different angles on the same event. Some
>> people say the same about the story of David's census, and yet the
>> explanation is there in the story.
>>
>>> The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.
>>
>> Not nearly as much as mine and my wife's. Then there was all of the
>> intervening history between that and when the seed was finally born.
>> You have no idea how hopeless things were for non Jews until Jesus came
>> and completed the work of redemption.
>
> Idiot.

Faggot.

>> The Lord's
>
> Idiot.

Faggot.

>> story isn't what is depressing. It's what he had to do in
>
> Idiot.

Faggot.

>> order to free you atheists to sit there behind your computers and allow
>> your imaginations to float in all sorts of perverse directions to
>> complain about how oppressed you are by religion, while your true goals
>> are to recreate the ideological hopelessness that once enslaved man
>> before the coming of our Lord.
>
> Not just an idiot but a liar too.

Not just a faggot but a liar too.

>> If you were to emulate even the parts of his life that you find the most
>> depressing most of you would be hundreds of times better on - in this
>> life - than you are now.
>
> Where did you demonstrate your pretend fiend ever existed before
> rudely and stupidly presuming it outside your religion, imbecile?

Where did you demonstrate your pretend criterion existed period, outcast
faggot?

>>> I suppose some Conservatives are social liberals but conservative with economics.
>>> It is just better to aspire to be an intellectual and get out of the dictatorship
>>> mind set. Evolution is the name of the game and we are all mutants to a
>> varying
>>> degree. So long as people accept Adam and Eve and resign themselves to
>> being
>>> simple then education has been a disaster.
>>
>> You are a spoiled child who has yet to experience true dictatorship.
>
> You are a total idiot living in a world of deluded fantasy.

You are a total faggot living in a world of fantasy acceptance.

>> Adam& Eve
>
> Idiot.

Faggot.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 14:59:46 -0500, Adam

<adam7days6...@creation.org> wrote:

>On 11/12/2012 02:47 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 14:42:56 -0500, Adam
>> <adam7days6...@creation.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/12/2012 11:03 AM, Microraptor wrote:
>>>> If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth,
>>>> status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different.
>>>
>>> But not contradictory. Merely different angles on the same event. Some
>>> people say the same about the story of David's census, and yet the
>>> explanation is there in the story.
>>>
>>>> The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.
>>>
>>> Not nearly as much as mine and my wife's. Then there was all of the
>>> intervening history between that and when the seed was finally born.
>>> You have no idea how hopeless things were for non Jews until Jesus came
>>> and completed the work of redemption.
>>
>> Idiot.
>
>Faggot.

Liar.

>>> The Lord's
>>
>> Idiot.
>
>Faggot.

Liar.

>>> story isn't what is depressing. It's what he had to do in
>>
>> Idiot.
>
>Faggot.

Liar.

>>> order to free you atheists to sit there behind your computers and allow
>>> your imaginations to float in all sorts of perverse directions to
>>> complain about how oppressed you are by religion, while your true goals
>>> are to recreate the ideological hopelessness that once enslaved man
>>> before the coming of our Lord.
>>
>> Not just an idiot but a liar too.
>
>Not just a faggot but a liar too.

Liar.

>>> If you were to emulate even the parts of his life that you find the most
>>> depressing most of you would be hundreds of times better on - in this
>>> life - than you are now.
>>
>> Where did you demonstrate your pretend fiend ever existed before
>> rudely and stupidly presuming it outside your religion, imbecile?
>
>Where did you demonstrate your pretend criterion existed period, outcast
>faggot?

What a fucking moron. A liar as well as an idiot.

>>>> I suppose some Conservatives are social liberals but conservative with economics.
>>>> It is just better to aspire to be an intellectual and get out of the dictatorship
>>>> mind set. Evolution is the name of the game and we are all mutants to a
>>> varying
>>>> degree. So long as people accept Adam and Eve and resign themselves to
>>> being
>>>> simple then education has been a disaster.
>>>
>>> You are a spoiled child who has yet to experience true dictatorship.
>>
>> You are a total idiot living in a world of deluded fantasy.
>
>You are a total faggot living in a world of fantasy acceptance.

Why are you so obsessed with gays?

>>> Adam& Eve
>>
>> Idiot.
>
>Faggot.

Liar.

[sbalneav]

Adam <adam7days6...@creation.org> wrote:
> On 11/12/2012 11:03 AM, Microraptor wrote:
>> If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth,
> > status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different.
>
> But not contradictory. Merely different angles on the same event.

There's a lot of contradictions here:

http://www.evilbible.com/contradictions.htm

Some are simple statements of fact. An inerrant bible wouldn't have gotten
some of these wrong.

> Some
> people say the same about the story of David's census, and yet the
> explanation is there in the story.
>
> > The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.
>
> Not nearly as much as mine and my wife's. Then there was all of the
> intervening history between that and when the seed was finally born.
> You have no idea how hopeless things were for non Jews until Jesus came
> and completed the work of redemption.

Lot of assumptions here. You have to prove God exists and you have to prove the
supernatural claims of the bible regarding Jesus, first.

> The Lord's story isn't what is depressing. It's what he had to do in
> order to free you atheists to sit there behind your computers and allow
> your imaginations to float in all sorts of perverse directions

Looking at all the evidence (or, more correctly, the lack thereof) for any sort
of deity existing, and coming to a sound, reasonable decision is "perverse"?
How so?

> to
> complain about how oppressed you are by religion, while your true goals
> are to recreate the ideological hopelessness that once enslaved man
> before the coming of our Lord.

What "ideological hopelessness" would this be? You mean "accepting reality as
it actually is"? Or something else?

> If you were to emulate even the parts of his life that you find the most
> depressing most of you would be hundreds of times better on

Getting nailed to a cross and stabbed in the side would make me "hundred of
times better"? How so?

> - in this
> life - than you are now.

How can you state this, when you don't know me?

>> I suppose some Conservatives are social liberals but conservative with economics.
>> It is just better to aspire to be an intellectual and get out of the dictatorship
>>mind set. Evolution is the name of the game and we are all mutants to a
> varying
>>degree. So long as people accept Adam and Eve and resign themselves to
> being
>>simple then education has been a disaster.
>
> You are a spoiled child who has yet to experience true dictatorship.

Oh, you mean like a fairy tale where some supernatural being can see your every
though and action, and punish you for eternity for your finite crimes, unless
you worship him and live your life exactly how he wants you to? A dictatorship
like that?

> Adam & Eve

--
__ _ | Nothing sickens me more than the closed door of a library.
(_ |_) | -- Barbara Tuchman
__)|_) |

[Syd M.]

On Nov 12, 11:55 am, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews

<Yawn> Empty threat rejected.

PDW

[Syd M.]

On Nov 12, 2:59 pm, Adam <adam7days6000years...@creation.org> wrote:
> On 11/12/2012 02:47 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 14:42:56 -0500, Adam

> > <adam7days6000years...@creation.org>  wrote:

>
> >> On 11/12/2012 11:03 AM, Microraptor wrote:
> >>> If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth,
> >>> status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different.
>
> >> But not contradictory.  Merely different angles on the same event.  Some
> >> people say the same about the story of David's census, and yet the
> >> explanation is there in the story.
>
> >>> The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.
>
> >> Not nearly as much as mine and my wife's.  Then there was all of the
> >> intervening history between that and when the seed was finally born.
> >> You have no idea how hopeless things were for non Jews until Jesus came
> >> and completed the work of redemption.
>
> > Idiot.
>
> Faggot.
>

Oh, good, another insecure little butthole who thinks calling someone
an 'faggot' is a insult.

> >> The Lord's
>
> > Idiot.
>
> Faggot.
>

<Yawn> Grow up, loser.

PDW

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/12/2012 3:50 PM, sbalneav wrote:
> Adam <adam7days6...@creation.org> wrote:
>> On 11/12/2012 11:03 AM, Microraptor wrote:
>>> If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth,
>>> status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different.
>>
>> But not contradictory. Merely different angles on the same event.
>
> There's a lot of contradictions here:
>
> http://www.evilbible.com/contradictions.htm

They only appear to be contradictions.

Read here for a full explanation:
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/b08aa.html

>
> Some are simple statements of fact. An inerrant bible wouldn't have gotten
> some of these wrong.

Exactly and absolutely correct.

>
>> Some
>> people say the same about the story of David's census, and yet the
>> explanation is there in the story.
>>
>>> The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.
>>
>> Not nearly as much as mine and my wife's. Then there was all of the
>> intervening history between that and when the seed was finally born.
>> You have no idea how hopeless things were for non Jews until Jesus came
>> and completed the work of redemption.
>
> Lot of assumptions here. You have to prove God exists and you have to prove the
> supernatural claims of the bible regarding Jesus, first.

No, you're wrong.

The knowledge of God's existence is innately known to every human being.

http://embracedbytruth.com/God/God%27s%20Existence/Innate%20Knowledge%20of%20God.htm

>> The Lord's story isn't what is depressing. It's what he had to do in
>> order to free you atheists to sit there behind your computers and allow
>> your imaginations to float in all sorts of perverse directions
>
> Looking at all the evidence (or, more correctly, the lack thereof) for any sort
> of deity existing, and coming to a sound, reasonable decision is "perverse"?
> How so?

That is not what was implied.

Go back and read it again. Slower this time.

>
>> to
>> complain about how oppressed you are by religion, while your true goals
>> are to recreate the ideological hopelessness that once enslaved man
>> before the coming of our Lord.
>
> What "ideological hopelessness" would this be? You mean "accepting reality as
> it actually is"? Or something else?
>
>> If you were to emulate even the parts of his life that you find the most
>> depressing most of you would be hundreds of times better on
>
> Getting nailed to a cross and stabbed in the side would make me "hundred of
> times better"? How so?

At least you are admitting concurrence to the historical Jesus.

>
>> - in this
>> life - than you are now.
>
> How can you state this, when you don't know me?

That is not necessary in this case.

>
>>> I suppose some Conservatives are social liberals but conservative with economics.
>>> It is just better to aspire to be an intellectual and get out of the dictatorship
>>> mind set. Evolution is the name of the game and we are all mutants to a
>> varying
>>> degree. So long as people accept Adam and Eve and resign themselves to
>> being
>>> simple then education has been a disaster.
>>
>> You are a spoiled child who has yet to experience true dictatorship.
>
> Oh, you mean like a fairy tale where some supernatural being can see your every
> though and action, and punish you for eternity for your finite crimes,

[snip]

That's where your train of thought derails.

Crimes are finite.

Sins against God are not.

[John Locke]

...Hardy. We're free of religious indoctrination so there's nothing to
worry about. Death is just a part of the natrual order of life.
Nothing more. Theists, on the other hand, are infested with the guilt
of sin and will be sweating bullets wondering if there's a few juicy
sins they've forgotten about over the years and failed to report to
Jesus which, in the delusional little mind of the theist, equates to
damnation in hell.

[Adam]

On 2012-11-12 03:50 PM, sbalneav wrote:

Oh look, a sock puppet.

> Adam <adam7days6...@creation.org> wrote:
>> On 11/12/2012 11:03 AM, Microraptor wrote:
>>> If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth,
>>> status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different.
>>
>> But not contradictory. Merely different angles on the same event.
>
> There's a lot of contradictions here:
>
> http://www.evilbible.com/contradictions.htm

No, those are just misrepresentations.

> Some are simple statements of fact. An inerrant bible wouldn't have gotten
> some of these wrong.

Right. It didn't because it is inerrant.
Problem solved.

>> Some
>> people say the same about the story of David's census, and yet the
>> explanation is there in the story.
>>
>>> The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.
>>
>> Not nearly as much as mine and my wife's. Then there was all of the
>> intervening history between that and when the seed was finally born.
>> You have no idea how hopeless things were for non Jews until Jesus came
>> and completed the work of redemption.
>
> Lot of assumptions here. You have to prove God exists and you have to prove the
> supernatural claims of the bible regarding Jesus, first.

No, there aren't. No, I don't. No, I don't.

>> The Lord's story isn't what is depressing. It's what he had to do in
>> order to free you atheists to sit there behind your computers and allow
>> your imaginations to float in all sorts of perverse directions
>
> Looking at all the evidence (or, more correctly, the lack thereof) for any sort
> of deity existing, and coming to a sound, reasonable decision is "perverse"?
> How so?

Probably, in your ability to read.

>> to
>> complain about how oppressed you are by religion, while your true goals
>> are to recreate the ideological hopelessness that once enslaved man
>> before the coming of our Lord.
>
> What "ideological hopelessness" would this be? You mean "accepting reality as
> it actually is"? Or something else?

Have fun pushing your agenda.

>> If you were to emulate even the parts of his life that you find the most
>> depressing most of you would be hundreds of times better on
>
> Getting nailed to a cross and stabbed in the side would make me "hundred of
> times better"? How so?

Reading and comprehension.

>> - in this
>> life - than you are now.
>
> How can you state this, when you don't know me?

Reading and comprehension.

>>> I suppose some Conservatives are social liberals but conservative with economics.
>>> It is just better to aspire to be an intellectual and get out of the dictatorship
>>> mind set. Evolution is the name of the game and we are all mutants to a
>> varying
>>> degree. So long as people accept Adam and Eve and resign themselves to
>> being
>>> simple then education has been a disaster.
>>
>> You are a spoiled child who has yet to experience true dictatorship.
>
> Oh, you mean like a fairy tale where some supernatural being can see your every
> though and action, and punish you for eternity for your finite crimes, unless
> you worship him and live your life exactly how he wants you to? A dictatorship
> like that?

Certainly not a dictatorship of perfect paradise. Time to grow up.

>> Adam & Eve
>

[Adam]

Oh, good, another faggot.

[Syd M.]

On Nov 12, 7:32 pm, Adam <adam7days6000years...@creation.org> wrote:
> On 2012-11-12 04:01 PM, Syd M. wrote:
>
> > On Nov 12, 2:59 pm, Adam <adam7days6000years...@creation.org> wrote:
> >> On 11/12/2012 02:47 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>
> >>> Idiot.
>
> >> Faggot.
>
> > Oh, good, another insecure little butthole who thinks calling someone
> > an 'faggot' is a insult.
>
> Oh, good, another faggot.
>

<Yawn> Grow up, bigot.

PDW

[Adam]

Excellent responses.

On 2012-11-12 04:38 PM, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
> On 11/12/2012 3:50 PM, sbalneav wrote:
>> http://www.evilbible.com/contradictions.htm
>
> They only appear to be contradictions.
>
> Read here for a full explanation:
> http://www.apologeticsindex.org/b08aa.html

> ...

[Calvin Ramsey]

Look at how emotional you've become in your attempt to convince
yourself there is no reason to get all excited.

I predict you'll be calling for a priest, a pastor, a rabbi, a monk, and
a swami
while you're laying there knowing you're only hours away from meeting God.

[kni...@baawa.com]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 14:42:56 -0500, Adam

<adam7days6...@creation.org> wrote:


>The Lord's story isn't what is depressing. It's what he had to do in
>order to free you atheists to sit there behind your computers and allow
>your imaginations to float in all sorts of perverse directions to
>complain about how oppressed you are by religion, while your true goals
>are to recreate the ideological hopelessness that once enslaved man
>before the coming of our Lord.

It wasn't your magic pixie, jesus, that brought us out of the Dark
Ages. You know, when the superstitious ruled and people were murdered
for not believing.

The Enlightenment came along a ruined everything.

The next time you want to rant about how perverse atheists are
remember most scientists, the ones that invented your computer and a
million other inventions were mostly atheists.

You're another sock puppet religer bleating the same superstitious
nonsense you were brainwashed into thinking is real.

Warlord Steve
BAAWA

[Syd M.]

Jesus was gay and an original sponsor of the daughters of Sappho.

PDW

[Calvin Ramsey]

Little Warlord Stevie has that in a text file on his desktop so that he can
easily copy and paste it.

He's like a little miniature Robocop who lives in his parent's basement.

He never wants to grow up and get a job.

But he's fun to watch when he says "nah nah nah nah".

<smirk>

[sbalneav]

Adam <adam7days6...@creation.org> wrote:
>
> On 2012-11-12 03:50 PM, sbalneav wrote:
>
> Oh look, a sock puppet.
>
>> Adam <adam7days6...@creation.org> wrote:
>>> On 11/12/2012 11:03 AM, Microraptor wrote:
>>>> If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth,
>>>> status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different.
>>>
>>> But not contradictory. Merely different angles on the same event.
>>
>> There's a lot of contradictions here:
>>
>> http://www.evilbible.com/contradictions.htm
>
> No, those are just misrepresentations.

OK, tell you what. Pick any one of them you'd like, I'll address it
individually.

>> Some are simple statements of fact. An inerrant bible wouldn't have gotten
>> some of these wrong.
>
> Right. It didn't because it is inerrant.
> Problem solved.

How do you know it's inerrant? On what basis do you judge it to be inerrant?

>>> Some
>>> people say the same about the story of David's census, and yet the
>>> explanation is there in the story.
>>>
>>>> The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.
>>>
>>> Not nearly as much as mine and my wife's. Then there was all of the
>>> intervening history between that and when the seed was finally born.
>>> You have no idea how hopeless things were for non Jews until Jesus came
>>> and completed the work of redemption.
>>
>> Lot of assumptions here. You have to prove God exists and you have to prove the
>> supernatural claims of the bible regarding Jesus, first.
>
> No, there aren't. No, I don't. No, I don't.

Well, you're technically right; you don't. On the other hand, if you're
unwilling to defend your position, you're not really in any position to be
issuing proclimations about how hopeless things were for the Jews.

>>> The Lord's story isn't what is depressing. It's what he had to do in
>>> order to free you atheists to sit there behind your computers and allow
>>> your imaginations to float in all sorts of perverse directions
>>
>> Looking at all the evidence (or, more correctly, the lack thereof) for any sort
>> of deity existing, and coming to a sound, reasonable decision is "perverse"?
>> How so?
>
> Probably, in your ability to read.

Perhaps you could try making sense. It might advance your position further.

>>> to
>>> complain about how oppressed you are by religion, while your true goals
>>> are to recreate the ideological hopelessness that once enslaved man
>>> before the coming of our Lord.
>>
>> What "ideological hopelessness" would this be? You mean "accepting reality as
>> it actually is"? Or something else?
>
> Have fun pushing your agenda.

I'm not. I just don't believe the claims of Christianity. I wasn't aware that
was an agenda.

>>> If you were to emulate even the parts of his life that you find the most
>>> depressing most of you would be hundreds of times better on
>>
>> Getting nailed to a cross and stabbed in the side would make me "hundred of
>> times better"? How so?
>
> Reading and comprehension.

Again, making sense would help.

>>> - in this
>>> life - than you are now.
>>
>> How can you state this, when you don't know me?
>
> Reading and comprehension.

Yeah, you should try it sometime.

>>>> I suppose some Conservatives are social liberals but conservative with economics.
>>>> It is just better to aspire to be an intellectual and get out of the dictatorship
>>>> mind set. Evolution is the name of the game and we are all mutants to a
>>> varying
>>>> degree. So long as people accept Adam and Eve and resign themselves to
>>> being
>>>> simple then education has been a disaster.
>>>
>>> You are a spoiled child who has yet to experience true dictatorship.
>>
>> Oh, you mean like a fairy tale where some supernatural being can see your every
>> though and action, and punish you for eternity for your finite crimes, unless
>> you worship him and live your life exactly how he wants you to? A dictatorship
>> like that?
>
> Certainly not a dictatorship of perfect paradise. Time to grow up.

I have. That's why I don't believe the claims of religion any more.

--
__ _ | If God listened to the prayers of men, all men would
(_ |_) | quickly have perished: for they are forever praying for
__)|_) | evil against one another. -- Epicurus, 341-270 BCE

[sbalneav]

Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
> On 11/12/2012 3:50 PM, sbalneav wrote:
>> Adam <adam7days6...@creation.org> wrote:
>>> On 11/12/2012 11:03 AM, Microraptor wrote:
>>>> If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth,
>>>> status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different.
>>>
>>> But not contradictory. Merely different angles on the same event.
>>
>> There's a lot of contradictions here:
>>
>> http://www.evilbible.com/contradictions.htm
>
> They only appear to be contradictions.
>
> Read here for a full explanation:
> http://www.apologeticsindex.org/b08aa.html

I'll pick one from the many links as representative of the whole:

"77. Did Adam die the same day (Genesis 2:17) or did he continue to live to the
age of 930 years (Genesis 5:5)?

(Category: misunderstood how God works in history)

The Scriptures describe death in three ways; 1) Physical death which ends our
life on earth, 2) spiritual death which is separation from God, and 3) eternal
death in hell. The death spoken of in Genesis 2:17 is the second death
mentioned in our list, that of complete separation from God, while the death
mentioned in Genesis 5:5 is the first death, a physical death which ends our
present life."

See, how do they KNOW that one passage refers to one death, and the other
passage refers to the OTHER death? Here's the passages:

Genesis 2:16-18
King James Version (KJV)
16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou
mayest freely eat:

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it:
for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

18 And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will
make him an help meet for him.

Genesis 5:4-6
King James Version (KJV)
4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and
he begat sons and daughters:

5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he
died.

6 And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos:

The first passage does not mention a spiritual separation. It just says "thou
shalt surely die".

So how do they resolve this contradiction? In the standard apologetic manner:
like humpty dumpty, words mean exactly what we want them to mean, no more, no
less. Even though, at Genesis 2:16 spiritual death hasn't been mentioned or
introduced as a concept, it doesn't mean "die" as we'd expect. It means
"separation from God".

But this is supposed to be an inerrant text. The word of God. If God means
"separation from me", why not just SAY: "... thou shalt not eat of it: for in
the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt be cast out of the Garden, and
forever separated from me". Why can't this supposed God SAY what it MEANS?

Answer: because it doesn't exist. It's an invention of man.

>> Some are simple statements of fact. An inerrant bible wouldn't have gotten
>> some of these wrong.
>
> Exactly and absolutely correct.

Wrong, as usual.

>>> Some
>>> people say the same about the story of David's census, and yet the
>>> explanation is there in the story.
>>>
>>>> The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.
>>>
>>> Not nearly as much as mine and my wife's. Then there was all of the
>>> intervening history between that and when the seed was finally born.
>>> You have no idea how hopeless things were for non Jews until Jesus came
>>> and completed the work of redemption.
>>
>> Lot of assumptions here. You have to prove God exists and you have to prove the
>> supernatural claims of the bible regarding Jesus, first.
>
> No, you're wrong.
>
> The knowledge of God's existence is innately known to every human being.

Nope, you haven't proven that. You've just asserted it.

<snip your usual bullshit>

> [snip]
>
> That's where your train of thought derails.
>
> Crimes are finite.
>
> Sins against God are not.

Since I see no evidence for a God, sin goes out the window too. Why should I
care what YHWH likes and dislikes any more than what Zeus likes and dislikes,
since both deities fall into the same category?

--
__ _ | Perilous to all of us are the devices of an art
(_ |_) | deeper than we ourselves possess.
__)|_) | -- Gandalf [J.R.R. Tolkien, "Lord of the Rings"]

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 05:03:48 +0000 (UTC), sbalneav
<sbal...@alburg.net> wrote:

>Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>> On 11/12/2012 3:50 PM, sbalneav wrote:
>>> Adam <adam7days6...@creation.org> wrote:
>>>> On 11/12/2012 11:03 AM, Microraptor wrote:
>>>>> If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth,
>>>>> status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different.
>>>>
>>>> But not contradictory. Merely different angles on the same event.
>>>
>>> There's a lot of contradictions here:
>>>
>>> http://www.evilbible.com/contradictions.htm
>>
>> They only appear to be contradictions.
>>
>> Read here for a full explanation:
>> http://www.apologeticsindex.org/b08aa.html
>
>I'll pick one from the many links as representative of the whole:
>
>"77. Did Adam die the same day (Genesis 2:17) or did he continue to live to the
>age of 930 years (Genesis 5:5)?
>
>(Category: misunderstood how God works in history)
>
>The Scriptures describe death in three ways; 1) Physical death which ends our
>life on earth, 2) spiritual death which is separation from God, and 3) eternal
>death in hell. The death spoken of in Genesis 2:17 is the second death
>mentioned in our list, that of complete separation from God, while the death
>mentioned in Genesis 5:5 is the first death, a physical death which ends our
>present life."

It's a dishonest redefinition of the word "death" after the event, to
fit their baseless presumption of inerrancy and rationalise away the
contradiction.

Dishonest.

DISHONEST.

*D*I*S*H*O*N*E*S*T*.

And stupid.

STUPID

*S*T*U*P*I*D*.

"This is what it really meant even though it doesn't say so. And
because this is what it really meant there's no contradiction"

That these retards imagine this should convince anybody is an insult
to the intelligence.

>See, how do they KNOW that one passage refers to one death, and the other
>passage refers to the OTHER death? Here's the passages:

They don't.

They invented this other death to fit their unjustified presumption of
inerrancy.

>Genesis 2:16-18
>King James Version (KJV)
>16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou
>mayest freely eat:
>
>17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it:
>for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
>
>18 And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will
>make him an help meet for him.
>
>Genesis 5:4-6
>King James Version (KJV)
>4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and
>he begat sons and daughters:
>
>5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he
>died.
>
>6 And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos:
>
>The first passage does not mention a spiritual separation. It just says "thou
>shalt surely die".
>
>So how do they resolve this contradiction? In the standard apologetic manner:
>like humpty dumpty, words mean exactly what we want them to mean, no more, no
>less. Even though, at Genesis 2:16 spiritual death hasn't been mentioned or
>introduced as a concept, it doesn't mean "die" as we'd expect. It means
>"separation from God".

And worse, having plucked this new meaning out of their rectal
orifices, they use it to "prove" there's no contradiction.

>But this is supposed to be an inerrant text. The word of God. If God means
>"separation from me", why not just SAY: "... thou shalt not eat of it: for in
>the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt be cast out of the Garden, and
>forever separated from me". Why can't this supposed God SAY what it MEANS?

Because it's a dishonest rationalisation.

They imagine this makes it go away.

And that because they have made one of them go away all the others do
too.

>Answer: because it doesn't exist. It's an invention of man.
>
>>> Some are simple statements of fact. An inerrant bible wouldn't have gotten
>>> some of these wrong.
>>
>> Exactly and absolutely correct.
>
>Wrong, as usual.
>
>>>> Some
>>>> people say the same about the story of David's census, and yet the
>>>> explanation is there in the story.

Bullshit.

>>>>> The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.
>>>>
>>>> Not nearly as much as mine and my wife's. Then there was all of the
>>>> intervening history between that and when the seed was finally born.
>>>> You have no idea how hopeless things were for non Jews until Jesus came
>>>> and completed the work of redemption.
>>>
>>> Lot of assumptions here. You have to prove God exists and you have to prove the
>>> supernatural claims of the bible regarding Jesus, first.
>>
>> No, you're wrong.

Lie noted.

>> The knowledge of God's existence is innately known to every human being.

Lie noted.

>Nope, you haven't proven that. You've just asserted it.
>
><snip your usual bullshit>
>
>> [snip]
>>
>> That's where your train of thought derails.

Lie noted.

>> Crimes are finite.
>>
>> Sins against God are not.

No such thing until the retard demonstrates this hypothetical god.

[Calvin Ramsey]

Two different Hebrew words or phrases were used.

Well, he did. Only he didn't say it in English (since English hadn't
been invented yet),
he said it in Hebrew.

Doh!

>
> Answer: because it doesn't exist. It's an invention of man.

Wrong answer. -2 pts.

>
>>> Some are simple statements of fact. An inerrant bible wouldn't have gotten
>>> some of these wrong.
>>
>> Exactly and absolutely correct.
>
> Wrong, as usual.

Yes you are. -2 pts.

>
>>>> Some
>>>> people say the same about the story of David's census, and yet the
>>>> explanation is there in the story.
>>>>
>>>>> The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.
>>>>
>>>> Not nearly as much as mine and my wife's. Then there was all of the
>>>> intervening history between that and when the seed was finally born.
>>>> You have no idea how hopeless things were for non Jews until Jesus came
>>>> and completed the work of redemption.
>>>
>>> Lot of assumptions here. You have to prove God exists and you have to prove the
>>> supernatural claims of the bible regarding Jesus, first.
>>
>> No, you're wrong.
>>
>> The knowledge of God's existence is innately known to every human being.
>
> Nope, you haven't proven that. You've just asserted it.

Actually, it's not my baby. And it's been demonstrated to true for
hundreds of years already.

But, don't worry about it. You'll deny and repress it just like you're
doing God,
just like he predestined you to do, heh heh

> <snip your usual bullshit>

See? There's a very good example of what I meant.

>> [snip]
>>
>> That's where your train of thought derails.
>>
>> Crimes are finite.
>>
>> Sins against God are not.
>
> Since I see no evidence for a God, sin goes out the window too. Why should I
> care what YHWH likes and dislikes any more than what Zeus likes and dislikes,
> since both deities fall into the same category?

Well, one of them created you and everything you see. Care to guess
which one?

But don't worry about it. You'll have lots of time to think things
through later.

<smirk>

[Calvin Ramsey]

Christopher A. Lee pretends to be giving a learned response:

[but because he fails to ever provide any evidence, it can all be
dismissed as meaningless tripe.]

<smirk>

[John Locke]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 01:38:51 -0500, Calvin Ramsey

That's what you claim. So how is that done ? How does this interaction
from outside of space and time take place ? Please explain in detail
the processes employed by your god in the manipulation of matter and
energy resulting in the creation of me and everything I see. No. No
No..magic won't do. Try again.

>But don't worry about it. You'll have lots of time to think things
>through later.
>

You're not grasping it. When you're dead there's no concept of time.
Just like when you undergo general anesthesia. No sense of time.
And when you're dead...it's permanent. That's it. You cease to exist.
Very simple...but you theists make it hellishly complicated.

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/13/2012 2:23 AM, John Locke wrote:

> Calvin Ramsey wrote:

>> Well, one of them created you and everything you see. Care to guess
>> which one?
>>
> That's what you claim. So how is that done ? How does this interaction
> from outside of space and time take place ? Please explain in detail
> the processes employed by your god in the manipulation of matter and
> energy resulting in the creation of me and everything I see. No. No
> No..magic won't do. Try again.

I think you're losing it, Johnny-boy. You need to calm down.

You're not giving it much thought. There's some things God just doesn't
tell us.

>> But don't worry about it. You'll have lots of time to think things
>> through later.
>>
> You're not grasping it. When you're dead there's no concept of time.
> Just like when you undergo general anesthesia. No sense of time.
> And when you're dead...it's permanent. That's it. You cease to exist.
> Very simple...but you theists make it hellishly complicated.

You're only trying to convince yourself that's true.

The only thing is, you have to keep repeating it over and over and over
again.

As soon as you stop, that innate knowledge we all have will creep in and
spoil all your fun.

But you already knew that, didn't you?

<smirk>

[sbalneav]

Which, of course, is a ridiculous term to use anyway since Christians define
the soul as IMMORTAL. If I have an IMMORTAL soul, why characterize separation
from God as "spiritual death"?

--
__ _ | Make way for liberty!
(_ |_) | -- Arnold von Winkelried
__)|_) |

[sbalneav]

Oh? Do you have a citation for that assertion?

You're assuming something that you haven't demonstrated yet; that differernt
words were used for the Genesis 2 and genesis 5 passages.

>> Answer: because it doesn't exist. It's an invention of man.
>
> Wrong answer. -2 pts.

Since no one's actually proven this deity of yours exists, I think I'm on
pretty solid ground here. Two points for Gryffindor, I'm afraid.

>>>> Some are simple statements of fact. An inerrant bible wouldn't have gotten
>>>> some of these wrong.
>>>
>>> Exactly and absolutely correct.
>>
>> Wrong, as usual.
>
> Yes you are. -2 pts.

No, you're wrong again. You *STILL* haven't proven ANY God whatsoever, let
alone the Sociopath God of Calvinism.

>>>>> Some
>>>>> people say the same about the story of David's census, and yet the
>>>>> explanation is there in the story.
>>>>>
>>>>>> The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not nearly as much as mine and my wife's. Then there was all of the
>>>>> intervening history between that and when the seed was finally born.
>>>>> You have no idea how hopeless things were for non Jews until Jesus came
>>>>> and completed the work of redemption.
>>>>
>>>> Lot of assumptions here. You have to prove God exists and you have to prove the
>>>> supernatural claims of the bible regarding Jesus, first.
>>>
>>> No, you're wrong.
>>>
>>> The knowledge of God's existence is innately known to every human being.
>>
>> Nope, you haven't proven that. You've just asserted it.
>
> Actually, it's not my baby. And it's been demonstrated to true for
> hundreds of years already.

Lie.

> But, don't worry about it. You'll deny and repress it just like you're
> doing God,
> just like he predestined you to do, heh heh

Assertion.

>> <snip your usual bullshit>
>
> See? There's a very good example of what I meant.
>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> That's where your train of thought derails.
>>>
>>> Crimes are finite.
>>>
>>> Sins against God are not.
>>
>> Since I see no evidence for a God, sin goes out the window too. Why should I
>> care what YHWH likes and dislikes any more than what Zeus likes and dislikes,
>> since both deities fall into the same category?
>
> Well, one of them created you and everything you see. Care to guess
> which one?

I pick neither.

> But don't worry about it. You'll have lots of time to think things
> through later.

Nope, I'll just be dead. Non existant. As will you.

In 50 years, neither one of us will be doing any thinking, As neither one of
us will have functioning corporeal brains, the embalmer's craft
notwithstanding.

--
__ _ | By denying scientific principles,
(_ |_) | one may maintain any paradox.
__)|_) | -- Galileo Galilei

[Christopher A. Lee]

He'll be 64 and although his acne should be gone by then he'll still
be a virgin.

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/13/2012 10:15 AM, sbalneav wrote:
> Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:

> See, how do they KNOW that one passage refers to one death, and the other
> passage refers to the OTHER death?
>
>> Two different Hebrew words or phrases were used.
>
> Oh? Do you have a citation for that assertion?

Oh, I see what you're doing now. You're just playing games with me.
First you wanted to know how two different meanings from the same
English word could be obtained. I told you how that was done, but
now you want me to prove that's how it was done. But if you really
wanted to know that you could very easily find out for yourself, starting
with the "Kiel & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament", and
moving on to "Strong's Concordance with Hebrew and Greek Lexicon".

In other words, you get to play with yourself. But I'm sure that's nothing
new for you. You're probably an old hand at that, aren't you?

<smirk>

[sbalneav]

Well, using Strong's concordance for Genesis 2:17 "Die":

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Gen&c=2&v=16&t=KJV#16

Die, here:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H4191&t=KJV


1) to die, kill, have one executed
a) (Qal)
1) to die
2) to die (as penalty), be put to death
3) to die, perish (of a nation)
4) to die prematurely (by neglect of wise moral conduct)
b) (Polel) to kill, put to death, dispatch
c) (Hiphil) to kill, put to death
d) (Hophal)
1) to be killed, be put to death
a) to die prematurely

Now, using the same concordance for Genesis 5:5

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Gen&c=5&v=5&t=KJV#top

Die, here:

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H4191&t=KJV

Huh! Whaddaya know: same word.

> <smirk>

Knew you couldn't provide the cite.

It's the same word.

Oh, to further beat it into your thick skull:

http://biblos.com/genesis/2-17.htm

and

http://biblos.com/genesis/5-5.htm

Notice they're both pointing to the same word in Strong's: 4191[e]

So, no. You're wrong.

Again.

And you lied.

Again.

Cripes, you're bad at this. For somebody who gets it so wrong, so often, you
do a lot of smirking. I'm always glad to wipe it off your face.

So, in summary:

God says if you eat this fruit, you will surely die (ta-mut). By this, per
Strong's concordance, means physically die. Later, after God can't get his
shit together, and allows Adam to live to the (biblically asserted and utterly
unbelievable) age of 930 years, he "dies" (way ya-mut). Both have the root
word "muth", which means a physical death to the body. NOT a spiritual death.

So the apologists lie, and to try to make the error go away, they claim its
two different words, when it's not. Then Calvin passes on their lie.

So Calvin, which is it? Are you a liar, or are you just plain pig-ignorant
gullible? Gotta be one of the two.

--
__ _ | The price of anything is the
(_ |_) | amount of life you exchange for it.
__)|_) | -- Henry David Thoreau

[Freedom Man]

Do you enjoy reading fairy tales?
If so, the bible (any one) is where you'll find many.
Just see them for what they are - the ravings of fanatics, con-artists, and
deluded fools!

[Calvin Ramsey]

Ah, I see you've either already forgotten, or failed to notice, that I
said "different words
or *phrases* ".

In Genesis 2:17, you find the Hebrew phrase "moth tamuth", a doubling of
the verb, which means, literally, "a death you shall die"; or, "dying
you shall die".

"You shall not only die spiritually, by losing the life of God, but from
that moment you shall become mortal, and shall continue in a dying state
till you die. This we find literally accomplished; every moment of man's
life may be considered as an act of dying, till soul and body are
separated." [Clark's Commentary on the Bible]

See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_and_Eve


And even though the same Hebrew *phrase* is not found in Genesis 5:5, it
is a very simple matter to derive the meaning from the context of the
entire verse, and the following verses.

It's also a very simple matter to deduce from your results that you
haven't even a clue on
how to read and understand what you read in Bible lexicons and
commentaries. If you
were you could not have missed the H4191 reference to Strong's lexicon
for both
"thereof thou shalt surely" and "die", which tells you, if you knew what
you were doing,
it is to be understood as a *phrase*, and not just a single word.

So, in summary, you need to let those who know what they are doing
handle the way
the Word of God is to be interpreted and translated.

That way you won't keep making yourself look so foolish, in front of
your peers, and in
front of the whole world, and not just those that are alive now, but
also in front of your
future great-great grandchildren, who may want to disavow having any
heritage with you
after seeing how badly you got your backside beat here in your own
stomping ground.

This has been a lot of fun.

Let's do it again, soon.

That way I can show you and the world just how mentally deficient you
really are, again.

<smirk>

[sbalneav]

Yeah, that's nice. We'll see this later on...

> "You shall not only die spiritually, by losing the life of God, but from
> that moment you shall become mortal, and shall continue in a dying state
> till you die. This we find literally accomplished; every moment of man's
> life may be considered as an act of dying, till soul and body are
> separated." [Clark's Commentary on the Bible]

It literally doesn't matter what his *commentary* is, that's just his
opinion on what he wants the text to say. The point is the WORD implies a
physical death. It ALSO implies that, with the english translators not
translating it "the way you think it means", that english translations of the
bible are LOSING some of the "meaning". This, AGAIN, throws the entire issue
of biblical inerrancy, at least for english language versions, out the window.

> See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_and_Eve

Did you actually read it?

"...you shall surely die" (Genesis 2:16-17) - Adam is told that if he eats of
the forbidden tree the consequence will be moth tamuth, "die a death",
indicating not merely death but *emphatically* so. As Adam does not in fact die
immediately on eating the fruit, some exegetes have argued that it means "you
shall die eventually," so that Adam and Eve would have had immortality in the
Garden, but lost it by eating the forbidden fruit. However, the grammar *does*
*not* *support* this reading, *nor* *does* *the* *narrative*: Adam and Eve are expelled
from the Garden lest they eat of the second tree, the tree of life, and gain
immortality. (Genesis 3:22)[2] Another explanation is that Adam will undergo "a
spiritual death". The 2nd century Book of Jubilees (4:29???31) explained that
"one day" is equivalent to a thousand years and thus Adam died within that same
"day"[3] the Greek Septuagint, on the other hand, has "day" translated into the
Greek word for a *twenty-four hour period*."

So basically, your "moth tamuth" red herring is bullshit, and a day is still
a 24 hour period.

You know, if you're going to post links, it might help if you actually posted
things that supported your side, as opposed to my side. So we're clear, my
side is: you're full of shit.

> And even though the same Hebrew *phrase* is not found in Genesis 5:5, it
> is a very simple matter to derive the meaning from the context of the
> entire verse, and the following verses.

More patented Calvin Ramsey "Arm Waving". "Harumph! Well, (waves arms)
it's very simple to just forget what things actually say, and just use the
interpretations I want you to use! You're an idiot if you don't".

No, Calvin, let me tell you what the very simple matter is. The very simple
matter is: die means physical death, in both passages. God said they'd die if
they ate the fruit, and they didn't. The only one who actually told the truth
about the supposedly fatal properties of the fruit?

The serpent.

http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/357sce/

> It's also a very simple matter to deduce from your results that you
> haven't even a clue on
> how to read and understand what you read in Bible lexicons and
> commentaries. If you
> were you could not have missed the H4191 reference to Strong's lexicon
> for both
> "thereof thou shalt surely" and "die", which tells you, if you knew what
> you were doing,
> it is to be understood as a *phrase*, and not just a single word.

Again, the very article you cited in the wikipedia page states this is
bullshit. I'm using YOUR source here. "... does not support this reading..."
Remember?

> So, in summary, you need to let those who know what they are doing
> handle the way
> the Word of God is to be interpreted and translated.

Oh, I never said they didn't know what they're doing. Apologists are VERY
proficient at "explaining away" these errors in the bible. However, so long as
you haven't already presupposed that the bible is inerrant, and therefore are
willing to accept ANY explaination, usupported by the text, you can see through
their bullshit.

> That way you won't keep making yourself look so foolish, in front of
> your peers, and in
> front of the whole world, and not just those that are alive now, but
> also in front of your
> future great-great grandchildren, who may want to disavow having any
> heritage with you
> after seeing how badly you got your backside beat here in your own
> stomping ground.

I'd just like to point out that the only link that you posted that I could
research supported my stance: that you couldn't interpret the text the way you
are. You want to talk about colossal foolishness...

> This has been a lot of fun.
>
> Let's do it again, soon.

Run, Calvie-poo, run.

> That way I can show you and the world just how mentally deficient you
> really are, again.

Well, we'll just let all those elect lurkers make up their own minds, won't we?
How's Gandalf, by the way? And Mathias?

Man, once you start with the imaginary friends, you just can't stop, can you?

--
__ _ | Any sufficiently advanced technology
(_ |_) | is indistinguishable from magic.
__)|_) | -- Arthur C. Clarke

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/13/2012 4:39 PM, sbalneav wrote:

> Calvin Ramsey wrote:

>> Ah, I see you've either already forgotten, or failed to notice, that I
>> said "different words or *phrases* ".
>>
>> In Genesis 2:17, you find the Hebrew phrase "moth tamuth", a doubling of
>> the verb, which means, literally, "a death you shall die"; or, "dying
>> you shall die".
>
> Yeah, that's nice. We'll see this later on...
>
>> "You shall not only die spiritually, by losing the life of God, but from
>> that moment you shall become mortal, and shall continue in a dying state
>> till you die. This we find literally accomplished; every moment of man's
>> life may be considered as an act of dying, till soul and body are
>> separated." [Clark's Commentary on the Bible]
>
> It literally doesn't matter what his *commentary* is, that's just his
> opinion on what he wants the text to say. The point is the WORD implies a
> physical death. It ALSO implies that, with the english translators not
> translating it "the way you think it means", that english translations of the
> bible are LOSING some of the "meaning". This, AGAIN, throws the entire issue
> of biblical inerrancy, at least for english language versions, out the window.

And that's just the opinion of somebody little idiot who doesn't know
how to properly use
either a concordance or a lexicon, against the knowledge of thousands of
Biblical
scholars throughout history.

You're only making yourself look foolish, again.

I say keep doing what you're doing.

You won't hear me complain.

<smirk>

[sbalneav]

Surrender accepted.

[WangoTango]

In article <k7s49s$jso$1...@speranza.aioe.org>,
adam7days6...@creation.org says...

>
> On 2012-11-12 03:50 PM, sbalneav wrote:
>
> Oh look, a sock puppet.
>
> > Adam <adam7days6...@creation.org> wrote:
> >> On 11/12/2012 11:03 AM, Microraptor wrote:
> >>> If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth,
> >>> status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different.
> >>
> >> But not contradictory. Merely different angles on the same event.
> >
> > There's a lot of contradictions here:
> >
> > http://www.evilbible.com/contradictions.htm
>
> No, those are just misrepresentations.

Really?
How about this, is Pi 3 and are bats birds?
Did all the various languages come about because of the tower of Babel
getting too close to heaven?
Must have been one heck of a tower, considering we build building higher
than anytime in history.

>
> > Some are simple statements of fact. An inerrant bible wouldn't have gotten
> > some of these wrong.
>
> Right. It didn't because it is inerrant.
> Problem solved.

Problem avoided by deflection.
Making a claim and PROVING that claim are two very different things.

>
> >> Some
> >> people say the same about the story of David's census, and yet the
> >> explanation is there in the story.
> >>
> >>> The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.
> >>
> >> Not nearly as much as mine and my wife's. Then there was all of the
> >> intervening history between that and when the seed was finally born.
> >> You have no idea how hopeless things were for non Jews until Jesus came
> >> and completed the work of redemption.
> >
> > Lot of assumptions here. You have to prove God exists and you have to prove the
> > supernatural claims of the bible regarding Jesus, first.
>
> No, there aren't. No, I don't. No, I don't.

Yes, yes, you do.
If you are going to make the claims you do, you have to show that any
such being exists. Otherwise it is just a story backed by nothing but a
bunch of people HOPING it is so. That's fine, if you like your life
based on nothing, but I prefer to KNOW that the things I believe have
some type of verifiable proof to back them up.

>
> >> The Lord's story isn't what is depressing. It's what he had to do in
> >> order to free you atheists to sit there behind your computers and allow
> >> your imaginations to float in all sorts of perverse directions
> >
> > Looking at all the evidence (or, more correctly, the lack thereof) for any sort
> > of deity existing, and coming to a sound, reasonable decision is "perverse"?
> > How so?
>
> Probably, in your ability to read.

Which is pretty funny, if you are claiming that it is somehow our
inability to understand the words or ideas in the Bible, I've got to
openly laugh. For you to claim that you have some sort of higher
understanding than the rest of us is just another one of those things
that you have to PROVE. I will concede that you do, in fact, have some
type of improved cognitive skills, upon proof. Otherwise, I am going to
have to go by the hard and fast rule that you are smack dab in the
middle of that bell curve of intelligence.

>
> >> to
> >> complain about how oppressed you are by religion, while your true goals
> >> are to recreate the ideological hopelessness that once enslaved man
> >> before the coming of our Lord.
> >
> > What "ideological hopelessness" would this be? You mean "accepting reality as
> > it actually is"? Or something else?
>
> Have fun pushing your agenda.

There is no agenda to requiring a little evidence for those things we
believe in, none.

>
> >> If you were to emulate even the parts of his life that you find the most
> >> depressing most of you would be hundreds of times better on
> >
> > Getting nailed to a cross and stabbed in the side would make me "hundred of
> > times better"? How so?
>
> Reading and comprehension.

See the statement on cognitive skills above.

>
> >> - in this
> >> life - than you are now.
> >
> > How can you state this, when you don't know me?
>
> Reading and comprehension.

See above.

>
> >>> I suppose some Conservatives are social liberals but conservative with economics.
> >>> It is just better to aspire to be an intellectual and get out of the dictatorship
> >>> mind set. Evolution is the name of the game and we are all mutants to a
> >> varying
> >>> degree. So long as people accept Adam and Eve and resign themselves to
> >> being
> >>> simple then education has been a disaster.
> >>
> >> You are a spoiled child who has yet to experience true dictatorship.
> >
> > Oh, you mean like a fairy tale where some supernatural being can see your every
> > though and action, and punish you for eternity for your finite crimes, unless
> > you worship him and live your life exactly how he wants you to? A dictatorship
> > like that?
>
> Certainly not a dictatorship of perfect paradise. Time to grow up.

Yes, it is.

[Calvin Ramsey]

Thank-you for that sign that you know you've lost.

You know nothing about the Hebrew language, so your opinion means
absolutely nothing.

And your uneducated opinion in writing is my proof that you are wrong,
again.

And now I know that you know that you are wrong, again.

See how that works?

<smirk>

[sbalneav]

You're welcome!

--
__ _ | The imagination is man's power over nature.
(_ |_) | -- Wallace Stevens
__)|_) |

[Calvin Ramsey]

That's funny and all, but you're forgetting something.

We're not the only ones reading this.

Somewhere there is someone who doesn't take this as a joke,
the way you're doing now. So you're only hurting yourself.

If we were only talking to one another, without any record
of what we said being made, then you might be able to get
away with it.

But here, all anyone has to do is go a few posts back and start
reading. And then they'll see that you were wrong. And then
when they get up to where we are now, and see you acting
like a clown, well, let's just say that will be the final nail in
your coffin.

So, please do keep doing what you're doing, again.

I won't object, Mr. Clown.

<smirk>

[sbalneav]

I'm glad you're entertained.

--
__ _ | The sun, with all those planets revolving around it and
(_ |_) | dependent on it, can still ripen a bunch of grapes as if
__)|_) | it had nothing else in the universe to do. -- Galileo

[Calvin Ramsey]

>> That's funny and all, but you're forgetting something.
>>
>> We're not the only ones reading this.
>>
>> Somewhere there is someone who doesn't take this as a joke,
>> the way you're doing now. So you're only hurting yourself.
>>
>> If we were only talking to one another, without any record
>> of what we said being made, then you might be able to get
>> away with it.
>>
>> But here, all anyone has to do is go a few posts back and start
>> reading. And then they'll see that you were wrong. And then
>> when they get up to where we are now, and see you acting
>> like a clown, well, let's just say that will be the final nail in
>> your coffin.
>>
>> So, please do keep doing what you're doing, again.
>>
>> I won't object, Mr. Clown.
>>
>

> I'm glad you're entertained.

Well, it is entertaining that you stopped talking about
the two verses in Genesis soon after I showed you, and
everyone else who is interested in knowing, where you
went wrong in your Biblical hermeneutics.

Yes. I do indeed find that to be very entertaining.

<smirk>

[sbalneav]

>> I'm glad you're entertained.
>
> Well, it is entertaining

We're having a jolly old time, aren't we? You running away, your ass bright
red after your spanking, and me, laughing in merriment as you go! "Oh, the fun
those two kidders have," the elect lurkers are saying!

Do say hello to your other imaginary friends, Gandalf, and Mathias Sereno, the
next time you see them. Oh, and your biggest imaginary friend, the one only you
seem to be able to talk to. Can't remember his initials... was it NB or YHWH?

I think I'll wander off and talk to a Scholar. You know, the kind that are
employed by secular universities!

Toodles! It's been fun!

--
__ _ | Adopt the pace of nature: her secret is patience.
(_ |_) | -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
__)|_) |

[Calvin Ramsey]

I know I sure am.

> I think I'll wander off and talk to a Scholar. You know, the kind that are
> employed by secular universities!

Be sure and and ask him/her if they've ever had "an original thought".

> Toodles! It's been fun!

You betcha it has.

And there's proof positive that you know you've been out maneuvered and
backed into a corner, with no possible exit except a full retreat.

You're almost as fun as Les is to win against.

You need to be thinking about leaving a note in a sealed envelope, not
to be
opened until your first great-great grandchild turns 18. In the note you can
explain why you ran away so many times from that Calvin dude back in the
early part of the 21st century. They will probably want to know why.

Make it good. Make it believable.

<smirk>

[Zacharias Mulletstein]

It's true, but the parts about gays aren't true anymore because Jesus Christ
is no longer a homophobe.

[sbalneav]

You must be masochistic, then.

--
__ _ | No furniture so charming as books.
(_ |_) | -- Sydney Smith
__)|_) |

[Calvin Ramsey]

Nope. Just a fun-loving guy.

<blink><blink>

[kolw...@astromail.com]

On Nov 12, 3:59 pm, "Syd M." <pauldavidwri...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 11:55 am, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews
>
> <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 12, 11:03 am, Microraptor <davidjst...@talk21.com> wrote:
>
> > > If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth, status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different. The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.

>
> > > I suppose some Conservatives are social liberals but conservative with economics.
> > > It is just better to aspire to be an intellectual and get out of the dictatorship mind set. Evolution is the name of the game and we are all mutants to a varying degree. So long as people accept Adam and Eve and resign themselves to being simple then education has been a disaster.
>

> > You will be more depressed on your deathbed...That is the truth
>
> <Yawn> Empty threat rejected.

You know you have appointment with death don't you.
It is no threat then


>
> PDW

[BroilJAB]

"My campaign is all about REVENGE on working whites"
--Hussein Obama

"We must send all whites straight to HELL!"
--Hussein Obama's Inaugural Preacher

If you do now own a high power rifle, go buy one.
Stock up on boxes of ammunition, defend yourself.

[Uirgil]

In article
<f0890cd3-2079-434c...@v9g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
BroilJAB <Design...@wmconnect.com> wrote:

> "My campaign is all about REVENGE on Blacks"
> --Liarboi Broiljab
>
> "We must send all Blacks straight to HELL!"
> --Liarboi Broiljab

>
If you do now own a high power rifle, go buy one.

Stock up on boxes of ammunition, defend yourself,
against hate-mongers like Liarboi Broiljab.

[Budikka666]

On Nov 12, 3:38 pm, Calvin Ramsey <calvinram...@live.com> wrote:
> They only appear to be contradictions.
>
> Read here for a full explanation:http://www.apologeticsindex.org/
b08aa.html

The keyword there is "apologetics". Why don't you and I formally debate
this right here in this thread?

Or you can meet me here and face the other challenge I've set for you:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/a942cafca1ba0ba0

Or you can run away like you always do, sad little coward-forChrist that
you are.

Budikka

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 15:54:15 +0000 (UTC), Budikka666
<Budi...@netscape.net> wrote:

>On Nov 12, 3:38 pm, Calvin Ramsey <calvinram...@live.com> wrote:
>> They only appear to be contradictions.

Lie noted.

Dishonest theist apologists try to make a few them go away by
rationalising them, and think this somehow disproves all of them.

>> Read here for a full explanation:http://www.apologeticsindex.org/
>b08aa.html
>
>The keyword there is "apologetics". Why don't you and I formally debate
>this right here in this thread?

There's nothing to debate.

All you can try to do is educate him.

But you're dealing with in-your-face dishonesty, lies and aggressive
stupidity.

Why can't these at least borderline psychopaths keep it to themselves?

[Mike Painter]

On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 15:54:15 +0000 (UTC), Budikka666
<Budi...@netscape.net> wrote:

Calvin is unusual in that he can just take on his predestination
persona and not have to run away.

There is no need for a bible or a defense of a bible if what he claims
when he is not defending the bible is true.
--
"When one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion." ~ Robert Pirsig

[Budikka666]

Do I have to repeat this?! The point is not to debate these losers
and coweards, although I would do so if any one of them ever could
find the guts and the material to do it with. The point is to merely
show that they are nothing *but* vacuous cowards and ignroant
blowhards.

Budikka

[duke]

On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 08:00:16 -0800, Christopher A. Lee
<chrisl...@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 15:54:15 +0000 (UTC), Budikka666
><Budi...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>>On Nov 12, 3:38 pm, Calvin Ramsey <calvinram...@live.com> wrote:
>>> They only appear to be contradictions.
>
>Lie noted.
>
>Dishonest theist apologists try to make a few them go away by
>rationalising them, and think this somehow disproves all of them.

What contradictions? Can you give examples and why they are "contradictions"?

The dukester, American - American
********************************************
You can't fix stupid.
********************************************

[sbalneav]

duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 08:00:16 -0800, Christopher A. Lee
> <chrisl...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 15:54:15 +0000 (UTC), Budikka666
>><Budi...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Nov 12, 3:38 pm, Calvin Ramsey <calvinram...@live.com> wrote:
>>>> They only appear to be contradictions.
>>
>>Lie noted.
>>
>>Dishonest theist apologists try to make a few them go away by
>>rationalising them, and think this somehow disproves all of them.
>
> What contradictions? Can you give examples and why they are "contradictions"?

Here's one you can think about: do you have free will?

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/free.html


--
__ _ | Politicians should read science fiction,
(_ |_) | not westerns and detective stories.

[Budikka666]

On Nov 23, 3:28 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 08:00:16 -0800, Christopher A. Lee
>

> <chrislee95...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 15:54:15 +0000 (UTC), Budikka666

> ><Budik...@netscape.net> wrote:

>
> >>On Nov 12, 3:38 pm,CalvinRamsey<calvinram...@live.com> wrote:
> >>> They only appear to be contradictions.
>
> >Lie noted.
>
> >Dishonest theist apologists try to make a few them go away by
> >rationalising them, and think this somehow disproves all of them.
>
> What contradictions?  Can you give examples and why they are "contradictions"?

They were posted over a decade ago. You ran away then, too:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/search?group=alt.atheism&q=Bible+Absurdities%2C+Contradictions%2C+and+Lies&qt_g=Search+this+group

But if you can find the guts to face me at long last, I'll go toe-to-
toe with you on Bible contradictions, right here in this thread.

Budikka

[hypatiab7]

On Monday, November 12, 2012 11:55:39 AM UTC-5, The Chief Castrator Of The Jews wrote:
> On Nov 12, 11:03 am, Microraptor <davidjst...@talk21.com> wrote:
>
> > If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth, status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different. The story of Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.
>
> > I suppose some Conservatives are social liberals but conservative with economics.
>
> > It is just better to aspire to be an intellectual and get out of the dictatorship mind set. Evolution is the name of the game and we are all mutants to a varying degree. So long as people accept Adam and Eve and resign themselves to being simple then education has been a disaster.

> You will be more depressed on your deathbed...That is the truth

Ah, I see, you're one of the stupid ones who still believe that
their religious threats scare anyone who doesn't believe in their
religion. Wrongo, oh foolish one.

[Christopher A. Lee]

Fundie mode: - "All you atheists ever do, is call people idiots and
liars just because you disagree with them".

It's not "disagreement" when somebody threatens you with their
mythology for not believing it.

It's mind-numbing stupidity.

[Budikka666]

On Nov 23, 5:58 pm, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
> On Nov 23, 3:28 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 08:00:16 -0800, Christopher A. Lee
>
> > <chrislee95...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > >On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 15:54:15 +0000 (UTC), Budikka666
> > ><Budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> > >>On Nov 12, 3:38 pm,CalvinRamsey<calvinram...@live.com> wrote:
> > >>> They only appear to be contradictions.
>
> > >Lie noted.
>
> > >Dishonest theist apologists try to make a few them go away by
> > >rationalising them, and think this somehow disproves all of them.
>
> > What contradictions?  Can you give examples and why they are "contradictions"?
>

> They were posted over a decade ago.  You ran away then, too:http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/search?group=alt.atheism&q...

>
> But if you can find the guts to face me at long last, I'll go toe-to-
> toe with you on Bible contradictions, right here in this thread.
>
> Budikka

Keep running you chickenshit for Jesus Clown, because every single
time you run you admit you have no faith in your purprotedly
omnipotent creator.

If you can find the guts meet me in the thread where I challenged Jope
with the same chalenge I offered you:
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/787f72a77ea8f2c2?hl=en&scoring=d&

I'm done with this thread.

Budikka

[duke]

On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 22:19:08 +0000 (UTC), sbalneav <sbal...@alburg.net> wrote:

>duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 08:00:16 -0800, Christopher A. Lee
>> <chrisl...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 15:54:15 +0000 (UTC), Budikka666
>>><Budi...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Nov 12, 3:38 pm, Calvin Ramsey <calvinram...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>> They only appear to be contradictions.
>>>
>>>Lie noted.
>>>
>>>Dishonest theist apologists try to make a few them go away by
>>>rationalising them, and think this somehow disproves all of them.
>>
>> What contradictions? Can you give examples and why they are "contradictions"?
>
>Here's one you can think about: do you have free will?

Yes, I do. God gives me full free choice. What are you getting at?

>http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/free.html

[Budikka666]

On Nov 24, 8:23 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 22:19:08 +0000 (UTC), sbalneav <sbaln...@alburg.net> wrote:
> >duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 08:00:16 -0800, Christopher A. Lee
> >> <chrislee95...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >>>On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 15:54:15 +0000 (UTC), Budikka666
> >>><Budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>On Nov 12, 3:38 pm, Calvin Ramsey <calvinram...@live.com> wrote:
> >>>>> They only appear to be contradictions.
>
> >>>Lie noted.
>
> >>>Dishonest theist apologists try to make a few them go away by
> >>>rationalising them, and think this somehow disproves all of them.
>
> >> What contradictions?  Can you give examples and why they are "contradictions"?
>
> >Here's one you can think about: do you have free will?
>
> Yes, I do.  God gives me full free choice.  What are you getting at?

You ahv eno free will dumb-ass:
http://chronicle.com/article/Jerry-A-Coyne/131165/

There is no god - until and unless you present your *objective*
*independent evidence for one, and sicne you ahve FLED THE THREAD
every time we've asked, you obviously have none.

Now why are you RUNNING from my offer to debate Bible contradictions
with you? No faiht in yoru supposedly omnipotent god Duke Box? Go
here for the debate if you can fidn the guts to face me instead of
endlessly running (see below for Duke Box's cowardice documented):
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/787f72a77ea8f2c2?hl=en&scoring=d&

Here's an abridged list of threads in which we've posed serious
questions about his position and from which he has run like diarrhea.

Here's the most recent example of Duke's Shameless cowardice:
Challenged to present his evidence for a creator god, he RAN AWAY!
(Again, yawn).
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/e8a0474ae8eb1ded?scoring=d&
9/29/2012

Challenged to a formal debate on abortion, Duke Box aborted!
http://tinyurl.com/9zgnxcb
9/9/2012

Challenged to a formal debate on the existence of Jesus, Duck & Run
Dipshit-For-Christ Duke RAN:
http://tinyurl.com/7mo8j5l
3/25/2012

In the massive slaughter of Usenet creationists, *every* *single*
*one* of whom fled because they could not post even on item of
positive scientific evidence for a creator or for a creation, Duped
was merely one of a host of creationists who RAN AWAY:
http://tinyurl.com/8yqo8fw
(3/18/2012)

Challenged to identify the two species on either side of this "missing
link" he lies exists, Dumbass Duke RAN AWAY!
http://tinyurl.com/7k2w6jc
(2/25/2012)

The Valentine's Day Massacre!
http://tinyurl.com/7mdvcep
(2/14/2012)

Duck & Run starts the new year in fine fettle - runs three times in
one day!
http://tinyurl.com/7eotebl
http://tinyurl.com/7b2waz8
http://tinyurl.com/7o23uvn

Dec 27th, 2011
Challenged to debate his 100% evidence for Jesus, Duck & Run ducked
and ran.
http://tinyurl.com/6m4ub5q

Dec 26th, 2011
Duck & Run claimed he had 100% of the evidence for a god, yet when
*given* *a* *second* *chance* to produce it, he fled the challenge!
http://tinyurl.com/7kawokn

Dec. 24th 2011
Duck & Run claimed he had 100% of the evidence for a god, yet when
challenged to produce it, he fled the challenge!
http://tinyurl.com/6m4ub5q

Sept. 5th 2011
asked for evidence for this Jesus of his. Duck & Run ducked & ran!
http://tinyurl.com/3brposl


On January 22, 2011, under the title: "Chicken Duke Has a Beautifully
Clean Pair of heels Does he Not?" We requested "Please provide
independent evidence - that is, from *outside* the Bible - that there
ever was a Jesus Christ, miracle working son of a god."
Chicken Duke couldn't do it.
http://tinyurl.com/4h6wdzm

Then there was this:
http://tinyurl.com/4dk7aoz
Jan 16, 2011, We requested this of Chicken Duke:
please provide *positive* *scientific* evidence for a creator or for a
creation, and post it right here in response to this message.
This was in response to his assertion that "Existence mandates
creation".
He ran away.

http://tinyurl.com/29hkt7j
December 22nd 2010, in which Chicken Duke was challenged to support
statements he has made repeatedly on Usenet. Once again he ran from
them like the stinking diarrhea he is and hid behind an irrelevant and
dishoenst non-sequitur.

Prior to that he ran from a similar challenge just the day before(!):
He ran from a challenge to support his bullshit on December 21st,
2010:
http://tinyurl.com/29hkt7j

And just the month before that:
http://tinyurl.com/2d5xtf3

November 20th 2010, he ran form these five simple questions rather
than support his god, thereby proving that he's nothing but another
limp Peter at the passion!

Here are the questions:
1. That the figure you quoted is true.
2. That they all believe in the *same* deity.
3. That this single deity actually exists
4. That this single deity actually created the universe
5. That this single deity is not a figment of their imagination
Here's my prediction at the time:
Time to show us that clean pair of heels again, Chicken Duck & Run.
Yep - he ran!

Claimed there are "gargantuan holes" in the Theory of Evolution and
then RAN when we called him on it:
http://tinyurl.com/27kf2da

The entire "Why There Isn't a God" series, started here:
http://tinyurl.com/6b9et

Duck & Run Ran Away - that is to say he failed 100% to actually get to
grips with the subject matter in any of those threads, his 'response'
consisting solely of chanting "no it isn't" or words to that effect.
He could offer no rebuttal, let alone refutation, he could not support
a single thing he claimed and he could offer zero rationale for his
position.

Let's face it, on this basis, he's run away from the entire "Why the
Holy Bible Lies" series, the entire "Why There Was No Flood" series,
and all of the the "Issues The Anti-Choice Crowd Carefully Avoid"
series so far.

Petition to Save the Hubble Telescope
Duck & Run makes yet another blind claim "Ok, you foot the bill to
keep looking at the same "sky" that's already been looked at" he
blathers, like there couldn't possibly be anything new to discover,
yet we proved him entirely wrong - again.
http://tinyurl.com/74p46nj

Scientists find new face on back of Turin shroud
http://tinyurl.com/2bx6jcf
Duck & Run, shrouded in cowardice, ran away.

The Inquisition
http://tinyurl.com/4pokf
Duck & Run didn't expect the inquisition....

Another Problem for Creation IDiots
http://tinyurl.com/3px9j
Duck & Run proved to be a creation IDiot.

Human aspect of Jesus
http://tinyurl.com/4w488
Duck and Run has provided us with a de facto admission that there was
no Jesus Christ, miracle-working son-of-a-god.

Jesus's three days sacrifice
http://tinyurl.com/3jhop
Duck & Run sacrificed the truth and got caught.

Which is the real God???
http://tinyurl.com/6bnoo
Duck & Run didn't know.

God isn't very smart about spreading his word, is he?
http://tinyurl.com/7xjux
Neither is Duck & Run.

Why did Mekkla run away from a discussion of Heb 8:7-13?
http://tinyurl.com/4v759
Duck & Run opened this thread to accuse someone else of running away.
As soon as he was challenged, Duck & Run ran away!

Why Didn't Jesus Die Sooner?
http://tinyurl.com/5gevm
Duck & Run's claims died sooner.

Why is Duke Such a Coward?
http://tinyurl.com/5p3qt
Duck & Run ran away, proving what a coward he is.

Duck & Run's five evidences of god
(that he later admitted were not evidences):
http://tinyurl.com/3otzr

Questions that Duke Can't Answer
(in which we accused Duck & Run of running away and from which
he...**RAN AWAY**! The questions remain unanswered. There are only
ten numbered questions in this thread, assembled from previous threads
from which
Duck & Run ran away. Duck & Run lied there were 75 questions
and...ran away!)
http://tinyurl.com/5ozyl

There are now well over one hundred unanswered questions that Duck &
Run has fled. Here's the bulk of them:
http://tinyurl.com/ad89u
http://tinyurl.com/9ky7y

Duck & Run thinks Christianity, which post-dates Mithraism by seven
centuries, gave rise to Mithraism:
http://tinyurl.com/yzp9bk
Duck & Run ran away.

Duke: Global Flood Challenge
A thread which we opened specifically at Duck & Run's request, and
from which he, predictably, ran away. He admitted there is no
evidence for a global flood, we presented abundant evidence that there
never was one,
Duck & Run offered zero rebuttal and ran away as he again did in the
recent flood series.
http://tinyurl.com/4l83y

Evidence that Duke can't refute:
http://tinyurl.com/5l2av
Duck & Run failed to refute the evidence and ran away, thereby proving
my case

An Answer to Pascal's Wager
http://tinyurl.com/4y63n
In which we accuse Duck & Run of running away. He ran away!

Thread: "Why Puke is Such a Pathological, Unregenerate, Cowardly,
Lying, Hypocritical Asshole"
http://tinyurl.com/4ant3
Duck & Run ran away because he's a pathological, unregenerate,
cowardly, lying hypocritical asshole.

Thread: "Duke's Chronic lying"
http://tinyurl.com/3ra8l
Duck & Run ran away.

Thread: "aqotm - bud(ikka) style"
http://tinyurl.com/4r4gz
Duck & Run ran away from his own clueless stupidity

Thread: "Duke: Global Flood Challenge"
http://tinyurl.com/3qd5m
Duck & Run was out of his depth - as he's recently proven again - and
so he...ran away!

Thread: "The Bland Assumption of Jesus' Existence"
http://tinyurl.com/5kj3m
Duck & Run ran away as we blandly assumed he would.

Thread: "Running Scriptural Circles Around Duke"
http://tinyurl.com/3ozwo
Duck & Run ran away after we ran scriptural circles around him

And my favorite:
http://tinyurl.com/487vc
This was a cowardly thread Duck & Run opened titled "Budikka Runs
Away". He set this up because he was peeved that he didn't get an
instant response from me in another thread! He never told me he'd
opened this alternate thread, yet he accused me of running away in
it! LoL! When we finally happened across it and challenged him in
it, he ran away! How pathetic is that?!

And more than once/month for an entire 12 month period starting April
2009:
April 21st, 2009: http://tinyurl.com/yzywu7q
July 12th, 2009: http://tinyurl.com/ybrmfxp
August 16th,2009: http://tinyurl.com/kjjmn4
September 10th, 2009: http://tinyurl.com/oasqn8
October 3rd, 2009: http://tinyurl.com/ybvtw53
November 9th, 2009: http://tinyurl.com/yjlmbrf
November 19th, 2009: http://tinyurl.com/yj64yqj
November 20th, 2009: http://tinyurl.com/ybrkvyh
November 22nd, 2009: http://tinyurl.com/ycw6s8l
November 25th, 2009: http://tinyurl.com/ygafw5d
November 29th, 2009: http://tinyurl.com/yakpje3
November 29th, 2009: http://tinyurl.com/ygafw5d
December 5th, 2009: http://tinyurl.com/yzt9f4m
December 7th, 2009: http://tinyurl.com/yllcb6q
December 8th, 2009: http://tinyurl.com/ybzvv33
December 13th, 2009: http://tinyurl.com/yakex6v
December 23rd, 2009: http://tinyurl.com/y9k8kpv
January 1st, 2010: http://tinyurl.com/ybnesb2
January 24th, 2010: http://tinyurl.com/ybsqw3l
January 27th, 2010: http://tinyurl.com/ycgm8u8
January 31st, 2010: http://tinyurl.com/ycemfpo
February 3rd, 2010: http://tinyurl.com/ybsqw3l
February 15th, 2010: http://tinyurl.com/yjjj93v
February 16th, 2010: http://tinyurl.com/ycemfpo
February 22nd, 2010: http://tinyurl.com/ye59brz
March 1st, 2010: http://tinyurl.com/ykgtezr
March 6th, 2010: http://tinyurl.com/yjhe3fe
March 9th, 2010: http://tinyurl.com/ybnahkb
March 11th, 2010: http://tinyurl.com/yl8hcea

The best comment from him was in alt.atheism on January 5th, 2004, at
5:46 pm when he said, "I've heard myself say a lot of vocal things,
but I've never heard myself think." (http://tinyurl.com/f48bq). This
explains everything, including why he's such a gashole. All he can do
is impotently snipe at people, since he has nothing of value or
intelligence to say and he demonstrably cannot support a single claim
he makes.

He has no proof, no evidence - not even an intelligent argument. He
does not think because he cannot. He's quite loco, and like a loco,
he's stuck on a pair of narrow rails. He has no clue he's on them,
let alone how to get off. And the track to which he's limited leads
to a dead end - which he hilariously thinks is "Heaven"!

The best "evidence" of a god he was ever capable of producing was a
lackluster five items he posted in thread "Scientists find new face on
back of Turin shroud" in a.a. on April 18 2004, 9:52 am:
http://tinyurl.com/c6hkg.

He appears to have appropriated "his" five evidences from Thomas
Aquinas who, c1245, published "Summa theologiae" which contained five
"Ways" to "prove" some god's existence, all of which have been
thoroughly discredited.

He admitted his "own" five ways were nothing but blind belief in alt
atheism in a thread called "The Inquisition" message posted on
Saturday, 12 June, 2004 11:52am:
http://tinyurl.com/bc5ud
but that was all he could do after the massive pounding he got.

We used those same five items in a spoof edition of my "Why There is
no God" series (http://tinyurl.com/bz54w). We changed a word here and
there and all of his five "evidences" miraculously became evidence for
the non-existence of a god! Naturally we didn't count them in the 666
since they were so pathetic.

His comments aren't born of smarts, logic, rational or evidence,
they're born of desperation. Neither are his comments aimed at the
material - they rarely are. He's incapable of having a rational
exchange on a topic. He spits out idiocy and insult and runs away.

His comments are not designed to enlighten, help, or exchange
anything, but to abuse people. He's the very antithesis of this
purported Christian love he's supposed to dispense.

He never documents or supports a single thing he says, whereas the
cowardice and lies of this pathetic hypocrite for Christ have been
fully documented on Usenet. His despicable behavior and his
slanderous unfounded charges (he thinks turning the other cheek means
mooning someone) are why he was mass-plonked by pretty near the entire
regular set on a.a.:
http://tinyurl.com/9gycg

It's a sign of how pathetic he is, how low he's sinking and how
desperate he's become since he was cut off, that he now has to beg for
atheists to talk to him by posting inane rants against us - this from
the guy who claims to be a Christian, who claims to do unto others as
he would be done by, and who lies about turning the other cheek!

His cowardice in "debate" or even discussion is legendary:
1. http://tinyurl.com/ac2vg
2. http://tinyurl.com/4dyok
3. http://tinyurl.com/664yu
4. http://tinyurl.com/apenc

He thinks Christianity, which post-dates Mithraism by seven centuries,
gave rise to Mithraism:
http://tinyurl.com/yzp9bk

He's quite literally astronomically stupid:
http://tinyurl.com/yhyopg
("the same "sky" that's already been looked at."!)
http://tinyurl.com/6fbwqh

He claims he can run rings around anyone on scripture, but when he was
actually taken up directly on this claim:
http://tinyurl.com/3z47u
he ran away!

He has numerous documented lies:
http://tinyurl.com/5zlzx
http://tinyurl.com/ablwm

He regularly demands people open discussions on his god, and when they
do, he runs away. We personally had him run from the *same topic*
well over 100 times in direct response to a challenge *he* made!

He dismally failed the simplest intelligence test imaginable:
http://tinyurl.com/7zm43

He has fifty questions he can't answer or daren't answer honestly
here:
http://tinyurl.com/ad89u (October 22nd 2004)

and fifty more here:
http://tinyurl.com/9ky7y (July 16th 2005)

In short, he's a waste of a human being and not worth any response
other than this.

End of Douche. Case closed.

Budikka

[duke]

On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 16:21:51 -0800 (PST), hypatiab7 <hypa...@comcast.net>
wrote:

Sorry, mm, but there is only one God and he's yours too. So you too will be
judged one moment after you die for the things you did while in the flesh,
whether good or bad. Time to clean up your act.

[duke]

Until you see the mind-numbing stupidity was yours for not listening.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <uvl1b8lb6qucg6tvc...@4ax.com>,

duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 22:19:08 +0000 (UTC), sbalneav <sbal...@alburg.net>
> wrote:
>
> >duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 08:00:16 -0800, Christopher A. Lee
> >> <chrisl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 15:54:15 +0000 (UTC), Budikka666
> >>><Budi...@netscape.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>On Nov 12, 3:38 pm, Calvin Ramsey <calvinram...@live.com> wrote:
> >>>>> They only appear to be contradictions.
> >>>
> >>>Lie noted.
> >>>
> >>>Dishonest theist apologists try to make a few them go away by
> >>>rationalising them, and think this somehow disproves all of them.
> >>
> >> What contradictions? Can you give examples and why they are
> >> "contradictions"?
> >
> >Here's one you can think about: do you have free will?
>
> Yes, I do. God gives me full free choice. What are you getting at?
>
> >http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/free.html

If your god knows everything that you will and has known for nearly 14
billion years, then you most definitely do NOT have free will. It's
impossible.

--
JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <no32b8dcq3sfd0s9m...@4ax.com>,

duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 16:21:51 -0800 (PST), hypatiab7 <hypa...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> >On Monday, November 12, 2012 11:55:39 AM UTC-5, The Chief Castrator Of The
> >Jews wrote:
> >> On Nov 12, 11:03 am, Microraptor <davidjst...@talk21.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth,
> >> > status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different. The story of
> >> > Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.
> >>
> >> > I suppose some Conservatives are social liberals but conservative with
> >> > economics.
> >>
> >> > It is just better to aspire to be an intellectual and get out of the
> >> > dictatorship mind set. Evolution is the name of the game and we are all
> >> > mutants to a varying degree. So long as people accept Adam and Eve and
> >> > resign themselves to being simple then education has been a disaster.
> >
> >> You will be more depressed on your deathbed...That is the truth
> >
> >Ah, I see, you're one of the stupid ones who still believe that
> >their religious threats scare anyone who doesn't believe in their
> >religion. Wrongo, oh foolish one.
>
> Sorry, mm, but there is only one God and he's yours too. So you too will be
> judged one moment after you die for the things you did while in the flesh,
> whether good or bad. Time to clean up your act.

John 3:16 says only believers will have eternal life.

Are you claiming that that is a lie?

[duke]

On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 16:42:51 -0800, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
wrote:

Why do you appear so more intellectually challenged every day.

Right now, God knows exactly how many hairs you have on your head and how long
they are. It's in the bible.

[Budikka666]

On Nov 24, 12:18 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> Sorry, mm, but there is only one God and he's yours too.

Your laughable fiction is not our god and never will be.

We're still waiting on your providing independent objective evidence
for this god of yours - a task from which you have FLED every single
time we've charged you with it. Care to present it here - and no,
LYING that you posted it elsewhere is not providing it here. You
either provide it here or provide a functioning URL to where you claim
you did post it, or you are openly and unconditionally admitting that
you can offer no evidence whatsoever supporting your blind, ignorant,
juvenile faith in your fictional god.

Budikka

[duke]

On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 17:27:55 -0800, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
wrote:

NO, people in hell don't refer to it as "life".

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <kik4b8l822ih30enj...@4ax.com>,

Insults instead of addressing my point. Typical.

Let's try again.

How can you claim to have free will if your god has known everything
you're ever going to do for nearly 14 billion years?

[Syd M.]

On Nov 25, 12:49 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Nov 2012 17:27:55 -0800, Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <no32b8dcq3sfd0s9ms236kgc9f7ot3d...@4ax.com>,
> > duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >> On Fri, 23 Nov 2012 16:21:51 -0800 (PST), hypatiab7 <hypati...@comcast.net>

> >> wrote:
>
> >> >On Monday, November 12, 2012 11:55:39 AM UTC-5, The Chief Castrator Of The
> >> >Jews wrote:
> >> >> On Nov 12, 11:03 am, Microraptor <davidjst...@talk21.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > If it was a word of God it would be perfect. Yet the accounts of birth,
> >> >> > status, crucifixion and resurrection are all different. The story of
> >> >> > Jesus is most depressing and leads to a depressing life.
>
> >> >> > I suppose some Conservatives are social liberals but conservative with
> >> >> > economics.
>
> >> >> > It is just better to aspire to be an intellectual and get out of the
> >> >> > dictatorship mind set. Evolution is the name of the game and we are all
> >> >> > mutants to a varying degree. So long as people accept Adam and Eve and
> >> >> > resign themselves to being simple then education has been a disaster.
>
> >> >> You will be more depressed on your deathbed...That is the truth
>
> >> >Ah, I see, you're one of the stupid ones who still believe that
> >> >their religious threats scare anyone who doesn't believe in their
> >> >religion. Wrongo, oh foolish one.
>
> >> Sorry, mm, but there is only one God and he's yours too.  So you too will be
> >> judged one moment after you die for the things you did while in the flesh,
> >> whether good or bad.  Time to clean up your act.
> >John 3:16 says only believers will have eternal life.
> >Are you claiming that that is a lie?
>
> NO, people in hell don't refer to it as "life".
>

Because it doesn't exist, loser.

PDW

[Budikka666]

I see you FLED the contradictions you demanded we post. Why is that
not a surprise? You've fled every challenge we've ever set before
you.

[duke]

On Sun, 25 Nov 2012 15:02:14 -0800, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>

Because I freely elected to do what I planned to freely elect to do.

[Budikka666]

Here's an abridged list of threads in which we've posed serious
questions about his position and from which he has run like diarrhea.

Here's the most recent example of Duke's Shameless cowardice:

Challenged yet again to provde evidence for his god - Duped RAN AWAY!
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/6b639843fdbe4de6?scoring=d&
11/25/2012

Challenged or debate Bible contradictions, Dickhewad Duke-Box RAN
AWAY!
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/23e20b2c87b8f0e1?scoring=d&
11/23/2012

Challenged to present his evidence for a creator god, Doofus RAN AWAY!

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <qf08b8hhvfftjdoqk...@4ax.com>,

No. You only think you had free will; it's an illusion.

You cannot have chosen to do anything other than what you claim your god
knew you would do. That is, obviously, not free will.

If you claim your god knew you were going to eat steak for dinner
tomorrow night, you will eat steak for dinner tomorrow night. You may
think you made that choice, but you didn't.

[duke]

On Mon, 26 Nov 2012 18:53:23 -0800, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>

I freely got up this morning when I wanted to, and did what I wanted to as I
freely chose to do.

What neurotic problems are you having?

>You cannot have chosen to do anything other than what you claim your god
>knew you would do. That is, obviously, not free will.

He only knows what I freely choose to do. He doesn't interfere.

>If you claim your god knew you were going to eat steak for dinner
>tomorrow night, you will eat steak for dinner tomorrow night. You may
>think you made that choice, but you didn't.

God didn't. He knew but he didn't tell me. I made that decision all on my own.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <ho4ab8l5pvmm8d3id...@4ax.com>,

No, you only think you did.

If your god saw that you'd be eating steak, then you'll eat steak even
if you'd rather have something else.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Tue, 27 Nov 2012 15:23:13 -0800, Jeanne Douglas
<hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:

Obviously not. You have to be blind not to see them, and stupid to
imagine that rationalising one or two makes them all go away.

[WangoTango]

In article <hlwdjsd2-373F68...@news.giganews.com>, hlwdjsd2
@NOSPAMgmail.com says...

>
> > >You cannot have chosen to do anything other than what you claim your god
> > >knew you would do. That is, obviously, not free will.
> >
> > He only knows what I freely choose to do. He doesn't interfere.
> >
> > >If you claim your god knew you were going to eat steak for dinner
> > >tomorrow night, you will eat steak for dinner tomorrow night. You may
> > >think you made that choice, but you didn't.
> >
> > God didn't. He knew but he didn't tell me. I made that decision all on my
> > own.
>
> No, you only think you did.
>
> If your god saw that you'd be eating steak, then you'll eat steak even
> if you'd rather have something else.

Another in the long list of cognitive dissonances that you have to
suffer from to believe that Gawd is all that "omni" stuff and yet we all
have free will. They have to choose, either their god has limits or we
only have the illusion of free will. You can't have it both ways.

[duke]

On Tue, 27 Nov 2012 15:23:13 -0800, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>

Of course, if he saw me eating steak, how could I be doing something else?

I love this discussion.

[duke]

God doesn't see us doing something other than what we do.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <ouscb8ptf64oim6sb...@4ax.com>,

Exactly.

You have no free will.

[Budikka666]

On Nov 27, 1:24 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> I freely got up this morning when I wanted to, and did what I wanted to as I
> freely chose to do.

Thnaks for admitting you can't provide a shred of objective
independent evidence for this bullshit god of yours (and no, no one
believes your "dog ate my homework" bullshit that you posted it
already because you always RUN when you're asked where it was you
posted it.

But now you've made yet another in your endless string of blunders for
the lord. *You* *have* *no* Free* *will* numbnuts:
http://chronicle.com/article/Jerry-A-Coyne/131165/

Deal with it.

Even if you were right you'd *still* be wrong because there is no
meaningful free will when the alternative to submitting to eternal
slavery under a god is eternal torture - from your god of love! lol!

Budikka

[duke]

On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 13:56:19 -0800, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>

Sure I do. It was my decision alone to steak. He couldn't see me doing it if I
didn't decide to.

[linuxgal]

duke wrote:
> God doesn't see us doing something other than what we do.

How can you say that, when he had to come down to Shinar to see the
tower they were building? If he can't see something from orbit, how can
he see something ten thousand years later in time?

--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0

[duke]

On Sat, 01 Dec 2012 13:00:49 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:

>duke wrote:
>> God doesn't see us doing something other than what we do.
>
>How can you say that, when he had to come down to Shinar to see the
>tower they were building? If he can't see something from orbit, how can
>he see something ten thousand years later in time?

No man saw his come down.

[Syd M.]

On Dec 2, 12:59 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 01 Dec 2012 13:00:49 -0800, linuxgal <linux...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >duke wrote:
> >> God doesn't see us doing something other than what we do.
>
> >How can you say that, when he had to come down to Shinar to see the
> >tower they were building?  If he can't see something from orbit, how can
> >he see something ten thousand years later in time?
>
> No man saw his come down.
>
>

Still wrong.

PDW

[Budikka666]

On Dec 2, 11:59 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:

> On Sat, 01 Dec 2012 13:00:49 -0800, linuxgal <linux...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >duke wrote:
> >> God doesn't see us doing something other than what we do.
>
> >How can you say that, when he had to come down to Shinar to see the
> >tower they were building?  If he can't see something from orbit, how can
> >he see something ten thousand years later in time?
>
> No man saw his come down.

But everyone has seen yours: