Innate Knowledge of God - 1

[Calvin Ramsey]

Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a knowledge
that every person has. It is a knowledge that is "manifest" (evident) in
every
individual and knowledge that the wicked "suppress" (Rom. 1:18-19). It is a
knowledge that consists of God’s invisible qualities, "His eternal power
and
Godhead," and a knowledge that is so "clearly seen" that men are "without
excuse" (Rom. 1:20). Whether this knowledge can best be described as innate
(an endowment by God of every man), or intuitive (an automatic knowledge
that arises within the individual because of that which is communicated to
him from around him), or a combination of the two, the point is that every
individual has this knowledge. It is a knowledge that no man is without.

To be man is to have knowledge of God; the knowledge is not probable but
certain, not a possibility for man but a reality for man. The reasoning and
arguments of man do not destroy this knowledge, for the knowledge is an
integral part of every man. And it has been there "since the creation of
the
world" (Rom. 1:20). Man may deny it; man may reject it; but the knowledge
remains.

To think is to think of God. In fact, one cannot think and not think of
God, for
God is inescapable. This is to say that God is not the highest evolving
thought
of man but that the God-thought is consistent with what it is for man to be
man. The Creator made the creature capable of thinking, and when the
creature thinks he thinks of the Creator—he cannot do otherwise. Written in
the universe around man and written on the heart within man is the fact of
God. Man thinks of God because God has impressed man indelibly with
Himself. No thinking is possible without God, and no thinking is possible
without God in the thinking. Really, no thought has meaning unless God is.
To think is to face God. To be man is to know that God is God.



For those of you with an interest in learning about Augustinianism
and Predestination as well as other fascinating topics, you will find
lots of articles to read or listen to on your mp3 player, while at home
or at work, from these websites:

*See especially* : http://www.the-highway.com/Calvinism_Meeter.html

http://monergism.com/

http://monergism.com/mp3/

http://monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/whatismonergism2.html

http://calvinistcorner.com/predestination.htm

http://ccel.org/

http://reformed.org/calvinism/

http://reformedreader.org/

http://carm.org/predestination-and-election

http://the-highway.com/predestination_index.html

http://albatrus.org/english/theology/predestination/verses_concerning_predestination.htm

http://philofreligion.homestead.com/main.html

http://philofreligion.homestead.com/plantingapage.html

http://nicenecouncil.com/media/

http://the-highway.com/calvinism.html

http://evolutionfacts.blogspot.com/

http://scienceagainstevolution.org/

http://leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/

http://wordofhisgrace.org/science.html

http://godandscience.org/

http://www.evidenceforchristianity.org/

http://www.whitehorseinn.org/

http://spurgeon.org/~phil/hall.htm

http://homepage.mac.com/shanerosenthal/reformationink/classic.htm

http://wabashcenter.wabash.edu/resources/result_browse.aspx?topic=675&pid=650

http://puritansermons.com/toc.htm

http://grmi.org/renewal/Richard_Riss/evidences/

[raven1]

On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 04:26:51 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a knowledge
>that every person has.

Poppycock. Spew your nonsense elsewhere Cal; you've become a tiresome
bore, who can't even keep his theology straight.

[Christopher A. Lee]

Become?

He's always been one.

An in-your-face, stupid, rude bore wiping it in in everybody's face.

[Calvin Ramsey]

I wonder if you can even perceive how you saying that I'm "wiping it in
everybody's face" is a subconscious confession that you subconsciously
know that every person has an innate knowledge of God. Otherwise, you
wouldn't call it "wiping it in everybody's face", as if you know there are
some people who would rather deny having that innate knowledge, and
not have it "wiped" in their face.

You would have just left it a "stupid, rude bore." But you adding that final
"wiping it in everybody's face" says more than I think you wanted to say.

But, if it helps you to feel any better, I wasn't addressing myself
directly
to you, Christopher A. Lee. In fact, I didn't even have you in mind.

But that's what you get for being such a self-centered narcissist.

And that's your problem, not mine.

You get to live with it.

All I get to do is enjoy watching you live with it.

<smirk>

[John Locke]

On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 04:26:51 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a knowledge

>that every person has...
>
Those unfortunate children who succumbed to religious childhood brain
washing may certainly incorporate delusions of "God"...unfortunately
even into adulthood. But that doesn't make your god monster real.

[raven1]

On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 11:01:58 -0500, Calvin Ramsey

<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>On 11/7/2012 10:02 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 08:36:24 -0500, raven1
>> <quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 04:26:51 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
>>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a knowledge
>>>> that every person has.
>>>
>>> Poppycock. Spew your nonsense elsewhere Cal; you've become a tiresome
>>> bore, who can't even keep his theology straight.
>>
>> Become?
>>
>> He's always been one.
>>
>> An in-your-face, stupid, rude bore wiping it in in everybody's face.
>
>I wonder if you can even perceive how you saying that I'm "wiping it in
>everybody's face" is a subconscious confession that you subconsciously
>know that every person has an innate knowledge of God. Otherwise, you
>wouldn't call it "wiping it in everybody's face", as if you know there are
>some people who would rather deny having that innate knowledge, and
>not have it "wiped" in their face.

No, he's saying that you're wiping your stupidity and boorishness in
everybody's face. Learn to read for comprehension, you illiterate
fool.

<bitch-slap>

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 08:54:52 -0800, John Locke
<johnnyd...@demonmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 04:26:51 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
><calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>
>>Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a knowledge
>>that every person has...

Ramsey just can't stop lying, Can he?

>Those unfortunate children who succumbed to religious childhood brain
>washing may certainly incorporate delusions of "God"...unfortunately
>even into adulthood. But that doesn't make your god monster real.

It happens so early some people think it is innate, inherent etc.

Those of us who were never taught it don't come up with it - and
atheist parents who don't teach it, know exactly when and how (if)
their kids acquire it, eg a colleague's little daughter furtively
saying grace after visiting theist grandparents.

But for some reason those who insist it is refuse to accept these
counter-examples, and rationalise them away by saying they don't have
the very thing they're supposed to be proving, without actually
addressing them.

Kids grow up believing whichever gods their parents and others teach
them, many of which aren't supreme beings like the one in the
Abrahamic religions.

And those who aren't taught them don't grow up believing in them.

Whether they are atheists growing up in the predominantly Christian
West or in the non-theistic Eastern religions which form about a third
of the world's population.

Neither of these two groups have the "knowledge" (actually belief)
which Calvin was lying that they do.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 12:07:54 -0500, raven1

<quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 11:01:58 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
><calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>
>>On 11/7/2012 10:02 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 08:36:24 -0500, raven1
>>> <quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 04:26:51 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
>>>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a knowledge
>>>>> that every person has.
>>>>
>>>> Poppycock. Spew your nonsense elsewhere Cal; you've become a tiresome
>>>> bore, who can't even keep his theology straight.
>>>
>>> Become?
>>>
>>> He's always been one.
>>>
>>> An in-your-face, stupid, rude bore wiping it in in everybody's face.
>>
>>I wonder if you can even perceive how you saying that I'm "wiping it in
>>everybody's face" is a subconscious confession that you subconsciously
>>know that every person has an innate knowledge of God.

Why can't the in-your-face, thoroughly nasty serial liar stop these
personal lies?

>> Otherwise, you
>>wouldn't call it "wiping it in everybody's face", as if you know there are
>>some people who would rather deny having that innate knowledge, and
>>not have it "wiped" in their face.

More of the pathological liar's lies.

>No, he's saying that you're wiping your stupidity and boorishness in
>everybody's face. Learn to read for comprehension, you illiterate
>fool.

He's incapable of that.


><bitch-slap>

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/7/2012 12:38 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:

>> Calvin Ramsey wrote:

>>>> An in-your-face, stupid, rude bore wiping it in in everybody's face.
>>>
>>> I wonder if you can even perceive how you saying that I'm "wiping it in
>>> everybody's face" is a subconscious confession that you subconsciously
>>> know that every person has an innate knowledge of God.
>
> Why can't the in-your-face, thoroughly nasty serial liar stop these
> personal lies?

And that's just your typical, usual ad hominem response.

But it's not good enough.

You need to give verifiable evidence for why you only attack the messenger,
and never the message. You need to give an irrefutable reason for why you
think the message is a lie.

But, because you never do, that can only be interpreted as you being the
one
who is lying.

As it turns out, *you* are the "thoroughly nasty serial liar" who can't
"stop
these personal lies".

>>> Otherwise, you
>>> wouldn't call it "wiping it in everybody's face", as if you know there are
>>> some people who would rather deny having that innate knowledge, and
>>> not have it "wiped" in their face.
>
> More of the pathological liar's lies.

Again, you attack the messenger, but never the message.

That says a lot about who you really are, and what you really believe.

You're also giving me a good indication that I've nailed your feet to
the floor,
and that you know that I'm right.

[Calvin Ramsey]

That's merely a typical response from somebody in denial of something
that is
innately known to every clear-thinking human being; from someone who
doesn't like the idea of being accountable to a Supreme Being, and who
will do
and say anything to try and convince themselves it isn't true, until
they find out
it didn't work, and they have to keep repeating the same thing to
themselves,
over and over again.

However, that's not unfortunate for them.

That's Predestination.

They are predestined by the very God they deny to be in denial.

[Fred^42]

Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>Knowledge of God

Have any evidence for your invisible playmates, ya fucking insane
Christian loon? Any at all?

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/7/2012 12:35 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 08:54:52 -0800, John Locke
> <johnnyd...@demonmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 04:26:51 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a knowledge
>>> that every person has...
>
> Ramsey just can't stop lying, Can he?

Again, you can only attack the messenger.

But never the message.

Thank-you for agreeing with the message.

That's really all I care about.

>> Those unfortunate children who succumbed to religious childhood brain
>> washing may certainly incorporate delusions of "God"...unfortunately
>> even into adulthood. But that doesn't make your god monster real.
>
> It happens so early some people think it is innate, inherent etc.
>

> Those of us who were never taught it don't come up with it.

That's why it's called "innate" knowledge. It doesn't have to be taught.

It's kind of like breathing. No one had to teach you how to breathe.

> But for some reason those who insist it is refuse to accept these
> counter-examples, and rationalise them away by saying they don't have
> the very thing they're supposed to be proving, without actually
> addressing them.
>
> Kids grow up believing whichever gods their parents and others teach
> them, many of which aren't supreme beings like the one in the
> Abrahamic religions.
>
> And those who aren't taught them don't grow up believing in them.
>
> Whether they are atheists growing up in the predominantly Christian
> West or in the non-theistic Eastern religions which form about a third
> of the world's population.
>
> Neither of these two groups have the "knowledge" (actually belief)
> which Calvin was lying that they do.

No. Actually, now I have proof that you are a liar.

"Dr Justin Barrett, a senior researcher at the University of Oxford's
Centre for Anthropology and Mind, claims that young people have a
predisposition to believe in a supreme being because they assume that
everything in the world was created with a purpose.

"He says that young children have faith even when they have not been
taught about it by family or at school, and argues that even those
raised alone on a desert island would come to believe in God.

"The preponderance of scientific evidence for the past 10 years or so
has shown that a lot more seems to be built into the natural development
of children's minds than we once thought, including a predisposition to
see the natural world as designed and purposeful and that some kind of
intelligent being is behind that purpose," he told BBC Radio 4's Today
programme.

"If we threw a handful on an island and they raised themselves I think
they would believe in God."

In a lecture to be given at the University of Cambridge's Faraday
Institute on Tuesday, Dr Barrett will cite psychological experiments
carried out on children that he says show they instinctively believe
that almost everything has been designed with a specific purpose."

(from:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/3512686/Children-are-born-believers-in-God-academic-claims.html
)



"Why do the majority of people � across cultures and throughout history
� believe in gods?

"One way to address this question is to look at why it is that children
acquire beliefs in gods. If an idea cannot be easily learned by children
then it is relatively unlikely to survive into the next generation and
will die out. So if we can explain why children are so ready to believe
in gods, we will be a big step closer in understanding religious beliefs
more generally. It may seem that the answer is simple: indoctrination.
Children believe because their parents or other adults teach them,
right? Unfortunately, the story is not that simple. Fortunately, it is
far more interesting.

"Children will believe a lot of what their parents teach them, but not
everything. Try to convince a child that a tarantula is harmless, that
broccoli is a better food for them than crisps, or that Paul McCartney
is a better musician than Miley Cyrus and you'll likely get nowhere.
Likewise, teachers have difficulty teaching many scientific insights
such as evolution by natural selection or that solid objects such as
tables are composed almost entirely of space. Children learn things that
their minds are tuned to learn more readily than things that go against
that natural tuning.

"Developmental psychologists have provided evidence that children are
naturally tuned to believe in gods of one sort or another."

(read more:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2008/nov/25/religion-children-god-belief
)

[Calvin Ramsey]

Well, you certainly are a good source for evidence that the Bible is true
when it basically says that God leaves certain individuals to their own
evil
ways and doesn't try to save them from themselves.

"So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he
wills."
--Romans 9:18 (ESV)

<smirk>

[Steve O]

On 07/11/2012 20:42, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
> On 11/7/2012 12:35 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 08:54:52 -0800, John Locke
>> <johnnyd...@demonmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 04:26:51 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
>>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a
>>>> knowledge
>>>> that every person has...
>>
>> Ramsey just can't stop lying, Can he?
>
> Again, you can only attack the messenger.
>
> But never the message.
>
> Thank-you for agreeing with the message.
>
> That's really all I care about.

You seem to have a complete disconnect with reality and you seem to be
completely unable to process information given to you by others.
Totally delusional.
<shrugs>

[Steve O]

On 07/11/2012 20:49, Calvin Ramsey wrote:

> "... and he hardens whomever he

> wills."
> --Romans 9:18 (ESV)
>
> <smirk>
>
>

I had no idea God was gay.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 22:42:36 +0000, Steve O <nos...@here.thanks>
wrote:

>On 07/11/2012 20:42, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>> On 11/7/2012 12:35 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 08:54:52 -0800, John Locke
>>> <johnnyd...@demonmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 04:26:51 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
>>>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a
>>>>> knowledge
>>>>> that every person has...
>>>
>>> Ramsey just can't stop lying, Can he?
>>
>> Again, you can only attack the messenger.
>>
>> But never the message.

What "message" was the in-your-face, question-begging, mentally ill
obsessive lying about?

>> Thank-you for agreeing with the message.

Somebody ask the pathological liar what "message" he imagines I am
agreeing with?

It has never got to that stage, and never will unless he proves his
bullshit.

>> That's really all I care about.

Lie noted,

All he cares about is obsession about a group he is bigoted against.

>You seem to have a complete disconnect with reality and you seem to be
>completely unable to process information given to you by others.
>Totally delusional.

Seriously mentally ill.

He needs psychiatric treatment before he goes postal.

It's not a case of "if" but "when" he will.

And when he does I hope he doesn't take anybody else down with him.

Even suicide by cop traumatises the officer.

><shrugs>

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/7/2012 5:57 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 22:42:36 +0000, Steve O <nos...@here.thanks>
> wrote:
>
>> On 07/11/2012 20:42, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>>> On 11/7/2012 12:35 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 08:54:52 -0800, John Locke
>>>> <johnnyd...@demonmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 04:26:51 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
>>>>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a
>>>>>> knowledge
>>>>>> that every person has...
>>>>
>>>> Ramsey just can't stop lying, Can he?
>>>
>>> Again, you can only attack the messenger.
>>>
>>> But never the message.
>
> What "message" was the in-your-face, question-begging, mentally ill
> obsessive lying about?

Thanks for asking.

The message was that the knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a

Supreme Being) is a knowledge that every person has. It is a knowledge that
is "manifest" (evident) in every individual and knowledge that the wicked

"suppress" (Rom. 1:18-19). It is a knowledge that consists of God�s

invisible
qualities, "His eternal power and Godhead," and a knowledge that is so
"clearly seen" that men are "without excuse" (Rom. 1:20). Whether this
knowledge can best be described as innate (an endowment by God of every
man), or intuitive (an automatic knowledge that arises within the
individual
because of that which is communicated to him from around him), or a
combination of the two, the point is that every individual has this
knowledge.
It is a knowledge that no man is without.

To be man is to have knowledge of God; the knowledge is not probable but
certain, not a possibility for man but a reality for man. The reasoning and
arguments of man do not destroy this knowledge, for the knowledge is an
integral part of every man. And it has been there "since the creation of the
world" (Rom. 1:20). Man may deny it; man may reject it; but the knowledge
remains.

To think is to think of God. In fact, one cannot think and not think of
God, for
God is inescapable. This is to say that God is not the highest evolving
thought
of man but that the God-thought is consistent with what it is for man to be
man. The Creator made the creature capable of thinking, and when the

creature thinks he thinks of the Creator�he cannot do otherwise. Written in

the universe around man and written on the heart within man is the fact of
God. Man thinks of God because God has impressed man indelibly with
Himself. No thinking is possible without God, and no thinking is possible
without God in the thinking. Really, no thought has meaning unless God is.
To think is to face God. To be man is to know that God is God.

>>> Thank-you for agreeing with the message.
>
> Somebody ask the pathological liar what "message" he imagines I am
> agreeing with?

I'm glad you asked.

It goes something like this:

Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a knowledge

that every person has. It is a knowledge that is "manifest" (evident) in
every
individual and knowledge that the wicked "suppress" (Rom. 1:18-19). It is a

knowledge that consists of God�s invisible qualities, "His eternal power and

Godhead," and a knowledge that is so "clearly seen" that men are "without
excuse" (Rom. 1:20). Whether this knowledge can best be described as innate
(an endowment by God of every man), or intuitive (an automatic knowledge
that arises within the individual because of that which is communicated to
him from around him), or a combination of the two, the point is that every
individual has this knowledge. It is a knowledge that no man is without.

To be man is to have knowledge of God; the knowledge is not probable but
certain, not a possibility for man but a reality for man. The reasoning and
arguments of man do not destroy this knowledge, for the knowledge is an
integral part of every man. And it has been there "since the creation of the
world" (Rom. 1:20). Man may deny it; man may reject it; but the knowledge
remains.

To think is to think of God. In fact, one cannot think and not think of
God, for
God is inescapable. This is to say that God is not the highest evolving
thought
of man but that the God-thought is consistent with what it is for man to be
man. The Creator made the creature capable of thinking, and when the

creature thinks he thinks of the Creator�he cannot do otherwise. Written in

the universe around man and written on the heart within man is the fact of
God. Man thinks of God because God has impressed man indelibly with
Himself. No thinking is possible without God, and no thinking is possible
without God in the thinking. Really, no thought has meaning unless God is.
To think is to face God. To be man is to know that God is God.

> It has never got to that stage, and never will unless he proves his
> bullshit.

Doesn't need proving.

That's all part of what "innate knowledge" means.

>
>>> That's really all I care about.
>
> Lie noted,
>
> All he cares about is obsession about a group he is bigoted against.

I'm assuming you have proof for that assertion of yours?

Because if you don't, then that makes *you* a liar. And an obsessive
serial liar at that. See how that works? You're welcome.

>> You seem to have a complete disconnect with reality and you seem to be
>> completely unable to process information given to you by others.

You call it information.
But without proper proof, then subjective personal opinion is what I
call it.

>> Totally delusional.
>
> Seriously mentally ill.
>
> He needs psychiatric treatment before he goes postal.
>
> It's not a case of "if" but "when" he will.
>
> And when he does I hope he doesn't take anybody else down with him.
>
> Even suicide by cop traumatises the officer.
>
>> <shrugs>

You guys may not know it, but argumentum ad hominem (attacking the
messenger)
is just another way of saying that you are totally incapable and unable
to attack the
message. It's out of your reach. It's even out of your league.

So, really and truly, from the bottom of my heart, I want to thank you
for admitting
something that you didn't even know you were admitting, that means so
much to me.

I think I'm going to cry.

<blink><sniff><blink>

[Les]

On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 19:06:20 -0500, Calvin Ramsey

<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>On 11/7/2012 5:57 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 22:42:36 +0000, Steve O <nos...@here.thanks>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 07/11/2012 20:42, Calvin Ramsey wrote:
>>>> On 11/7/2012 12:35 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 08:54:52 -0800, John Locke
>>>>> <johnnyd...@demonmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 04:26:51 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
>>>>>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a
>>>>>>> knowledge
>>>>>>> that every person has...
>>>>>
>>>>> Ramsey just can't stop lying, Can he?
>>>>
>>>> Again, you can only attack the messenger.
>>>>
>>>> But never the message.
>>
>> What "message" was the in-your-face, question-begging, mentally ill
>> obsessive lying about?
>
>Thanks for asking.
>
>The message was that the knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a
>Supreme Being) is a knowledge that every person has. It is a knowledge that
>is "manifest" (evident) in every individual and knowledge that the wicked

>"suppress" (Rom. 1:18-19). It is a knowledge that consists of God’s

>invisible
>qualities, "His eternal power and Godhead," and a knowledge that is so
>"clearly seen" that men are "without excuse" (Rom. 1:20). Whether this
>knowledge can best be described as innate (an endowment by God of every
>man), or intuitive (an automatic knowledge that arises within the
>individual
>because of that which is communicated to him from around him), or a
>combination of the two, the point is that every individual has this
>knowledge.
>It is a knowledge that no man is without.

Hmm methinks Ramsey regards everybody as thinking as he does and with
the same god obessions he has.

I understand this is a trait common to self-centred arrogant people
who consider themselves above 'the rabble'. When somebody has
a world outlook different to his he regards such people as 'misguided'
and sets himself up to be their guide on the grounds
they obviously need one never allowing their ability to determine
things for themselves as we do. Such people are not worthy of
consideration in my view.

>To be man is to have knowledge of God; the knowledge is not probable but
>certain, not a possibility for man but a reality for man. The reasoning and
>arguments of man do not destroy this knowledge, for the knowledge is an
>integral part of every man. And it has been there "since the creation of the
>world" (Rom. 1:20). Man may deny it; man may reject it; but the knowledge
>remains.
>
>To think is to think of God. In fact, one cannot think and not think of
>God, for
>God is inescapable. This is to say that God is not the highest evolving
>thought

and this confirms what I say above.

All he is doing is talking of his own thoughts and feelings as if I
and everybody else has the same which is clearly not the case
otherwise we would all be nodding our heads and agreeing with him

Fortunatly we are not all part of his Borg collective as he appears to
think we are.

>of man but that the God-thought is consistent with what it is for man to be
>man. The Creator made the creature capable of thinking, and when the

>creature thinks he thinks of the Creator—he cannot do otherwise. Written in

>the universe around man and written on the heart within man is the fact of
>God. Man thinks of God because God has impressed man indelibly with
>Himself. No thinking is possible without God, and no thinking is possible
>without God in the thinking. Really, no thought has meaning unless God is.
>To think is to face God. To be man is to know that God is God.
>
>>>> Thank-you for agreeing with the message.

Which is patently not true but in his minds eye that is how he sees
it. I am sure doctors will have an appropriate word for such symptoms

>> Somebody ask the pathological liar what "message" he imagines I am
>> agreeing with?
>
>I'm glad you asked.
>
>It goes something like this:

>
>Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a knowledge
>that every person has. It is a knowledge that is "manifest" (evident) in
>every
>individual and knowledge that the wicked "suppress" (Rom. 1:18-19). It is a

>knowledge that consists of God’s invisible qualities, "His eternal power and

>Godhead," and a knowledge that is so "clearly seen" that men are "without
>excuse" (Rom. 1:20). Whether this knowledge can best be described as innate
>(an endowment by God of every man), or intuitive (an automatic knowledge
>that arises within the individual because of that which is communicated to
>him from around him), or a combination of the two, the point is that every
>individual has this knowledge. It is a knowledge that no man is without.
>
>To be man is to have knowledge of God; the knowledge is not probable but
>certain, not a possibility for man but a reality for man. The reasoning and
>arguments of man do not destroy this knowledge, for the knowledge is an
>integral part of every man. And it has been there "since the creation of the
>world" (Rom. 1:20). Man may deny it; man may reject it; but the knowledge
>remains.
>
>To think is to think of God. In fact, one cannot think and not think of
>God, for
>God is inescapable. This is to say that God is not the highest evolving
>thought
>of man but that the God-thought is consistent with what it is for man to be
>man. The Creator made the creature capable of thinking, and when the

>creature thinks he thinks of the Creator—he cannot do otherwise. Written in

>the universe around man and written on the heart within man is the fact of
>God. Man thinks of God because God has impressed man indelibly with
>Himself. No thinking is possible without God, and no thinking is possible
>without God in the thinking. Really, no thought has meaning unless God is.
>To think is to face God. To be man is to know that God is God.
>
>
>> It has never got to that stage, and never will unless he proves his
>> bullshit.
>
>Doesn't need proving.
>
>That's all part of what "innate knowledge" means.

If true

What one individual may regard as 'innate knowledge' may well be
personal only to the individual even though he may think otherwise
whether it is right or wrong or compelety 'off-beam'

To the man who thinks he is Napoleon this is 'innate knowledge'
to him, but only to him.

He probably thinks everybody else knows he is Napoleon
too and are lying when they tell him otherwise.

People quickly learn to smile, cross their fingers and tell such
persons they are right then continue smiling as they slowly back away.
It is always better to appear to agree with these types lest these
types become even more disurbed.

>>>> That's really all I care about.
>>
>> Lie noted,
>>
>> All he cares about is obsession about a group he is bigoted against.


>
>I'm assuming you have proof for that assertion of yours?
>

M'Lord I submit all of Ramsey's posts to alt.atheism,
for the last year (and all the other names he is known to use) in
evidence.

I also submit the frequency of these posts as evidence. They have
been unending day after day week after week only stopping briefly
from time to time. (which seems to coincide with the appearance
of one fasgnadh)

>Because if you don't, then that makes *you* a liar. And an obsessive
>serial liar at that. See how that works? You're welcome.

Yes we know how it works and under which circumstances it works.

It is one thing expressing relgious belief and faith as that remains
within the realm of make-believe and requires no proof, it is just
somebody elses religous beliefs but when they step ouside that
realm into the real world and begin to assert some universal truth
about it (such as the existence of a god and that we are all aware of
it) they are now in a world where the knowledge of absolute truth of
it is an important part.

We owe a duty to such truths to demand absolute proof of it
before it is accepted otherwise we would become hopelessly
lost and in the dark. It is far too important to treat lightly and
just on the say of another

We will never know these absolute truths if we allow our knowledge
of it to be corrupted by deceivers and the only way to determine
that is by demanding that those who do assert it demonstrate
how they know this truth in a way others can check and verify for
themselves. If the person really does know the truth then he
should be happy to do this and not attempt to dodge or evade
doing it.

Ramsey has been given several opportunities to demonstrate
the truth of his assertions and has failed every time. How many
failure should he be permitted before we can conclude he is
trying to deceive us and thereby corrupt our knowledge?

>
>>> You seem to have a complete disconnect with reality and you seem to be
>>> completely unable to process information given to you by others.
>
>You call it information.
>But without proper proof, then subjective personal opinion is what I
>call it.

>
>>> Totally delusional.
>>
>> Seriously mentally ill.
>>
>> He needs psychiatric treatment before he goes postal.
>>
>> It's not a case of "if" but "when" he will.
>>
>> And when he does I hope he doesn't take anybody else down with him.
>>
>> Even suicide by cop traumatises the officer.
>>
>>> <shrugs>
>
>You guys may not know it, but argumentum ad hominem (attacking the
>messenger)
>is just another way of saying that you are totally incapable and unable
>to attack the
>message. It's out of your reach. It's even out of your league.

There is some merit in this but when the message is nothing more
that the persons own thoughts and beliefs projected onto everybody
else as a universal and absolute truth then it is no longer a case of
a messenger bringing a message but the messenger delivering himself
and should be treated as such

As such the religious have no message to bring but only proclaim
their own worthless relgious beliefs and faith which they cannot
demonstrate the truth of it. If they remain within the realm of
belief and leave others to decide its merits for themselves then
there is no problem.

<dross>


Les Hellawell
Greeting from:
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County

"For the assertion that “There is no God” is just as much a claim to
knowledge as is the assertion that “There is a God.” Therefore, the
former assertion requires justification just as the latter does. "
- William Lane Craig, "Reasonable Faith"

[Calvin Ramsey]

So that would make everything you have to say after that nothing more than
your own personal subjective opinion.

[snip self-confessed person subjective opinion]

>
>> To be man is to have knowledge of God; the knowledge is not probable but
>> certain, not a possibility for man but a reality for man. The reasoning and
>> arguments of man do not destroy this knowledge, for the knowledge is an
>> integral part of every man. And it has been there "since the creation of the
>> world" (Rom. 1:20). Man may deny it; man may reject it; but the knowledge
>> remains.
>>
>> To think is to think of God. In fact, one cannot think and not think of
>> God, for
>> God is inescapable. This is to say that God is not the highest evolving
>> thought
>
> and this confirms what I say above.

Which is nothing but you expressing your own unsubstantiated opinion,

[snip unsubstantiated opinion]

>> of man but that the God-thought is consistent with what it is for man to be
>> man. The Creator made the creature capable of thinking, and when the
>> creature thinks he thinks of the Creator—he cannot do otherwise. Written in
>> the universe around man and written on the heart within man is the fact of
>> God. Man thinks of God because God has impressed man indelibly with
>> Himself. No thinking is possible without God, and no thinking is possible
>> without God in the thinking. Really, no thought has meaning unless God is.
>> To think is to face God. To be man is to know that God is God.
>>
>>>>> Thank-you for agreeing with the message.
>

> Which is patently not true [snip argumentum ad hominem attack]

I'm assuming you have proof for that assertion of yours.

Because if you don't, then I have proof that you are a liar.

> personal only to the individual [snip subjective unsubstantiated opinion]

Only I'm not. I'm speaking of the self-authenticating authority of the
Bible, which
you can only deny and disbelieve, but never disprove.


"For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law
requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the
law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts,
while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting
thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my
gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus."
--Romans 2:14-16 "ESV)

"For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown
it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and
divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of
the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without
excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or
give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their
foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools."
--Romans 1:19-22 (ESV)

>> Because if you don't, then that makes *you* a liar. And an obsessive
>> serial liar at that. See how that works? You're welcome.
>

> Ramsey has been given several opportunities to demonstrate
> the truth of his assertions and has failed every time.

I've only failed with those whose minds are already blinded to the truth
of the
Gospel of God, and who hourly have to try convincing themselves there is
no God
that they will have to answer to.

Besides you fool yourself by placing yourself upon a pedestal and
imagine that
I am trying to get you to believe anything. It is you who first
responded to me,
thinking it was to you I was directing my posts. That can very easily
be taken
as a clear indication of an over-indulging self-centered narcissism.

>>>> You seem to have a complete disconnect with reality and you seem to be
>>>> completely unable to process information given to you by others.
>>
>> You call it information.
>> But without proper proof, then subjective personal opinion is what I
>> call it.
>
>>
>>>> Totally delusional.
>>>
>>> Seriously mentally ill.
>>>
>>> He needs psychiatric treatment before he goes postal.
>>>
>>> It's not a case of "if" but "when" he will.
>>>
>>> And when he does I hope he doesn't take anybody else down with him.
>>>
>>> Even suicide by cop traumatises the officer.
>>>
>>>> <shrugs>
>>
>> You guys may not know it, but argumentum ad hominem (attacking the
>> messenger)
>> is just another way of saying that you are totally incapable and unable
>> to attack the
>> message. It's out of your reach. It's even out of your league.
>
> There is some merit in this but when the message is nothing more
> that the persons own thoughts and beliefs projected onto everybody
> else

And you are mistaken by that false assertion, as I've previously shown.

As a reminder, taken from the immutable Word of God:

"For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law
requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the
law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts,
while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting
thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my
gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus."
--Romans 2:14-16 "ESV)

"For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown
it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and
divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of
the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without
excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or
give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their
foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools."
--Romans 1:19-22 (ESV)

But since you continue to think that I am fabricating all of this
myself, and thereby
proving that you are only expressing an obvious and unsubstantiated
personal
subjective opinion, while at the same time, aggrandizing yourself to the
position of
a self-appointed Prophet, everything you have to say should only be
treated as such.

> As such the religious have no message to bring but only proclaim
> their own worthless relgious beliefs and faith which they cannot
> demonstrate the truth of it.

Only to those whose minds are blinded to the truth of the Gospel of God,
and who thereby repress and deny the knowledge of their accountability
to God, which is already innately possessed by them, and cannot be
eradicated from their consciences.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 12:58:12 +0000, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:

Piggyback...

>On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 19:06:20 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
><calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>
>>On 11/7/2012 5:57 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 22:42:36 +0000, Steve O <nos...@here.thanks>
>>> wrote:
>>>

>>> What "message" was the in-your-face, question-begging, mentally ill
>>> obsessive lying about?
>>
>>Thanks for asking.
>>
>>The message was that the knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a
>>Supreme Being) is a knowledge that every person has.

Stops at the first lie.

[Les]

On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 09:39:36 -0500, Calvin Ramsey

<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>On 11/8/2012 7:58 AM, Les wrote:
>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 19:06:20 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:

<usual dross as expected>y

[Calvin Ramsey]

You are the liar.

You have not and you cannot prove that what I wrote is a lie.

Therefore, I have proof that you are the liar.

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/8/2012 11:33 AM, Les wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 09:39:36 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>
>> On 11/8/2012 7:58 AM, Les wrote:
>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 19:06:20 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
>>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>
> <usual dross as expected>

Usual ad hominem fallacy, as expected.

All you can do is attack the messenger, never the message.

Thank you.

[sbalneav]

Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
> Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a knowledge
> that every person has.

How does every person get this knowledge? Is the knowledge implanted in us at
birth? Is the knowledge actually part of our genetic makeup (i.e. like
breathing, it's instinctual) or is it taught somehow?

--
__ _ | There is no friend as loyal as a book.
(_ |_) | -- Ernest Hemingway
__)|_) |

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 17:00:21 +0000 (UTC), sbalneav
<sbal...@alburg.net> wrote:

>Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>> Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a knowledge
>> that every person has.
>
>How does every person get this knowledge? Is the knowledge implanted in us at
>birth? Is the knowledge actually part of our genetic makeup (i.e. like
>breathing, it's instinctual) or is it taught somehow?

What knowledge?

The pathological liar hasn't yet shown that anybody has it, let alone
everybody.

He also needs to learn the difference between belief and knowledge.

Too many theists conflate belief and knowledge, but their beliefs
remain just beliefs until they are proven - at which point they become
knowledge.

Only his co-religionists share the same belief.

It is a lie to call it knowledge.

Another to say everybody knows it.

And a personal lie to tell those who don't believe it that they do
because they are part of "everybody".

[sbalneav]

Christopher A. Lee <chrisl...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 17:00:21 +0000 (UTC), sbalneav
> <sbal...@alburg.net> wrote:
>
>>Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>> Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a knowledge
>>> that every person has.
>>
>>How does every person get this knowledge? Is the knowledge implanted in us at
>>birth? Is the knowledge actually part of our genetic makeup (i.e. like
>>breathing, it's instinctual) or is it taught somehow?
>
> What knowledge?

Shhh! I'm goin' somewhere with this. I've got the hook baited and in the
water, let's see if he bites...

--
__ _ | No man is free who is not master of himself.
(_ |_) | -- Epictetus
__)|_) |

[raven1]

On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 15:01:30 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>Again, you attack the messenger, but never the message.

Your message is self-contradictory. Pick one: either humans have
innate knowledge of God, or humans can't believe in God unless he so
chooses. The two positions are mutually exclusive.

[Calvin Ramsey]

You can deny and repress having knowledge of God all you want.

Just taking the anger and the overall emotional level into consideration
at which you sling your ad hominem invectives, trying to get me to be
silent,
can be taken as very strong evidence that you do have innate knowledge
of God,
which will lead ultimately to you having to give a full account of
yourself before
his judgement seat when your life is over.

So your denying and repressing is itself good evidence that you know there
is a God with whom you will be judged.

"For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law
requires,
they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They
show
that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their
conscience also
bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them
on that
day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by
Christ Jesus."

--Romans 2:14-16 (ESV)

[Christopher A. Lee]

The deluded lunatic hasn't got a message.

If someone insists on telling you what he claims is a message from
Santa Claus umpteen times a day whether you want it or not, what is
the reaction?

And what makes it any different when it is from his equally
hypothetical God?

He is in serious need of psychiatric help, not just for his delusion
but for behaviour towards others.

[Calvin Ramsey]

On 11/8/2012 12:49 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 12:35:25 -0500, raven1
> <quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 15:01:30 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Again, you attack the messenger, but never the message.
>>
>> Your message is self-contradictory. Pick one: either humans have
>> innate knowledge of God, or humans can't believe in God unless he so
>> chooses. The two positions are mutually exclusive.
>
> The deluded lunatic hasn't got a message.

Yes, I do have a message.
It's the one you keep denying and repressing.

Here, I'll show those who may have missed it the first time around:

Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a knowledge

that every person has. It is a knowledge that is "manifest" (evident) in
every
individual and knowledge that the wicked "suppress" (Rom. 1:18-19). It is a

knowledge that consists of God�s invisible qualities, "His eternal power and

Godhead," and a knowledge that is so "clearly seen" that men are "without
excuse" (Rom. 1:20). Whether this knowledge can best be described as innate
(an endowment by God of every man), or intuitive (an automatic knowledge
that arises within the individual because of that which is communicated to
him from around him), or a combination of the two, the point is that every
individual has this knowledge. It is a knowledge that no man is without.

To be man is to have knowledge of God; the knowledge is not probable but
certain, not a possibility for man but a reality for man. The reasoning and
arguments of man do not destroy this knowledge, for the knowledge is an
integral part of every man. And it has been there "since the creation of the
world" (Rom. 1:20). Man may deny it; man may reject it; but the knowledge
remains.

To think is to think of God. In fact, one cannot think and not think of
God, for
God is inescapable. This is to say that God is not the highest evolving
thought
of man but that the God-thought is consistent with what it is for man to be
man. The Creator made the creature capable of thinking, and when the

creature thinks he thinks of the Creator�he cannot do otherwise. Written in

the universe around man and written on the heart within man is the fact of
God. Man thinks of God because God has impressed man indelibly with
Himself. No thinking is possible without God, and no thinking is possible
without God in the thinking. Really, no thought has meaning unless God is.
To think is to face God. To be man is to know that God is God.

> If someone insists on telling you what he claims is a message from
> Santa Claus umpteen times a day whether you want it or not, what is
> the reaction?
>
> And what makes it any different when it is from his equally
> hypothetical God?

Because God is your Creator, who also gave you the innate knowledge that
you are to be held accountable to him.

> He is in serious need of psychiatric help, not just for his delusion
> but for behaviour towards others.

There's your usual ad homimen fallacy again.
Attack the messenger, never the message.

Thanks for admitting you have nothing.

<smirk>

[sbalneav]

Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.net> wrote:
> On 11/8/2012 12:11 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 17:00:21 +0000 (UTC), sbalneav
>> <sbal...@alburg.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Calvin Ramsey <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>> Knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a Supreme Being) is a knowledge
>>>> that every person has.
>>>
>>> How does every person get this knowledge? Is the knowledge implanted in us at
>>> birth? Is the knowledge actually part of our genetic makeup (i.e. like
>>> breathing, it's instinctual) or is it taught somehow?

So, Calvin, care to answer my question? How, exactly, do we come by this
"innate knowledge"?

--
__ _ | Maybe a person's time would be as well spent raising food
(_ |_) | as raising money to buy food.
__)|_) | -- Frank A. Clark

[raven1]

On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 11:48:06 -0500, Calvin Ramsey

<calvin...@live.com> wrote:

>On 11/8/2012 10:54 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>> On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 12:58:12 +0000, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:
>>
>> Piggyback...
>>
>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 19:06:20 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
>>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/7/2012 5:57 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 22:42:36 +0000, Steve O <nos...@here.thanks>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>
>>>>> What "message" was the in-your-face, question-begging, mentally ill
>>>>> obsessive lying about?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for asking.
>>>>
>>>> The message was that the knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a
>>>> Supreme Being) is a knowledge that every person has.
>>
>> Stops at the first lie.
>
>You are the liar.
>
>You have not and you cannot prove that what I wrote is a lie.

Christopher lacks that supposed "knowledge", as do I, and many others.
Were your claim true, there would be no atheists. However, you
certainly seem to believe it, so while it is untrue, it does not
technically qualify as a lie.

>Therefore, I have proof that you are the liar.

The only "proof" here is that you couldn't recognize a rational
argument if we spotted you "L_GIC" and let you buy a vowel.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 13:12:36 -0500, raven1
<quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 11:48:06 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
><calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>
>>On 11/8/2012 10:54 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>>> On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 12:58:12 +0000, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:
>>>
>>> Piggyback...
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 19:06:20 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
>>>> <calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/7/2012 5:57 PM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 22:42:36 +0000, Steve O <nos...@here.thanks>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>> What "message" was the in-your-face, question-begging, mentally ill
>>>>>> obsessive lying about?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for asking.
>>>>>
>>>>> The message was that the knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a
>>>>> Supreme Being) is a knowledge that every person has.
>>>
>>> Stops at the first lie.
>>
>>You are the liar.

Another lie noted.

I do not have this knowledge the liar says everybody has.

Even if he acknowledges that it is a belief and not knowledge, I don't
have that belief either.

>>You have not and you cannot prove that what I wrote is a lie.
>
>Christopher lacks that supposed "knowledge", as do I, and many others.

Which makes it a lie.

>Were your claim true, there would be no atheists. However, you
>certainly seem to believe it, so while it is untrue, it does not
>technically qualify as a lie.

Yes it does, because no way of knowing what is in our minds unless we
tell him.

Which we have done every time he has repeated what has long since
ceased to be an honest mistake.

He got corrected the first time, after which he knows it is disputed
and that we are the arbiters of what is in our own minds, not he.

After which repeating it makes him a liar.

>>Therefore, I have proof that you are the liar.

Calvin just can't stop lying, can he?

>The only "proof" here is that you couldn't recognize a rational
>argument if we spotted you "L_GIC" and let you buy a vowel.

He is seriously mentally ill, bigoted towards and obsessed with
atheists.

If it were anything but religion he would be in a strait jacket.

[Les]

On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 11:46:26 -0800, Christopher A. Lee
<chrisl...@comcast.net> wrote:

>On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 13:12:36 -0500, raven1
><quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 11:48:06 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
>><calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On 11/8/2012 10:54 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 12:58:12 +0000, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:

<there be snippage>

>>>>>> The message was that the knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a
>>>>>> Supreme Being) is a knowledge that every person has.
>>>>
>>>> Stops at the first lie.
>>>
>>>You are the liar.
>
>Another lie noted.
>
>I do not have this knowledge the liar says everybody has.

Which, according to previous posts from him the god intentionally
keeps us from knowing, not being his elect, which directly contradicts
what he now claims.

Perhaps he could let us know which of these two contradictory
claims he wishes to admit is a lie and why we should not now
regard everything he says to be a lie having proved himself he lies?

(thanks to raven for reminding us of this earlier asserted truth
from Ramisery)

[sbalneav]

Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 11:46:26 -0800, Christopher A. Lee
> <chrisl...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 13:12:36 -0500, raven1
>><quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 11:48:06 -0500, Calvin Ramsey
>>><calvin...@live.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 11/8/2012 10:54 AM, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 08 Nov 2012 12:58:12 +0000, Les <l...@sharnt.tell> wrote:
>
> <there be snippage>
>
>
>>>>>>> The message was that the knowledge of God (knowledge that there is a
>>>>>>> Supreme Being) is a knowledge that every person has.
>>>>>
>>>>> Stops at the first lie.
>>>>
>>>>You are the liar.
>>
>>Another lie noted.
>>
>>I do not have this knowledge the liar says everybody has.
>
> Which, according to previous posts from him the god intentionally
> keeps us from knowing, not being his elect, which directly contradicts
> what he now claims.
>
> Perhaps he could let us know which of these two contradictory
> claims he wishes to admit is a lie and why we should not now
> regard everything he says to be a lie having proved himself he lies?

Note also the wording:

... wicked "suppress" (Rom. 1:18-19). ...

So if the wicked supress it, again, that appears to be an act of free will,
which runs counter to his predestination crap.

Boy, he's really stuck his foot in it this time.

> (thanks to raven for reminding us of this earlier asserted truth
> from Ramisery)

That raven1. Smart AND handsome!

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