Also hat Gott: Jesus Christ has provided salvation! :)

[Brock]

Hi friends,

Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
testimony. Here is one example of that beautiful and tender sharing
of the most wonderful news for sinners:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo

What is the message? The translation is beautiful:

"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."

http://bible.cc/john/3-16.htm

May you receive the beautiful message of God's kindness and wonderful
love,

Brock

[Bob T.]

On Sep 20, 10:14 am, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi friends,
>
> Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
> abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
> instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
> testimony.  Here is one example of that beautiful and tender sharing
> of the most wonderful news for sinners:

On the other hand, I find it refreshing how rational atheists are,
compared to the delusions that many Christians are subject to. One
famous Christian has actually drawn cartoons depicting the Antichrist
taking over the Vatican. Can you imagine? What do you think about
such a thing, Brock - do you believe it has been prophesized, or is
Jack Chick mistaken?

- Bob T

[dali_70]

On Sep 20, 1:22 pm, "Bob T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote:

> On the other hand, I find it refreshing how rational atheists are,
> compared to the delusions that many Christians are subject to.  One
> famous Christian has actually drawn cartoons depicting the Antichrist
> taking over the Vatican.  Can you imagine?  What do you think about
> such a thing, Brock - do you believe it has been prophesized, or is
> Jack Chick mistaken?

Brock doesn't actually read those tracts, he just looks at the
pictures. Until all the pages are stuck together.

[Neil Kelsey]

On Sep 20, 10:14 am, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi friends,
>
> Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
> abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
> instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
> testimony.

I always find that fucking testimonials are not Jesus sucking on a
doggy dicking valid evidence that Christians have witnessed anything.

> Here is one example of that beautiful and tender sharing
> of the most wonderful news for sinners:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo
>
> What is the message?  The translation is beautiful:
>
> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
> whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."

Unspupported fucking assertions set to music are still unsupported
fucking delusions.

> http://bible.cc/john/3-16.htm
>
> May you receive the beautiful message of God's kindness and wonderful
> love,

May you abandon your religious delusions and embrace atheism.

[Gokudomatic]

will you also say that not everything can be explained?

[Bob T.]

On Sep 20, 12:44 pm, Gokudomatic <gourry.gabr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> will you also say that not everything can be explained?

A goddam question is not a fucking objection.

- Brock T

> > Brock- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Answer_42]

On Sep 20, 1:14 pm, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi friends,

Still sublimely delusional, I see...

What a fucking moron...
________________________________________
It is much safer to obey than to rule.
-- Thomas à Kempis

[Gokudomatic]

get lost, will you?

[Trance Gemini]

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Brock <brock...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi friends,

Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
testimony.

You mean "gentle, simple beautiful and elegant Christian testimony" like this Brock?

http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity/browse_frm/thread/6f446fe203e71ed4?hl=en&tvc=1&q=madalyn
 
"The struggle for a free intelligence has always been a struggle between the ironic and the literal mind." — Christopher Hitchens

--
"Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." --Thomas Paine
"The struggle for a free intelligence has always been a struggle between the ironic and the literal mind." — Christopher Hitchens
 

[Deidzoeb]

You know what's arrogant, when someone pushes their beliefs on you and
doesn't really have a good reason to think they know more than you.
After a person hears enough of that and experiences the receiving end
of prejudice and discrimination for their beliefs long enough, some of
them become abrasive and harsh when talking about the subject. Who
could blame them?

On Sep 20, 1:14 pm, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi friends,
>
> Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
> abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
> instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
> testimony.  Here is one example of that beautiful and tender sharing
> of the most wonderful news for sinners:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo
>
> What is the message?  The translation is beautiful:
>
> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
> whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."

For God so loved the world that he designed it with sin and pain and
suffering and evil, and established hoops for people to jump through
to avoid eternal suffering that would be their punishment by default.
This series of hoops is known as "salvation". What a guy!

[Walt]

On Sep 20, 1:14 pm, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi friends,

I''m glad you have no hard feelings that we couldn't get together
enough money to get you that pony.

>
> Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
> abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
> instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
> testimony.  Here is one example of that beautiful and tender sharing
> of the most wonderful news for sinners:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo
>
> What is the message?  The translation is beautiful:
>
> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
> whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."
>
> http://bible.cc/john/3-16.htm

The Parable of the Lawn Mower may help everyone to understand Brock's
religious beliefs a little better.

Neighbor: Hey God, can I borrow your lawn mower?
God: Sorry, but it's not that simple.
N: How do you mean?
(God gets his dog Jesus and a cattle prod. Begins shocking the dog
over and over with the cattle prod, with dog yelping loudly.)
N: God, what the fuck, man.
G: I'm doing it because I love you.
N: My wife's not mad anymore that Jesus sniffed her crotch.
G: No, it's not about that, I'm doing it just to prove I love you.
You know how much I love this dog.
N: OK, stop, that's enough.
G: I'll decide when you know my love is proven.
N: It's animal cruelty God, don't make me call the cops on you.
(Jesus stops yelping and lies motionless.)
G: Now my love is proven.
N: You know the county has mental health counselors for people who
can't afford one on their own.
(Jesus opens his eyes and staggers to his feet.)
N: Oh man, that's a relief.
G: Are you not overjoyed that Jesus lives!
N: I'd be more overjoyed if you'd never done that shit in the first
place. I really hate to bug you, obviously you've got some shit going
on, but my grass is getting really high, can I please use your mower?
G: Do you accept Jesus as your lawn savior?
N: No, you can't let him start crapping on my lawn again, I don't
believe that shit about how it's just fertilizer.
G: I said I'd never let him again, you can never let that go, can
you? I just want you to accept him as your lawn savior.
N: God, we been friends for years, you know I'd do anything for you.
But I really don't think I'd be helping you by encouraging these weird
ideas your getting into.
(God rolls out large industrial drum from garage.)
N: What's that?
G: It's 100 gallons of round-up. I'm going to pour it all over your
lawn if you don't say Jesus is your lawn savior.
N: OK already! Jesus is my lawn savior!
G: OK now you can use the lawn mower. Do you see how much I really
love you?
N: Yes God. Oh, I forgot to tell you, we found out my wife has
hepatitis, so you shouldn't go near her for your own safety.

[Neil Kelsey]

On Sep 20, 1:47 pm, Gokudomatic <gourry.gabr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> get lost, will you?

Looks like you missed the thread in which some of us decided to
satirize Brock's complaints about "abrasive atheist language" by using
*really* abrasive language in response to his posts. Bob, I'm sure,
wasn't cussin' at you; no need to take offence.

> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[Bob T.]

On Sep 20, 3:52 pm, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 20, 1:47 pm, Gokudomatic <gourry.gabr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > get lost, will you?
>
> Looks like you missed the thread in which some of us decided to
> satirize Brock's complaints about "abrasive atheist language" by using
> *really* abrasive language in response to his posts. Bob, I'm sure,
> wasn't cussin' at you; no need to take offence.

You are correct, of course - I was mocking Brock. I find it a bit
suprising that a regular poster would not recognize the "a question is
not an objection" phrase, even if it's somewhat fucking altered.

- Bob T

[e_space]

lol ... boy, does he have your numbers or what? hahahaha

[Max]

Brock.....they're singers. They are singing. They're singing
beautifully. They are singing in a church that has wonderful
acoustics. I like the sound myself. Why...because I like the sound of
their singing.

Here's another song I like that was sung in a church.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98I85ceICRM

And what does this all mean.

I like music & singing.

It doesn't mean that I stop thinking or that the bible somehow gains
meaning, relevance or accuracy any more than if Mr Obama sung 'A boy
stood on the burning deck' that would be enough for me to start
shooting heroin up my arm.

Brocky, you really are getting worse. Try listening to the relaxed and
entirely non abrasive Richard Dawkins at your leisire too.

Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war, with the cross of
Jesus going on before.
Christ, the royal Master, leads against the foe; forward into battle
see his banners go!

Ahhhhh......god war.......beauty!!

[Mystic Merman]

I like this one better. It seems to be closer to the truth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rq6ulGCounc&feature=related

[Simon Ewins]

On Sep 21, 1:14 am, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
> whoever believes in Him

will believe anything.

A truth to which you stand as a remarkable proof.

:::0:9582db4b0536d1086fb3de6f18454853:7d0::::

[Gokudomatic]

I see. I didn't know that.
But in that case wouldn't it be more coherent that you use your
abrasive language directly on brock instead of those who answer to
him?

[Bob T.]

On Sep 20, 10:26 pm, Gokudomatic <gourry.gabr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I see. I didn't know that.
> But in that case wouldn't it be more coherent that you use your
> abrasive language directly on brock instead of those who answer to him?

Mostly I do.

- Bob T

[ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com]

On Sep 20, 1:14 pm, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi friends,
>
> Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
> abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
> instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
> testimony.  Here is one example of that beautiful and tender sharing
> of the most wonderful news for sinners:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo
>
> What is the message?  The translation is beautiful:

Can't those who don't believe this message be believers in Jesus? If
not, why not? Why would one have believe the message of someone other
than Jesus in order to believe in Jesus?

> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
> whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."

The good Samaritan shall perish* but the one** who robbed the traveler
shall have eternal life?
* if he didn't believe in Jesus
** if he believed in Jesus before he died

> http://bible.cc/john/3-16.htm
>
> May you receive the beautiful message of God's kindness and wonderful
> love,

Does Jesus agree with this message? If so, how do you know he does?
Which of these three groups (of 1st century people) were those who
believed in Jesus?
1) those who received a sermon from Jesus and believed what he said to
them
2) those who received an epistle from Paul and believed what he wrote
to them
3) those who had never heard of Jesus, such as the 1st century
ancestors of today's Eskimos

[Trance Gemini]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:06 AM, Mystic Merman <mystic...@yahoo.com> wrote:

I like this one better.  It seems to be closer to the truth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rq6ulGCounc&feature=related

Thanks MM! I haven't heard that one before.

[William T. Goat]

On Sep 20, 1:14 pm, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi friends,
>
> Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
> abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
> instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
> testimony. Here is one example of that beautiful and tender sharing
> of the most wonderful news for sinners:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo

There are many different kinds of Christians, who deliver their
testimony in different ways. The fact that some Christians use beauty
to get the message across, necessitates an explanation for the
ugliness of the rest.

> What is the message?  The translation is beautiful:
>
> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
> whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."
>
> http://bible.cc/john/3-16.htm

But it would be dishonest to ignore the ugliness shortly thereafter:

"but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not
believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

http://bible.cc/john/3-18.htm

One would have expected that a God who loved "the world" would save
"the world," not just the believers. It's a shame God's love is too
limited for that.

"For God so loved M&Ms, that He only eats the green ones."

--Billy

[Brock Organ]

dali_70! :)

Regards,

Brock

[Brock Organ]

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> What is the message?  The translation is beautiful:
>>
>> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
>> whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."
>
> Unspupported fucking assertions set to music are still unsupported
> fucking delusions.

Evidence available here:

http://bible.cc

Regards,

Brock

[Brock Organ]

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Gokudomatic <gourry....@gmail.com> wrote:
> will you also say that not everything can be explained?

I'm not sure what you are specifically referring to here, can you
clarify what you are asking?

Regards,

Brock

[Brock Organ]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 5:26 AM, ranjit_...@yahoo.com
<ranjit_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Sep 20, 1:14 pm, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi friends,
>>
>> Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
>> abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
>> instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
>> testimony.  Here is one example of that beautiful and tender sharing
>> of the most wonderful news for sinners:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo
>>
>> What is the message?  The translation is beautiful:
>
> Can't those who don't believe this message be believers in Jesus? If
> not, why not? Why would one have believe the message of someone other
> than Jesus in order to believe in Jesus?

Sorry, ranjit, I don't understand what you are specifically asking here.

>> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
>> whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."
>
> The good Samaritan shall perish* but the one** who robbed the traveler
> shall have eternal life?
> * if he didn't believe in Jesus
> **  if he believed in Jesus before he died

A question is not an objection.

>> http://bible.cc/john/3-16.htm
>>
>> May you receive the beautiful message of God's kindness and wonderful
>> love,
>
> Does Jesus agree with this message? If so, how do you know he does?

http://bible.cc

> Which of these three groups (of 1st century people) were those who
> believed in Jesus?
> 1) those who received a sermon from Jesus and believed what he said to
> them
> 2) those who received an epistle from Paul and believed what he wrote
> to them
> 3) those who had never heard of Jesus, such as the 1st century
> ancestors of today's Eskimos

Not sure why you articulated those specific groups, which specific
principle are you interested in?

Regards,

Brock

[Bob T.]

On Sep 21, 6:48 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Gokudomatic <gourry.gabr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > will you also say that not everything can be explained?
>
> I'm not sure what you are specifically referring to here, can you
> clarify what you are asking?

He's asking whether you agree with Jack Chick that the Papacy will
soon be controlled by the Antichrist.

- Bob T

>
> Regards,
>
> Brock

[Brock Organ]

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Trance Gemini <trance...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Brock <brock...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi friends,
>>
>> Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
>> abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
>> instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
>> testimony.
>
> You mean "gentle, simple beautiful and elegant Christian testimony" like
> this Brock?
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity/browse_frm/thread/6f446fe203e71ed4?hl=en&tvc=1&q=madalyn

Nope, I meant gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
testimony like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo

Regards,

Brock

[Bob T.]

On Sep 21, 6:58 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> > On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Hi friends,
>
> >> Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
> >> abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
> >> instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
> >> testimony.
>
> > You mean "gentle, simple beautiful and elegant Christian testimony" like
> > this Brock?
>

> >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity/browse_frm/thr...

>
> Nope, I meant gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
> testimony like this:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo

I speak a little German... I think they're singing "Oh Lord, how can
anyone be so stupid as to believe that the Papacy will soon be
controlled by the Antichrist? Surely those who spread such dangerous
nonsense will spend eternity burning in Hell. La la la."

- Bob T

>
> Regards,

[Brock Organ]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 7:47 AM, William T. Goat <eric...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> On Sep 20, 1:14 pm, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi friends,
>>
>> Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
>> abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
>> instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
>> testimony. Here is one example of that beautiful and tender sharing
>> of the most wonderful news for sinners:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo
>
> There are many different kinds of Christians, who deliver their
> testimony in different ways. The fact that some Christians use beauty
> to get the message across, necessitates an explanation for the
> ugliness of the rest.

I consider contrastingly that the beauty is not the delivery of the
message, but the message itself:

"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."

http://bible.cc/john/3-16.htm

>> What is the message?  The translation is beautiful:
>>
>> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
>> whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."
>>
>> http://bible.cc/john/3-16.htm
>
> But it would be dishonest to ignore the ugliness shortly thereafter:
>
> "but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not
> believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."
>
> http://bible.cc/john/3-18.htm
>
> One would have expected that a God who loved "the world" would save
> "the world," not just the believers. It's a shame God's love is too
> limited for that.

No reason to blame God for humankind's sinful rebellion against His
wonderful salvation:

"Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and
opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he
with Me."

http://bible.cc/revelation/3-20.htm

Regards,

Brock

[Neil Kelsey]

On Sep 21, 6:47 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> What is the message?  The translation is beautiful:
>
> >> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
> >> whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."
>
> > Unspupported fucking assertions set to music are still unsupported
> > fucking delusions.
>
> Evidence available here:
>
> http://bible.cc

Links to unspupported fucking assertions are still unsupported fucking
delusions.

[Brock Organ]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Bob T. <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote:
>> Nope, I meant gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
>> testimony like this:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo
>
> I speak a little German... I think they're singing "Oh Lord, how can
> anyone be so stupid as to believe that the Papacy will soon be
> controlled by the Antichrist?  Surely those who spread such dangerous
> nonsense will spend eternity burning in Hell.  La la la."

Atheism: when accuracy in translation doesn't matter.

Regards,

Brock

[Walt]

On Sep 21, 9:56 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 5:26 AM, ranjit_math...@yahoo.com

>
>
>
> <ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Sep 20, 1:14 pm, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi friends,
>
> >> Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
> >> abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
> >> instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
> >> testimony.  Here is one example of that beautiful and tender sharing
> >> of the most wonderful news for sinners:
>
> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo
>
> >> What is the message?  The translation is beautiful:
>
> > Can't those who don't believe this message be believers in Jesus? If
> > not, why not? Why would one have believe the message of someone other
> > than Jesus in order to believe in Jesus?
>
> Sorry, ranjit, I don't understand what you are specifically asking here.
>
> >> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
> >> whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."
>
> > The good Samaritan shall perish* but the one** who robbed the traveler
> > shall have eternal life?
> > * if he didn't believe in Jesus
> > **  if he believed in Jesus before he died
>
> A question is not an objection.

Jesus is possessed by a demon.

[Brock Organ]

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Answer_42 <ipu.be...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 20, 1:14 pm, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi friends,
>

> Still sublimely delusional, I see...

Or not. :)

Regards,

Brock

[Brock Organ]

Fallacy by infinite regress:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_regress

Regards,

Brock

[Simon Ewins]

On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 10:18:13 -0400, Brock Organ <brock...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I consider contrastingly that the beauty is not the delivery of the
> message, but the message itself:

I consider this to be far superior. It was also written by an atheist who
was deaf at the time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kcOpyM9cBg&feature=fvst

--
"Do you think you can tell?" -- Mr. P. Floyd

"Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it." [Andre
Gide]

http://home.sjewins.operaunite.com/webserver/content/index.htm

[Brock Organ]

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Deidzoeb <deid...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You know what's arrogant, when someone pushes their beliefs on you

Or, graciously offers a lifeline to those who face a terrible and eternal peril:

"Rescue the perishing, care for the dying,
Snatch them in pity from sin and the grave;
Weep o’er the erring one, lift up the fallen,
Tell them of Jesus, the mighty to save.

Rescue the perishing, care for the dying,
Jesus is merciful, Jesus will save.

Though they are slighting Him, still He is waiting,
Waiting the penitent child to receive;
Plead with them earnestly, plead with them gently;
He will forgive if they only believe.

Rescue the perishing, care for the dying,
Jesus is merciful, Jesus will save.

Down in the human heart, crushed by the tempter,
Feelings lie buried that grace can restore;
Touched by a loving heart, wakened by kindness,
Chords that were broken will vibrate once more.

Rescue the perishing, care for the dying,
Jesus is merciful, Jesus will save.

Rescue the perishing, duty demands it;
Strength for thy labor the Lord will provide;
Back to the narrow way patiently win them;
Tell the poor wand’rer a Savior has died.

Rescue the perishing, care for the dying,
Jesus is merciful, Jesus will save."

http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/r/e/rescuetp.htm

May you be saved from the terrible peril of sin,

Brock

[Neil Kelsey]

Theism: the inability to detect satire. Fuck piss shit oh hell.

[Brock Organ]

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Walt <wka...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Sep 20, 1:14 pm, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi friends,
>

> I''m glad you have no hard feelings that we couldn't get together
> enough money to get you that pony.

No hard feelings, Walt. :)

Regards,

Brock

[Simon Ewins]

On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 13:14:51 -0400, Brock <brock...@gmail.com> wrote:

> http://bible.cc

Ah yes, the delusionally revered words of ancient schizophrenics.

Fascinating but not trustworthy if truth is desired.

[Brock Organ]

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Bob T. <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote:
>
> You are correct, of course - I was mocking Brock.

A point not lost on me when considering which responses and questions
to answer. :)

Regards,

Brock

[Brock Organ]

Or the ability to note the inadequacy of satire, positionally speaking. :)

Regards,

Brock

[Bob T.]

On Sep 21, 7:18 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 7:47 AM, William T. Goat <ericv...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 20, 1:14 pm, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi friends,
>
> >> Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
> >> abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
> >> instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
> >> testimony. Here is one example of that beautiful and tender sharing
> >> of the most wonderful news for sinners:
>
> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo
>
> > There are many different kinds of Christians, who deliver their
> > testimony in different ways. The fact that some Christians use beauty
> > to get the message across, necessitates an explanation for the
> > ugliness of the rest.
>
> I consider contrastingly that the beauty is not the delivery of the
> message, but the message itself:

I consider that you're obviously quite fucking mistaken. As evidence,
I submit the entire musical career of Stryper.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stryper

- Bob T

>
> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
> whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."
>
> http://bible.cc/john/3-16.htm
>
>
>
>
>
> >> What is the message?  The translation is beautiful:
>
> >> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
> >> whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."
>
> >>http://bible.cc/john/3-16.htm
>
> > But it would be dishonest to ignore the ugliness shortly thereafter:
>
> > "but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not
> > believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."
>
> >http://bible.cc/john/3-18.htm
>
> > One would have expected that a God who loved "the world" would save
> > "the world," not just the believers. It's a shame God's love is too
> > limited for that.
>
> No reason to blame God for humankind's sinful rebellion against His
> wonderful salvation:
>
> "Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and
> opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he
> with Me."
>
> http://bible.cc/revelation/3-20.htm
>
> Regards,
>

[Bob T.]

Theism: when acknowledging reality doesn't matter.

- Bob T

P.S. It's funny how often Brock's only retort is to pretend to take a
joke literally. What a fucking goober!

> Regards,
>
> Brock

[Bob T.]

On Sep 21, 7:28 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

Not to mention the terrible peril of the Pope destroying Israel!

- Bob T

>
> Brock

[Bob T.]

As I have said before, I will resume being nice to you if you just
answer my questions about Jack Chick's anti-Catholicism.

- Bob T.

>
> Regards,
>
> Brock

[Walt]

When I'm burning in Hell, I'll take comfort knowing you're in Heaven
with a stable of 1000 ponies.

>
> Regards,
>
> Brock

[Walt]

DANG Brock that wasn't half bad! Fanny pat. Keep it up, you could at
least entertain us a little since we're all going to burn in Hell.

>
> Regards,
>
> Brock

[Bob T.]

Interesting... so you think that Brock's Heaven and Pony Hell are the
same place?

- Bob T

[Neil Kelsey]

On Sep 21, 7:23 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 21, 6:47 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> What is the message?  The translation is beautiful:
>
> >> >> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
> >> >> whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."
>
> >> > Unspupported fucking assertions set to music are still unsupported
> >> > fucking delusions.
>
> >> Evidence available here:
>
> >>http://bible.cc
>
> > Links to unspupported fucking assertions are still unsupported fucking
> > delusions.
>
> Fallacy by infinite regress:

So stop fucking infinitely regressing.

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_regress

[Neil Kelsey]

On Sep 21, 7:36 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

Failure to note the existence of satire is not noting the inadequacy
of satire. Fuck piss shit.

[Brock Organ]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 21, 7:23 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Sep 21, 6:47 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> What is the message?  The translation is beautiful:
>>
>> >> >> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
>> >> >> whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."
>>
>> >> > Unspupported fucking assertions set to music are still unsupported
>> >> > fucking delusions.
>>
>> >> Evidence available here:
>>
>> >>http://bible.cc
>>
>> > Links to unspupported fucking assertions are still unsupported fucking
>> > delusions.
>>
>> Fallacy by infinite regress:
>
> So stop fucking infinitely regressing.

The regress stops here:

http://bible.cc

Regards,

Brock

[Neil Kelsey]

On Sep 21, 8:46 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

No it doesn't. Links to unspupported fucking assertions are
unsupported fucking assertions.

[Brock Organ]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prima_facie

Regards,

Brock

[Neil Kelsey]

On Sep 21, 8:57 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

I have no idea how you fucking intend for that fucking link to relate
to your previous fucking link.

[Bob T.]

On Sep 21, 8:57 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

Prima facie, the fucking Bible is a fucking myth.

- Bob T

[Brock Organ]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > No it doesn't.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prima_facie
>
> I have no idea how you fucking intend for that fucking link to relate
> to your previous fucking link.

I consider you should rethink using that kind of caustic language. It
is not appropriate in a public forum such as this.

Regards,

Brock

[Neil Kelsey]

On Sep 21, 9:17 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> > No it doesn't.
>
> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prima_facie
>
> > I have no idea how you fucking intend for that fucking link to relate
> > to your previous fucking link.
>
> I consider you should rethink using that kind of caustic language.  It
> is not appropriate in a public forum such as this.

I consider that you warned me/us of the eternal dangers of using
fucking caustic language, several times, so I am testing your gaddamn
claim. Besides, I think it is more important to remain vigilant about
censorship (and it's a slippery slope from warning people about
motherfucking caustic language to censoring them). And finally, you
haven't fucking answered Bob T's fucking question.

[Bob T.]

On Sep 21, 9:17 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> > No it doesn't.
>
> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prima_facie
>
> > I have no idea how you fucking intend for that fucking link to relate
> > to your previous fucking link.
>
> I consider you should rethink using that kind of caustic language.  It
> is not appropriate in a public forum such as this.

I know it's been a couple of days, but surely you recall that it is
within your power to greatly reduce the caustic language directed your
way on this group.

Why are you so reluctant to answer my questions? Surely you have an
opinion about whether the Antichrist is prophecied to take over the
Vatican. Is it worth all the fucking aggravation just to avoid
telling us what you think? If Richard Dawkins said some heinous
things, you could ask me if I still respected the man and I would
answer honestly.

- Bob T

>
> Regards,
>
> Brock

[Brock Organ]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sep 21, 9:17 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > No it doesn't.
>>
>> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prima_facie
>>
>> > I have no idea how you fucking intend for that fucking link to relate
>> > to your previous fucking link.
>>
>> I consider you should rethink using that kind of caustic language.  It
>> is not appropriate in a public forum such as this.
>
> I consider that you warned me/us of the eternal dangers of using
> fucking caustic language, several times, so I am testing your gaddamn
> claim.

The use of such violent, caustic, and hateful language is not
appropriate for public forums such as this.

Regards,

Brock

[Neil Kelsey]

On Sep 21, 9:37 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 21, 9:17 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > No it doesn't.
>
> >> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prima_facie
>
> >> > I have no idea how you fucking intend for that fucking link to relate
> >> > to your previous fucking link.
>
> >> I consider you should rethink using that kind of caustic language.  It
> >> is not appropriate in a public forum such as this.
>
> > I consider that you warned me/us of the eternal dangers of using
> > fucking caustic language, several times, so I am testing your gaddamn
> > claim.
>
> The use of such violent, caustic, and hateful language is not
> appropriate for public forums such as this.

Satire is not violence. I can understand why you'd mistake satire for
"caustic language" since you are the object of the satire. Satire is
not hatred. Fuck piss shit. Punch me in the head (like the guy did in
your instructional video allegedly over "caustic language") and I'll
call the cops and sue you. Copulate urinate defecate.

1. It's a slippery slope from your warnings to censoring atheists to
another Inquisition. Fuck that.
2. When you answer Bob T's fucking question then I will stop using
"abrasive language." For the record, I am not given to swearing all
that much. I lack talent in that area.

[Brock Organ]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sep 21, 9:37 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Sep 21, 9:17 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> > No it doesn't.
>>
>> >> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prima_facie
>>
>> >> > I have no idea how you fucking intend for that fucking link to relate
>> >> > to your previous fucking link.
>>
>> >> I consider you should rethink using that kind of caustic language.  It
>> >> is not appropriate in a public forum such as this.
>>
>> > I consider that you warned me/us of the eternal dangers of using
>> > fucking caustic language, several times, so I am testing your gaddamn
>> > claim.
>>
>> The use of such violent, caustic, and hateful language is not
>> appropriate for public forums such as this.
>
> Satire is not violence. I can understand why you'd mistake satire for
> "caustic language" since you are the object of the satire. Satire is
> not hatred.

If those who condone caustic language on this forum would maintain
that form of dialogue is acceptable public discourse, I consider this
video gives an example that offers the contrasting position:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX2qn6nrQZs

The reality is that the abusive, caustic and hateful language was
probably the principal tactic of escalation used. The aggressor only
sporadically used other tactics and techniques of intimidation
throughout the video, but constantly and continually used vitriolic,
caustic and hateful language.

Regards,

Brock

[Neil Kelsey]

On Sep 21, 10:05 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 21, 9:37 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > On Sep 21, 9:17 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> > No it doesn't.
>
> >> >> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prima_facie
>
> >> >> > I have no idea how you fucking intend for that fucking link to relate
> >> >> > to your previous fucking link.
>
> >> >> I consider you should rethink using that kind of caustic language.  It
> >> >> is not appropriate in a public forum such as this.
>
> >> > I consider that you warned me/us of the eternal dangers of using
> >> > fucking caustic language, several times, so I am testing your gaddamn
> >> > claim.
>
> >> The use of such violent, caustic, and hateful language is not
> >> appropriate for public forums such as this.
>
> > Satire is not violence. I can understand why you'd mistake satire for
> > "caustic language" since you are the object of the satire. Satire is
> > not hatred.
>
> If those who condone caustic language on this forum would maintain
> that form of dialogue is acceptable public discourse, I consider this
> video gives an example that offers the contrasting position:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX2qn6nrQZs

I consider that you have established that you have no idea what they
are fucking fighting about and have goddamn well misinterpreted the
events in the video.

> The reality is that the abusive, caustic and hateful language was
> probably the principal tactic of escalation used.

"The reality is...probably..." That is hardly enough to fucking
convince me that you are fucking right. You're delusional about God,
why wouldn't you be delusional about other bits of reality as well?
Defecate Urinate Copulate.

> The aggressor only
> sporadically used other tactics and techniques of intimidation
> throughout the video, but constantly and continually used vitriolic,
> caustic and hateful language.

The alleged aggressor (maybe the other guy had molested his daughter)
got punched in the head when he expressed his anger physically by
shoving the other guy and throwing his garbage can around. You have no
fucking clue whether or not he would have been punched in the head if
he hadn't escalated the expression of his anger from swearing to
pushing.

[Walt]

On Sep 21, 11:35 am, "Bob T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote:
> On Sep 21, 8:20 am, Walt <wka...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 21, 10:29 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Walt <wka...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > On Sep 20, 1:14 pm, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> Hi friends,
>
> > > > I''m glad you have no hard feelings that we couldn't get together
> > > > enough money to get you that pony.
>
> > > No hard feelings, Walt. :)
>
> > When I'm burning in Hell, I'll take comfort knowing you're in Heaven
> > with a stable of 1000 ponies.
>
> Interesting... so you think that Brock's Heaven and Pony Hell are the
> same place?

Oh, come on, I don't think Brock wants a pony for THAT. Ponies love
Brock, they don't understand what he's saying. They just know he
gives them a carrot every time he says "something something something
noted" or gives the URI of the Bible on-line.

[William T. Goat]

On Sep 21, 10:18 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 7:47 AM, William T. Goat <ericv...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 20, 1:14 pm, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi friends,
>

> >> Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
> >> abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
> >> instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
> >> testimony. Here is one example of that beautiful and tender sharing
> >> of the most wonderful news for sinners:
>
> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo
>
> > There are many different kinds of Christians, who deliver their
> > testimony in different ways. The fact that some Christians use beauty
> > to get the message across, necessitates an explanation for the
> > ugliness of the rest.
>
> I consider contrastingly that the beauty is not the delivery of the
> message, but the message itself:
>

> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
> whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."
>

> http://bible.cc/john/3-16.htm

Those of us who read John 3:16 in context can see that the beauty is
nullified by the ugliness of the rest of the message:

"...but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath

not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

http://bible.cc/john/3-18.htm


> > One would have expected that a God who loved "the world" would save
> > "the world," not just the believers. It's a shame God's love is too
> > limited for that.
>
> No reason to blame God for humankind's sinful rebellion against His
> wonderful salvation:

John 3:18 is not about rebellion. It is about doubt. How unfortunate
that God cannot discern the difference!

> "Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and
> opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he
> with Me."
>
> http://bible.cc/revelation/3-20.htm

And if God is only good to those who are good to Him, what credit is
that to Him? Even 'sinners' do that.

http://bible.cc/luke/6-33.htm

--Billy

[Bob T.]

You need to go back and watch Deadwood again, cocksucker.

- Bob T

[Brock Organ]

probably the principal tactic of escalation used. The aggressor only

sporadically used other tactics and techniques of intimidation
throughout the video, but constantly and continually used vitriolic,
caustic and hateful language.

Regards,

Brock

[Simon Ewins]

On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 13:46:27 -0400, Brock Organ <brock...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> The reality is that the abusive, caustic and hateful language was
> probably the principal tactic of escalation used. The aggressor only
> sporadically used other tactics and techniques of intimidation
> throughout the video, but constantly and continually used vitriolic,
> caustic and hateful language.

Then you need to get out more. It was obviously the posturing and physical
warning displays that were threatening violence.

Naivety can be attractive, but on you it just hangs like stupidity.

--
"Hey, reptile brain! God is a whore." -- S. Ewins

"Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it." [Andre
Gide]

http://home.sjewins.operaunite.com/webserver/content/index.htm

[Bob T.]

On Sep 21, 10:26 am, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Defecate Urinate Copulate.

Neil, you were correct earlier when you said you had no talent for
profanity.

Brock, it is within your power to relieve Neil of his Oath of
Profanity. Only you can fulfill the conditions of his oath. If you
do not answer a few simple questions about Jack Chick, we are in for
more of the above.

- Bob T

[Brock Organ]

Its a gracious and wonderful God who offers salvation to sinners who
otherwise deserve only justice. I was pleased to accept pardon from
the Lord for my sin, and encourage you to do the same.

>> > One would have expected that a God who loved "the world" would save
>> > "the world," not just the believers. It's a shame God's love is too
>> > limited for that.
>>
>> No reason to blame God for humankind's sinful rebellion against His
>> wonderful salvation:
>
> John 3:18 is not about rebellion. It is about doubt. How unfortunate
> that God cannot discern the difference!

http://members.core.com/~lpm8998/man_who_refused.htm

>> "Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and
>> opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he
>> with Me."
>>
>> http://bible.cc/revelation/3-20.htm
>
> And if God is only good to those who are good to Him

God is good to sinners (like me) who have no merit or favor with which
to recommend themselves. :)

Regards,

Brock

[Brock Organ]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Bob T. <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote:
> Brock, it is within your power to relieve Neil of his Oath of
> Profanity.  Only you can fulfill the conditions of his oath.  If you
> do not answer a few simple questions about Jack Chick, we are in for
> more of the above.

Incorrect, Bob, I am not responsible for Neil's language choices.

Regards,

Brock

[Neil Kelsey]

Lard fuck, man, my S/O is the more attractive reincarnation of
Calamity Jane - after watching that show, *she* even thinks so. I'm a
humble brown belt, she's a black belt. I know my place. Thanks to
Brock for giving me the opportunity to practise, though.

[Neil Kelsey]

On Sep 21, 10:46 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

And the motherfucker in the black shirt just stood there when the
bastard in the white shirt swore at him, but punched the cocksucker in
the white shirt in the head when he got physical. The "aggression"
escalated from the verbal to the physical. Your grip on reality seems
tentative. Copulate urinate defecate.

[Bob T.]

No, but he has stated that he will stop swearing at you when you
answer my questions about Jack Chick, so it is indeed within your
power to reduce the amount of swearing in this group. I, too, will
stop swearing at you once you have answered my questions, cocksucker.

Why are you so afraid to answer a few simple fucking questions,
Brock? Do you think that giving a direct answer to a direct question
means that you've lost some sort of game? It's not a personal
question - it's directly on topic. You cite Chick frequently - surely
you have an opinion about his anti-Catholicism.

I can't imagine a question about religion that I wouldn't answer on
this forum. I'm not embarassed about my opinions. You haven't even
told us why you won't tell us why you think about Chick, you just
pretend the questions haven't been asked.

- Bob T

[Brock Organ]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> The "aggression"
> escalated from the verbal to the physical.

Exactly: If those who condone caustic language on this forum would

maintain that form of dialogue is acceptable public discourse, I
consider this video gives an example that offers the contrasting

position.

Regards,

Brock

[Jelrak TB]

On Sep 21, 8:07 am, "Bob T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote:
> On Sep 21, 6:58 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> Hi friends,
>
> > >> Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
> > >> abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
> > >> instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
> > >> testimony.
>

> > > You mean "gentle, simple beautiful and elegant Christian testimony" like
> > > this Brock?
>
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity/browse_frm/thr...

>
> > Nope, I meant gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
> > testimony like this:
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo
>
> I speak a little German... I think they're singing "Oh Lord, how can
> anyone be so stupid as to believe that the Papacy will soon be
> controlled by the Antichrist?  Surely those who spread such dangerous
> nonsense will spend eternity burning in Hell.  La la la."
>

That's Brocking hilarious!

> - Bob T
>
>
>
> > Regards,
>
> > Brock- Hide quoted text -
>

[Neil Kelsey]

On Sep 21, 11:25 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > The "aggression"
> > escalated from the verbal to the physical.
>
> Exactly:

When the motherfucker in the white shirt *got* physical. Don't be so
desparate to twist what I already said, cocksucker.

>  If those who condone caustic language on this forum would
> maintain that form of dialogue is acceptable public discourse, I
> consider this video gives an example that offers the contrasting
> position.

I don't want to punch people in the head who swear. I don't know
anyone else who punches people in the head for swearing. It's against
the law to punch people in the head for swearing. I'll ask you again,
mothercopulator (and you will no doubt ignore me again, urinator) - do
you want to punch me in the head? Is that what you're warning me/us
about? Your video does not "offer the contrasting position," it shows
a guy punching another guy in the head for reasons that are unclear.
You are jumping to conclusions here in the same way that you jump to
conclusions about God's existence. Fuck piss and shit, pussy Jesus
vagina.

[Bob T.]

On Sep 21, 11:25 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > The "aggression"
> > escalated from the verbal to the physical.
>
> Exactly:  If those who condone caustic language on this forum would
> maintain that form of dialogue is acceptable public discourse, I
> consider this video gives an example that offers the contrasting position.

If that is so, then it can also be said that refusing to answer a few
simple fucking questions leads to a shitstorm of profanity. If you
are truly concerned that profanity leads to violence, then you have
only one moral option: answer my fucking questions, cocksucker.

- Bob T.

>
> Regards,
>
> Brock

[Brock Organ]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 2:37 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I don't want to punch people in the head who swear. I don't know
> anyone else who punches people in the head for swearing. It's against
> the law to punch people in the head for swearing. I'll ask you again,
> mothercopulator (and you will no doubt ignore me again, urinator) - do
> you want to punch me in the head? Is that what you're warning me/us
> about?

I've been clear: if those who condone caustic language on this forum

would maintain that form of dialogue is acceptable public discourse, I
consider this video gives an example that offers the contrasting
position.

Regards,

Brock

[Simon Ewins]

On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:49:27 -0400, Brock Organ <brock...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I've been clear: if those who condone caustic language on this forum

> would maintain that form of dialogue is acceptable public discourse, I
> consider this video gives an example that offers the contrasting
> position.

And, maintaining consistency, you would again be wrong.

[Max]

The equation is simple. If you debate honestly, people will be
unlikely to swear at you.

If you continue to disrespect honest posters, you in turn will be
disrespected.


On Sep 22, 2:49 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Neil Kelsey]

On Sep 21, 11:49 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

I think your dire warnings about "caustic language" are moderator's
issues and that they are inappropriate here. Jesus fucking Christ shit
shit masturbate.

[Answer_42]

On Sep 21, 10:21 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Atheism:  when accuracy in translation doesn't matter.

Brock: When mildly retarded jelly paste is used instead of a brain.

Regards,
____________________________________
A major contributor to the present-day tendency to accept and
encourage homosexuality is Dr. Sigmund Freud.
-- Rev Tim LaHaye

[Answer_42]

On Sep 21, 11:35 am, "Bob T." <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote:

>
> > When I'm burning in Hell, I'll take comfort knowing you're in Heaven
> > with a stable of 1000 ponies.
>
> Interesting... so you think that Brock's Heaven and Pony Hell are the
> same place?

ROTFLMAO

Love it!

[Brock Organ]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think your dire warnings about "caustic language" are moderator's
> issues and that they are inappropriate here.

Not true, it is very appropriate to note:

If those who condone caustic language on this forum would maintain
that form of dialogue is acceptable public discourse, I consider the

video gives an example that offers the contrasting position.

Regards,

Brock

[Bob T.]

On Sep 21, 1:14 pm, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I think your dire warnings about "caustic language" are moderator's
> > issues and that they are inappropriate here.
>
> Not true, it is very appropriate to note:
>
> If those who condone caustic language on this forum would maintain
> that form of dialogue is acceptable public discourse, I  consider the
> video gives an example that offers the contrasting position.

No matter how many times you repeat that stupid fucking statement it
will still be false, motherfucker.

- Bob T

>
> Regards,
>
> Brock

[Simon Ewins]

On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 11:35:37 -0400, Bob T. <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote:

>> When I'm burning in Hell, I'll take comfort knowing you're in Heaven
>> with a stable of 1000 ponies.
>
> Interesting... so you think that Brock's Heaven and Pony Hell are the
> same place?

I had a word with some ponies and they figure that no matter where they
are, if Brock's there, it will be pony Hell.

[Walt]

On Sep 21, 4:42 pm, "Simon Ewins" <sjew...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2010 11:35:37 -0400, Bob T. <b...@synapse-cs.com> wrote:
> >> When I'm burning in Hell, I'll take comfort knowing you're in Heaven
> >> with a stable of 1000 ponies.
>
> > Interesting... so you think that Brock's Heaven and Pony Hell are the
> > same place?
>
> I had a word with some ponies and they figure that no matter where they  
> are, if Brock's there, it will be pony Hell.

Well of course the TALKING ponies. Any being with a facility for
language will be driven to abject despair by the inane repetition of
non-information.

[Trance Gemini]

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Brock Organ <brock...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Trance Gemini <trance...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Brock <brock...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi friends,
>>
>> Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
>> abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
>> instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
>> testimony.
>
> You mean "gentle, simple beautiful and elegant Christian testimony" like
> this Brock?
>

> http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity/browse_frm/thread/6f446fe203e71ed4?hl=en&tvc=1&q=madalyn

Nope, I meant gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian
testimony like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo

Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an theist's arrogant, abrasive and harsh characterization of rational atheist debate, with what is instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant well reasoned, logically sound atheist position.

http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity/browse_frm/thread/6f446fe203e71ed4?hl=en&tvc=1&q=madalyn

--
"Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." --Thomas Paine
"The struggle for a free intelligence has always been a struggle between the ironic and the literal mind." — Christopher Hitchens
 

[Trance Gemini]

It's borderline.

So, I decided not make an issue of it.

However, you're right in the sense that it's a meaningless gesture here. If he wants to change the policy he'll have to start a thread on the Mod Board.

He can't ban anyone for swearing and if he does he'll be tossed off the Mod Board so fast it will make your head spin since the Owners don't agree with him on this and neither do I.

He knows that the only chance he has of changing the policy is to recruit some support amongst the membership.

And he's been trying to lobby support for this dead horse for almost as long as I've been on the site and fails miserably every time.
 
Better that he lobby this way rather than try to turn every unrelated Mod issue into a platform to spew his rhetoric on this topic, which is what he's been shamelessly doing.

[Neil Kelsey]

On Sep 21, 4:34 pm, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 21, 11:49 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 2:37 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_m_kel...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > I don't want to punch people in the head who swear. I don't know
> > > > anyone else who punches people in the head for swearing. It's against
> > > > the law to punch people in the head for swearing. I'll ask you again,
> > > > mothercopulator (and you will no doubt ignore me again, urinator) - do
> > > > you want to punch me in the head? Is that what you're warning me/us
> > > > about?
>
> > > I've been clear:  if those who condone caustic language on this forum
> > > would maintain that form of dialogue is acceptable public discourse, I
> > > consider this video gives an example that offers the contrasting
> > > position.
>
> > I think your dire warnings about "caustic language" are moderator's
> > issues and that they are inappropriate here. Jesus fucking Christ shit
> > shit masturbate.
>
> It's borderline.

I know it is borderline in one sense, but in another it isn't. I'm a
member of this newsgroup and here one of the moderators is threatening
me with videos about guys getting punched in the head insinuating that
the same thing will happen to me if I use something he vaguely calls
"caustic language." I think this is appalling.

> So, I decided not make an issue of it.
>
> However, you're right in the sense that it's a meaningless gesture here.

I will take your word for it. In the meantime I will continue my
policy to use what I only have to guess is "abrasive language" to
satirize his censorship tendencies, unless he answers Bob T's
questions about Jack Chick.

[Trance Gemini]

You should start a thread on the Mod Board if you want to discuss this further.

> So, I decided not make an issue of it.
>
> However, you're right in the sense that it's a meaningless gesture here.

I will take your word for it. In the meantime I will continue my
policy to use what I only have to guess is "abrasive language" to
satirize his censorship tendencies, unless he answers Bob T's
questions about Jack Chick.

Yup ;-)

[Neil Kelsey]

On Sep 21, 5:51 pm, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Done.

> > > So, I decided not make an issue of it.
>
> > > However, you're right in the sense that it's a meaningless gesture here.
>
> > I will take your word for it. In the meantime I will continue my
> > policy to use what I only have to guess is "abrasive language" to
> > satirize his censorship tendencies, unless he answers Bob T's
> > questions about Jack Chick.
>
> Yup ;-)
>
> --
> "Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is
> always a vice." --Thomas Paine
> "The struggle for a free intelligence has always been a struggle between the

> ironic and the literal mind." — Christopher Hitchens- Hide quoted text -

[e_space]

oh great ... a moderation thread that has nothing to do with
moderation policies ... how rational!

[Neil Kelsey]

On Sep 22, 3:19 am, e_space <espace1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> oh great ... a moderation thread that has nothing to do with
> moderation policies ... how rational!

If you don't think that being threatened with violence by a moderator
who wants to limit free speech isn't a threat to the newsgroup, then
you're not rational. Oh wait, you've already established that.

If you want to discuss this further, move it to the Moderator board.

[e_space]

fortunately, i dont ... and i certainly dont take directives from you
thankfully

[xeno]

On Sep 21, 9:17 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I have no idea how you fucking intend for that fucking link to relate
> > to your previous fucking link.

> I consider you should rethink using that kind of caustic language.  It
> is not appropriate in a public forum such as this.

Let's consider the pertinent issue here: The bible doesn't represent
some ultimate truth abt reality. It represents the mythology of an
ancient culture. IOW, it means nothing outside of human affairs. Get
over it.

[William T. Goat]

On Sep 21, 1:50 pm, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 1:30 PM, William T. Goat <ericv...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 21, 10:18 am, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 7:47 AM, William T. Goat <ericv...@my-deja.com> wrote:

>
> >> > On Sep 20, 1:14 pm, Brock <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> Hi friends,
>
> >> >> Often, I find a dramatic contrast between an atheist's arrogant,
> >> >> abrasive and harsh characterization of Christian witness, with what is
> >> >> instead a contrasting gentle, simple, beautiful and elegant Christian

> >> >> testimony. Here is one example of that beautiful and tender sharing
> >> >> of the most wonderful news for sinners:
>
> >> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fScwzH23sQo
>
> >> > There are many different kinds of Christians, who deliver their
> >> > testimony in different ways. The fact that some Christians use beauty
> >> > to get the message across, necessitates an explanation for the
> >> > ugliness of the rest.
>
> >> I consider contrastingly that the beauty is not the delivery of the
> >> message, but the message itself:
>
> >> "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that
> >> whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."
>
> >>http://bible.cc/john/3-16.htm
>
> > Those of us who read John 3:16 in context can see that the beauty is
> > nullified by the ugliness of the rest of the message:
>
> > "...but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath
> > not  believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."
>
> >http://bible.cc/john/3-18.htm
>
> Its a gracious and wonderful God who offers salvation to sinners who
> otherwise deserve only justice.

That unbelievers should "perish" is not justice.


> I was pleased to accept pardon from
> the Lord for my sin, and encourage you to do the same.


I have accepted God's pardon on numerous occasions, but Christians
assure me that I didn't *really* accept it. Accepting God's grace
doesn't really count without repentance and contrition. And as long as
I remain unconvinced that I have offended God, genuine contrition is
unattainable.


> >> > One would have expected that a God who loved "the world" would save
> >> > "the world," not just the believers. It's a shame God's love is too
> >> > limited for that.
>
> >> No reason to blame God for humankind's sinful rebellion against His
> >> wonderful salvation:
>
> > John 3:18 is not about rebellion. It is about doubt. How unfortunate
> > that God cannot discern the difference!
>
> http://members.core.com/~lpm8998/man_who_refused.htm

George Wilson, the man who refused the pardon, was guilty of a crime.
He was arrested, tried, and scheduled to be punished. In contrast,
those who do not believe in God are not guilty of rebellion, and
therefore will not be judged or punished by God. Nobody needs to be
pardoned for crimes they did not commit.

I would also like to point out a fundamental contradiction in the
provided document: "God Must Punish Sinners" and "But God Has Provided
a Pardon." Clearly, if a pardon is provided, the punishment is not a
must!

--Billy

[Brock Organ]

Why? Consider alternatively:

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0001/0001_01.asp

> Accepting God's grace
> doesn't really count without repentance and contrition. And as long as
> I remain unconvinced that I have offended God, genuine contrition is
> unattainable.

What a terrible and tragic future unrepentant sinners face. But God
is merciful to offer pardon, even to the worst sinner:

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0037/0037_01.asp

>> >> No reason to blame God for humankind's sinful rebellion against His
>> >> wonderful salvation:
>>
>> > John 3:18 is not about rebellion. It is about doubt. How unfortunate
>> > that God cannot discern the difference!
>>
>> http://members.core.com/~lpm8998/man_who_refused.htm
>
> George Wilson, the man who refused the pardon, was guilty of a crime.
> He was arrested, tried,  and scheduled to be punished. In contrast,
> those who do not believe in God are not guilty of rebellion, and
> therefore will not be judged or punished by God.

http://media.chick.com/tractimages89308/0001/0001_04.gif

> I would also like to point out a fundamental contradiction in the
> provided document: "God Must Punish Sinners" and "But God Has Provided
> a Pardon." Clearly, if a pardon is provided, the punishment is not a
> must!

Or another, the very Holy Messiah of God, substitution-arily received
the punishment:

http://media.chick.com/tractimages89308/0085/0085_10.gif

Regards,

Brock

[Walt]

On Sep 24, 12:55 pm, Brock Organ <brockor...@gmail.com> wrote:

Now, just supposin' a guy gets saved, will Jesus take a urine test for
him? That could save a lot of souls, clean urine can set you back a
few bucks. Just sayin'.

>
> Regards,
>
> Brock