Re: My reason I want
Mark T
>>> Praise the Lord!
>>Which one?
>
> How many do *you* know???
Lots!
Lord of the Rings
Lord and god Caesar
Lord Screaming Sutch
Mr and Mrs Lord and their son John Lord
Lord Byron
Lord Mayor
Lord God, King of the Universe, Yahweh
Lord Jesus of Nazareth, the human Messiah
etc etc etc etc
Which particular one are you talking about?????
--
Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
De t'ings dat yo li'ble to read in de Bible - It ain't necessarily so.
- Porgy and Bess (George Gershwin)
"We're Christians! We're not supposed to think!" Fanny Wype (Nudist Colony
Of The Dead)
"All things are probable. Try to believe." - Mark 17:1
"Really! Try to believe even if it's bloody stupid and irrational." - Mark
17:2
"Why? Because I said so, that's why! Don't ask questions. Just
believe." - Mark 17:3
Pax
"Mark T" <moi@09375963546864676755877579565567424> wrote in message
news:4542ae78$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> --
> Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
Why?
You quote atheists, agnostics, ignorant "learned" men, liars, simpletons and
yourself... ad infinitum, ad nauseam. You misquote the Bible for your own
amusement. God's words seem lacking where you're concerned however. Who is
God to you? Where do you find His words? How do you find Him? Do you ever
look?
What if you are proven to be right in the end, and all of us "foolish
believers" are wrong? What if the Bible were just a book of fables written
by men with too much time on their hands and too many ulterior motives? What
if faith is futile and hope of taking part in God's Kingdom is a joke played
on idiots? What will you have gained? One day you, just as all the rest of
us, will take your last breath. Then what? Then nothing.
Nothing. And so much of your life spent fighting hope and cursing faith;
hating strangers, working so hard at cultivating enemies. So much time
wasted destroying your own chances at joy in this life, as you spend all
your time reading "fairy tales" you don't even enjoy, looking for your next
"good" argument in a battle of words with no real purpose past the battle
itself.
There are places where logic fails. There are times when logic damns... even
if that damnation is only in this life. But, for those cursed with too much
logic, Pascal's Wager seems the best bet, since if you're wrong in having
faith, you lose nothing in the end... but, if you're right...
Do you think a fool knows he's a fool? It would seem the last person able to
make that assessment would be the fool himself. I can't judge that about
myself. I can only have faith that God loves fools too, in case I happen to
be one. He's never required wisdom, only love, and even a fool can love
completely and without question.
Jesus is Lord - Pax
Athanasius
wrote:
>Jesus is Lord - Pax
I am beginning to appreciate your presence and words on our newsgroup
Sherri.
Peace.
Jesus is indeed Lord God.
Pax
"Athanasius" <dcn_ath...@REMOVEyahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:igf5k21l7nqjo44kh...@4ax.com...
Yes He is. :)
Thank you so much, your kind words are very appreciated.
lynx
> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 02:14:48 GMT, "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Jesus is Lord - Pax
>>
>
> I am beginning to appreciate your presence and words on our newsgroup
> Sherri.
>
let the sunshine and fresh air in!
> Peace.
>
> Jesus is indeed Lord God.
>
--
rgds,
Pete
=====
http://pw352.blogspot.com/
'Computers are machines to help you solve problems you wouldn't have if you didn't have a computer'
lynx
> "Mark T" <moi@09375963546864676755877579565567424> wrote in message
> news:4542ae78$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
>> --
>> Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
>>
>
> Why?
>
> You quote atheists, agnostics, ignorant "learned" men, liars, simpletons and
> yourself... ad infinitum, ad nauseam. You misquote the Bible for your own
> amusement. God's words seem lacking where you're concerned however. Who is
> God to you?
> Where do you find His words?
> How do you find Him? Do you ever
> look?
>
> What if you are proven to be right in the end, and all of us "foolish
> believers" are wrong? What if the Bible were just a book of fables written
> by men with too much time on their hands and too many ulterior motives? What
> if faith is futile and hope of taking part in God's Kingdom is a joke played
> on idiots? What will you have gained? One day you, just as all the rest of
> us, will take your last breath. Then what? Then nothing.
>
> Nothing. And so much of your life spent fighting hope and cursing faith;
> hating strangers, working so hard at cultivating enemies. So much time
> wasted destroying your own chances at joy in this life, as you spend all
> your time reading "fairy tales" you don't even enjoy, looking for your next
> "good" argument in a battle of words with no real purpose past the battle
> itself.
>
> There are places where logic fails. There are times when logic damns... even
> if that damnation is only in this life. But, for those cursed with too much
> logic, Pascal's Wager seems the best bet, since if you're wrong in having
> faith, you lose nothing in the end... but, if you're right...
>
> Do you think a fool knows he's a fool? It would seem the last person able to
> make that assessment would be the fool himself. I can't judge that about
> myself. I can only have faith that God loves fools too, in case I happen to
> be one. He's never required wisdom, only love, and even a fool can love
> completely and without question.
>
> Jesus is Lord - Pax
>
>
>
lynx
> "Mark T" <moi@09375963546864676755877579565567424> wrote in message
> news:4542ae78$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
>> --
>> Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
>>
>
> Why?
>
> You quote atheists, agnostics, ignorant "learned" men, liars, simpletons and
> yourself... ad infinitum, ad nauseam. You misquote the Bible for your own
> amusement. God's words seem lacking where you're concerned however. Who is
> God to you? Where do you find His words? How do you find Him? Do you ever
> look?
>
> What if you are proven to be right in the end, and all of us "foolish
> believers" are wrong? What if the Bible were just a book of fables written
> by men with too much time on their hands and too many ulterior motives? What
> if faith is futile and hope of taking part in God's Kingdom is a joke played
> on idiots? What will you have gained? One day you, just as all the rest of
> us, will take your last breath. Then what? Then nothing.
>
> Nothing. And so much of your life spent fighting hope and cursing faith;
> hating strangers, working so hard at cultivating enemies.
cultivating enemies. He has the distinct ability to create them almost
instantly! :)
>
> Jesus is Lord - Pax
>
--
rgds,
Pete
=====
http://pw352.blogspot.com/
'I used to be forgetful and indecisive. (Think I was. Don't remember when. Maybe not.)'
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> "Mark T" <moi@09375963546864676755877579565567424> wrote in message
> news:4542ae78$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> > --
> > Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
>
> Why?
Without the counsel of the Holy Spirit, Mark's interpretation of
Scripture will remain meaningless.
> You quote atheists, agnostics, ignorant "learned" men, liars, simpletons and
> yourself... ad infinitum, ad nauseam. You misquote the Bible for your own
> amusement. God's words seem lacking where you're concerned however. Who is
> God to you? Where do you find His words? How do you find Him? Do you ever
> look?
Mark is "ever seeing but never perceiving."
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/758699d8bd036a60?
> What if you are proven to be right in the end, and all of us "foolish
> believers" are wrong? What if the Bible were just a book of fables written
> by men with too much time on their hands and too many ulterior motives? What
> if faith is futile and hope of taking part in God's Kingdom is a joke played
> on idiots? What will you have gained? One day you, just as all the rest of
> us, will take your last breath. Then what? Then nothing.
>
> Nothing. And so much of your life spent fighting hope and cursing faith;
> hating strangers, working so hard at cultivating enemies. So much time
> wasted destroying your own chances at joy in this life, as you spend all
> your time reading "fairy tales" you don't even enjoy, looking for your next
> "good" argument in a battle of words with no real purpose past the battle
> itself.
>
> There are places where logic fails. There are times when logic damns... even
> if that damnation is only in this life. But, for those cursed with too much
> logic, Pascal's Wager seems the best bet, since if you're wrong in having
> faith, you lose nothing in the end... but, if you're right...
>
> Do you think a fool knows he's a fool? It would seem the last person able to
> make that assessment would be the fool himself. I can't judge that about
> myself. I can only have faith that God loves fools too, in case I happen to
> be one. He's never required wisdom, only love, and even a fool can love
> completely and without question.
>
> Jesus is Lord - Pax
"Jesus is KING of kings and LORD of lords." -- Holy Spirit
Amen !
Laus Deo ! ! !
Marana tha ! ! ! ! ! ! !
May GOD continue to heal our hearts with HIS living water, dear sister
Sherri whom I love unconditionally.
Prayerfully in Christ's amazing love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung
Cardiologist, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit
As for knowing who are the very elect, these you will know by the
unconditional love they have for everyone including their enemies
(Matthew 5:44-45, 1 Corinthians 13:3, James 2:14-17).
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/f4dad7fe68478acf?
Denis Loubet
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lov...@thetruth.com> wrote in message
news:1162016473.1...@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> Pax wrote:
>> "Mark T" <moi@09375963546864676755877579565567424> wrote in message
>> news:4542ae78$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>> > --
>> > Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
>>
>> Why?
>
> Without the counsel of the Holy Spirit, Mark's interpretation of
> Scripture will remain meaningless.
So will yours, for since we have no way to determine that you are being
guided by the holy spirit, even if there were such a thing, your
interpretation is just as meaningless to us.
--
Denis Loubet
dlo...@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
http://www.ashenempires.com
Kadaitcha Man
> news:1162016473.1...@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>> Pax wrote:
>>> "Mark T" <moi@09375963546864676755877579565567424> wrote in message
>>> news:4542ae78$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>>> --
>>>> Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
>>>
>>> Why?
>>
>> Without the counsel of the Holy Spirit, Mark's interpretation of
>> Scripture will remain meaningless.
>
> So will yours, for since we have no way to determine that you are
> being guided by the holy spirit, even if there were such a thing, your
> interpretation is just as meaningless to us.
Us? Name them. All of them.
--
alt.usenet.kooks - Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005 and April 2006
"K-Man's particular genius, however, lies not merely in his humour,
but his ability to make posters who had previously seemed reasonably
well-balanced turn into foaming, frothing, death threat-uttering
maniacs" - Snarky, Demon Lord of Confusion
Thou hooligan. Thy breath stinks with eating toasted cheese.
Kadaitcha Man
> "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lov...@thetruth.com> wrote
*plonk*
--
alt.usenet.kooks - Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005 and April 2006
"K-Man's particular genius, however, lies not merely in his humour,
but his ability to make posters who had previously seemed reasonably
well-balanced turn into foaming, frothing, death threat-uttering
maniacs" - Snarky, Demon Lord of Confusion
Thou foolish extravagant spirit. Thou bum-bailiff.
Mark T
>> Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
>
> Why?
Because God did not write the Bible - men did! (Sexism intended)
God does not make mistakes but the bible contains many mistakes.
Learn about how the Bible was put together ... and edited ....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BIBLE TIMELINE
Dates are approximate
3000 BC
- Egyptian songs written that were the source of many of the Psalms
2000 BC
- Eclessiastes written
1900 BC
- Abraham comes to Palestine
- Beginning of oral tradition later recorded in the bible
1375 - 1358 BC
- Reign of Egyptian Pharoah Amenhotep IV ( later called Ikhnaton)
inspiration of much of Moses' writing.
1250 BC
- Moses leads Isrealites out of Egypt
1030 - 1010 BC
- Reign of Saul
1010 - 970 BC
- Reign of David
1000 BC
- Bible begins to be written with Job (fiction)
970 - 931 BC
- Reign of Solomon
960 BC
- The YAHWIST editor began in Jerusalem. He calls God YHWH.and describes God
in humanlike terms. The Yahwist editor wrote Genesis 2 ( Genesis 1 had not
yer been written.). Bible heroes are not whitewashed - Abraham is called a
liar (Gen 20), Noah's drunken state is described (Gen 9) and Lot's incest is
told (Gen 19). The monarchy and priesthood in Jeruslem are important. This
editor wrote the first version of the 10 Commandments in Exodus 34 which
contains no reference to resting on the Sabbath.
850 BC
- The ELOHIST editor began in Samaria. He calls God Elohim. The
Elohist editor has a democratic value system and so asserts that no priest,
leader or king can claim permanent status over God's people. There is no
dynasty established. He starts his story with Abraham and wrote about Isaac
and Jacob. He places importance on the Northern kingdoms power and shrines.
He uses dreams, miracle and magic as a way to demonstrate God's power. He
asserts that God raises up prophets whn required.
621 BC
- The DEUTERONOMIST editor began in 621 BCE in the reign of King Josiah in
Jerusalem. The "discovered" book was called the second (deuters) giving of
the Law (nomas) and became known as Deuteronomy. It was responsive to the
prophetic tradition of Hosea, Amos, Isaiah, Micah and Jeremiah (who was
alivce at the time of writing). The deuteronomist editor centralised worship
under the supervision of the Jerusalem priesthood. Its interest's were in a
high spiritual monotheism and therefdore wrote than no image could be made
of God.
596 BC
- The PRIESTLY editors began after the city of Jerusalem fell to
Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians. Many of the Psalms were
written in this time (including Psalm 137). The priests edited and rewrote
massive parts of the sacred story. They emphasised circumcision, dietary
laws and Sabbath day observance and were responsible for writing Genesis 1
to provide a reason for observing the Sabbath abnd it was one of the last
parts of the Old Testament to be written. At the same time synagogues were
built to indoctrinate the people. As a result thje etails of worship, the
rules of worship, the observance of worship became important and resulted in
much of Exodus, almost all of Leviticus and major portions of Numbers. All
the chronologies were written by the priestly editors. The incompleted
harmonisation of the Yahwist and Elohist editors produce most of the
contradictions in the Old Testament.
400 BC
- Emphasis on individualism and life after death
200 BC
- Daniel written (fiction)
6 BCE
- Jesus birth
27 - 34 CE
- Jesus' death
50 - 60 CE
- 1 Thessalonians. Philippians, Galatians, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians,
Romans, Philemon
50 - 80 CE
- Colossians
50 - 95 CE
- Hebrews
65 - 80 CE
- Mark's gospel
70 - 100 CE
- James
80 -100 CE
- 2 Thessalonians, Ephesians, Matthew's gospel (written in Antioch),
80 -110 CE
- 1 Peter
80 CE - 130 CE
- Luke's gospel, Acts (both written in Caesarea)
90 - 95 CE
- Revelation of John
90 -120 CE.
- John's Gospel, I John, 2 John, 3 John, Jude
100 -150 CE
-1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus
100 -160 CE
- 2 Peter
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Who is God to you?
The One God whom Jesus of Nazareth worshipped - Yahweh.
Read my Blog from the beginning to understand my background.
http://www.whitepage.com.au/strooth/
> Where do you find His words?
The infinite God can never be contained in an errant man-made finite book.
> How do you find Him?
As the Bible says (quoting the pagan poet Aratus) "in him we live and move
and have our being."
How did Abraham and Moses find God without a Bible?
> There are places where logic fails.
Name 'em! As a philosopher I would love to see 'em. ;-)
> for those cursed with too much logic, Pascal's Wager seems the best bet
Have you read Pascal's "Pensees" right the way through? I have. He is
wrong in many areas.
> Do you think a fool knows (s)he's a fool?
Do you?
***********************************************************
'As rare as a Fundamentalist who loves her enemy.
#################################################
... quoting from James Barr's book "Fundamentalism" on the three
distinguishing features of the Fundamentalist '... an assurance that those
who do not share their religious viewpoint are not really true Christians at
all.' - Peter Cameron "Heretic" (Doubleday; Sydney: 1994) p. 178
#################################################
--
Visit my Blog (including my artwork)
http://www.whitepage.com.au/strooth/
Visit my Band Page (free mp3 downloads)
http://www.soundclick.com/marktindall
Mark T
> Jesus is indeed Lord God.
Jesus is Lord but not God for he was never worshipped by anyone in the
Jerusalem Temple when He and the disciple went there to worship God.
################################################################
Then God spoke all these words. He said: 'I am Yahweh your God who brought
you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall have NO
GODS (INCLUDING JESUS) EXCEPT ME.' - Exodus 20: 1-2
################################################################
Why do you add the human Jesus of Nazareth, God's human Messiah, as another
god to worship alongside of Yahweh?
That's idol worship!
Mark T
> "Jesus is KING of kings and LORD of lords." -- Holy Spirit
No, that is Yahweh.
"I [Jesus] am ascending to MY FATHER AND YOUR FATHER, MY GOD AND YOUR GOD" -
John 20:17
Does God have a God?????
################################################################
Then God spoke all these words. He said: 'I am Yahweh your God who brought
you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall have NO
GODS (INCLUDING JESUS) EXCEPT ME.' - Exodus 20: 1-2
################################################################
Jesus said that Yahweh is spirit. "God is spirit, and those who worship Him
must worship him in spirit and truth" John 4: 24
Is Jesus of Nazareth (a human) really Yahweh (spirit) who brought the tribe
of Israel out of Egypt?????
Prove it.
Mark T
spat:
> FUCKING ALIEN No, that is Yahweh. TWAT PRICK VAGINA SLUT CUNT-STABBER
> GODDAMN LIKE IT DIRTY SAUSAGE JOCKEY PIMP
> FUCKING DYKE BREASTS "I [Jesus] am ascending to FUCKING ARSE-BONE MY
> FATHER AND YOUR FATHER, FUCKING SHAFT ARSEDUKE MY GOD AND YOUR GOD"
> FUCKING BAZOOMBAS WHORE FINK - John 20:17 CUNT RIFLE MOIST
> CUNT-STIRRER FLAPS CUNT SCRUBBER GODDAMN SHIT BITCH SUCK TWAT
> FUCKING BACK-DOOR MILKMAN BACK-DOOR BANDIT Does God have a God?????
> GAY BEAVER FELCH FELCH PUSSY
> FUCKING AMMUNITION-WHORE Jesus said that Yahweh is FUCKING ALL-DAY
> SUCKER spirit. "God is spirit, and FUCKING FUCKER those who worship
> Him must FUCKING BIT OF MUTTON worship him in spirit and FUCKING ARSE
> OVER TIT BOTTOM FEEDER SLUT truth" John 4: 24 ANAL CUNT-STRETCHER
> FILTHY SHITTER SLAPPER BITCH BUM BANDIT BONER PRICK GAYLORD MOIST
> SCREW
> FUCKING KNOB Is Jesus of Nazareth (a FUCKING ANUS QUEEN human) really
> Yahweh (spirit) who brought FUCKING BUTT BANGING the tribe of Israel
> out of FUCKING KIPPER RIPPER Egypt????? VAGINA TIT SUCK PUBES CUNT
> COMPANION BULL SHIT BREASTS PRICK
> FUCKING ANAL FISTING BONE ACHE Prove it. ASSWIPE GAY GOLDEN SHOWER
> WANK ORGASM
Mark T
Mark T
spritzed:
OH! FUCK!!!!@@@!!! DOOOMED!!! I AM DOOMED!!!!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Rowland Croucher
news:ehvlqk$4qo$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com:
>> Complaints-To: ab...@databasix.com
> OH! FUCK!!!!@@@!!! DOOOMED!!! I AM DOOMED!!!!
It's worse than that, you're dead Jim.
--
Krieg! Rowland Croucher
Christian achievements
http://broomleigh.org/
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>
> > "Jesus is KING of kings and LORD of lords." -- Holy Spirit
Amen ! Laus Deo ! ! Marana tha ! ! ! ! ! ! !
> No, that is Yahweh.
Incorrect:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/4b0ed0f59d4114aa?
It would be your choice to align yourself with Kurt Gavin, an atheist,
and argue against GOD using the free will that HE has generously given
to you along with other souls including those belonging to fig trees
(Mark 11:12-14, 20):
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/ddb25eb1d5cf468a?
This victory belongs to GOD:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/175b5dc947a0781f?
Your consolation prize is eternal life if you choose to surrender to
HIM:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/fcb058da12bb3f3d?
May GOD in HIS infinite mercy and grace keep your heart beating to give
you time to understand and act on this, dear neighbor Mark whom I love
unconditionally.
Prayerfully in Christ's amazing love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung
Cardiologist, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit
As for knowing who are the very elect, these you will know by the
unconditional love they have for everyone including their enemies
(Matthew 5:44-45, 1 Corinthians 13:3, James 2:14-17).
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/f4dad7fe68478acf?
terry
Pax wrote in message ...
Here, Here! Well stated Pax. Mark continually proves, along with some
others, that Scriptures are in fact accurate and useful.
"Professing themselves to be wise, they are fools."
Of course, he will not see the truth in this statment because it was
offered by the Apostle Paul and not by Spong, Freud or some other deviant.
I suppose if Satan would have offered it he would use it with authority.
Go figure!-- Dark hearts, dark minds, dark words, dark actions, dark
references, dark postings......
"For everyone that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh
to the light, lest his deeds be reproved." John 3:20
Terry Ivy
Pax
"lynx" <no...@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:lnA0h.54541$rP1....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Pax wrote:
>
>> "Mark T" <moi@09375963546864676755877579565567424> wrote in message
>> news:4542ae78$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>
>>> --
>>> Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
>>>
>>
>> Why?
>>
>> You quote atheists, agnostics, ignorant "learned" men, liars, simpletons
>> and yourself... ad infinitum, ad nauseam. You misquote the Bible for your
>> own amusement. God's words seem lacking where you're concerned however.
>> Who is God to you?
>
> Peter Cameron.
>
>> Where do you find His words?
>
> In his books.
Sad, don't you think?
I can't claim it. To everyone who asks, God gives. Any wisdom comes from
Him.
> rgds,
>
> Pete
> =====
> http://pw352.blogspot.com/
> 'Computers are machines to help you solve problems you wouldn't have if
> you didn't have a computer'
LOL
I love your quotes. :)
Pax
> Pax wrote:
>
>> "Mark T" <moi@09375963546864676755877579565567424> wrote in message
>> news:4542ae78$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>> faith; hating strangers, working so hard at cultivating enemies.
>
> You got that wrong, sorry to say. He doesn't need to work hard at
> cultivating enemies. He has the distinct ability to create them almost
> instantly! :)
:) :) Some people are born to fight, others are pushed to it. You know him
much better than I do, which is he?
> rgds,
>
> Pete
> =====
> http://pw352.blogspot.com/
> 'I used to be forgetful and indecisive. (Think I was. Don't remember when.
> Maybe not.)'
LOL
I need to save your quotes, they perk me up. :) :)
Pax
Jesus is Lord - Pax
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lov...@thetruth.com> wrote in message
news:1162016473.1...@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> Pax wrote:
>> "Mark T" <moi@09375963546864676755877579565567424> wrote in message
>> news:4542ae78$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>> > --
>> > Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
>>
>> Why?
>
> Without the counsel of the Holy Spirit, Mark's interpretation of
> Scripture will remain meaningless.
>
>> You quote atheists, agnostics, ignorant "learned" men, liars, simpletons
>> and
>> yourself... ad infinitum, ad nauseam. You misquote the Bible for your own
>> amusement. God's words seem lacking where you're concerned however. Who
>> is
>> God to you? Where do you find His words? How do you find Him? Do you ever
>> look?
>
> Mark is "ever seeing but never perceiving."
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/758699d8bd036a60?
>
>
Pax
> Athanasius wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 02:14:48 GMT, "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Jesus is Lord - Pax
>>>
>>
>> I am beginning to appreciate your presence and words on our newsgroup
>> Sherri.
>>
>
> I just read it too. I think someone's opened a window and a door, and let
> the sunshine and fresh air in!
>> Peace.
>>
>> Jesus is indeed Lord God.
Thank you so much for your wonderful welcome. :)
> rgds,
>
> Pete
> =====
> http://pw352.blogspot.com/
> 'Computers are machines to help you solve problems you wouldn't have if
> you didn't have a computer'
<grin>
Pax
"Mark T" <moi@09375963534546587698988706743567424> wrote in message
news:4543...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>>> Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
>>
>> Why?
>
> Because God did not write the Bible - men did! (Sexism intended)
>
> God does not make mistakes but the bible contains many mistakes.
>
> Learn about how the Bible was put together ... and edited ....
You make me so sad.
Pax
"terry" <sitting@hisdesk> wrote in message
news:aYqdnasaE7asG97Y...@netdoor.com...
>
> Pax wrote in message ...
>>
>>"Mark T" <moi@09375963546864676755877579565567424> wrote in message
>>news:4542ae78$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>> --
>>> Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
>>
>>Why?
>
> others, that Scriptures are in fact accurate and useful.
>
> "Professing themselves to be wise, they are fools."
>
> Of course, he will not see the truth in this statment because it was
> offered by the Apostle Paul and not by Spong, Freud or some other deviant.
> I suppose if Satan would have offered it he would use it with authority.
> Go figure!-- Dark hearts, dark minds, dark words, dark actions, dark
> references, dark postings......
>
> "For everyone that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh
> to the light, lest his deeds be reproved." John 3:20
One day he will stand in God's eye without Jesus to shield his view of
himself. Mourn for him. He destroys himself.
His hate has no power over those who belong to God.
Matthew 10:28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill
the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in
hell.
Luke 12:
4 "I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and
after that can do no more. 5 But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear
him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell.
Yes, I tell you, fear him. 6 Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? Yet
not one of them is forgotten by God. 7 Indeed, the very hairs of your head
are all numbered. Don't be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.
8 "I tell you, whoever acknowledges me before men, the Son of Man will also
acknowledge him before the angels of God. 9 But he who disowns me before men
will be disowned before the angels of God."
> Terry Ivy
Pax
"Mark T" <moi@09375963534546587698988706743567424> wrote in message
Every man is one in three: body, mind and spirit. Without any one of those
elements, a man is not complete and can't live.
The spirit guides the mind and the mind controls the actions of the body. We
communicate with each other mind to mind and spirit to spirit by having our
minds send commands to our bodies. Though we see the body articulating, we
speak to another person's mind and spirit, the body is just the tool we use
to accomplish that communication.
Of the three elements that make us up, in a way the body is the least, since
it's whole purpose is merely to carry out the will of the mind and spirit.
Yet, if you have seen the body, you have seen the mind and spirit.
God tried for a very long time to teach man, but He was imposing and seemed
so "inhuman". He gave man the Law, He guided man through the prophets, He
forgave, He punished. But He was always so intimidating... and seemed so far
removed from anything man could really relate to. It broke His heart when
Israel insisted on having an earthly king to rule over them rather than Him.
He got the message across that man should fear Him, but the main message He
wanted to impart most of all got lost in all that fear. What message? That
all He wants is our love. That He loves us and wants us to love Him.
So, most men couldn't relate man to God, but man could relate man to man.
Therefore, God became a man, to teach eye to eye and heart to heart. He had
given the Law to show man how much he needed God, that man couldn't do it on
his own. But that didn't work, and the punishment for not following the Law
is death. Therefore, in His mercy, He took on Himself the punishment for the
sins of all mankind, to show once and for all that it was never the
punishment of man He wanted, it was always and only man's love.
Free Lunch
"Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
<zEM0h.16859$GR...@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>:
>
>"Mark T" <moi@09375963534546587698988706743567424> wrote in message
>news:45435590$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>> "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lov...@thetruth.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Jesus is KING of kings and LORD of lords." -- Holy Spirit
>>
>> No, that is Yahweh.
>>
>> "I [Jesus] am ascending to MY FATHER AND YOUR FATHER, MY GOD AND YOUR
>> GOD" - John 20:17
>>
>> Does God have a God?????
>>
>> ################################################################
>> Then God spoke all these words. He said: 'I am Yahweh your God who
>> brought
>> you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall have
>> NO
>> GODS (INCLUDING JESUS) EXCEPT ME.' - Exodus 20: 1-2
>> ################################################################
>>
>> Jesus said that Yahweh is spirit. "God is spirit, and those who worship
>> Him must worship him in spirit and truth" John 4: 24
>>
>> Is Jesus of Nazareth (a human) really Yahweh (spirit) who brought the
>> tribe of Israel out of Egypt?????
>>
>> Prove it.
>
>Every man is one in three: body, mind and spirit.
What evidence do you have to support that partition? The mind appears to
be nothing more than self-awareness of brain activities and spirit
doesn't have any evidence at all.
>Without any one of those
>elements, a man is not complete and can't live.
How would anyone know if a spirit went missing?
>The spirit guides the mind and the mind controls the actions of the body. We
>communicate with each other mind to mind and spirit to spirit by having our
>minds send commands to our bodies. Though we see the body articulating, we
>speak to another person's mind and spirit, the body is just the tool we use
>to accomplish that communication.
It sounds as if you are merely reifying abstractions of actions of
people.
>Of the three elements that make us up, in a way the body is the least, since
>it's whole purpose is merely to carry out the will of the mind and spirit.
>Yet, if you have seen the body, you have seen the mind and spirit.
Does this mean something?
>God tried for a very long time to teach man, but He was imposing and seemed
>so "inhuman". He gave man the Law, He guided man through the prophets, He
>forgave, He punished. But He was always so intimidating... and seemed so far
>removed from anything man could really relate to. It broke His heart when
>Israel insisted on having an earthly king to rule over them rather than Him.
This is the God that supposedly murdered everyone on earth except for
eight people?
>He got the message across that man should fear Him, but the main message He
>wanted to impart most of all got lost in all that fear. What message? That
>all He wants is our love. That He loves us and wants us to love Him.
You don't have a nice god. Why don't you invent a better one?
>So, most men couldn't relate man to God, but man could relate man to man.
>Therefore, God became a man, to teach eye to eye and heart to heart. He had
>given the Law to show man how much he needed God, that man couldn't do it on
>his own. But that didn't work, and the punishment for not following the Law
>is death. Therefore, in His mercy, He took on Himself the punishment for the
>sins of all mankind, to show once and for all that it was never the
>punishment of man He wanted, it was always and only man's love.
>
>Jesus is Lord - Pax
Your god is not nice, but he is also ill.
sci.med.cardiology removed because people who care about the heart don't
need to have the fallout from Andrew's lies littering their group.
Denis Loubet
"Kadaitcha Man" <fuck-you...@kiss-my-big-black-ass.com> wrote in
message news:nstt0p$obu$u...@beggarly-snuggle-pups.org...
> Denis Loubet <dlo...@io.com>, the hair dresser, upchucked:
>> "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lov...@thetruth.com> wrote in message
>> news:1162016473.1...@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>>> Pax wrote:
>>>> "Mark T" <moi@09375963546864676755877579565567424> wrote in message
>>>> news:4542ae78$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>>>> --
>>>>> Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
>>>>
>>>> Why?
>>>
>>> Without the counsel of the Holy Spirit, Mark's interpretation of
>>> Scripture will remain meaningless.
>>
>> So will yours, for since we have no way to determine that you are
>> being guided by the holy spirit, even if there were such a thing, your
>> interpretation is just as meaningless to us.
>
> Us? Name them. All of them.
No.
Learn to live with disappointment.
Pax
"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
news:d067k2l1rus0g1kqg...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 17:42:55 GMT, in alt.atheism
> "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
> <zEM0h.16859$GR...@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>:
>>
>>
>
> What evidence do you have to support that partition? The mind appears to
> be nothing more than self-awareness of brain activities and spirit
> doesn't have any evidence at all.
Can you explain how self-awareness came about? The body is controlled by
electrical impulses through the nervous system to and from the brain and
dispersed throughout the neural net. There is no real reason for
self-awareness on a level man displays, since the messages from our five
senses should be sufficient for our survival. Memory and emotions are a
necessary adaptation, since they increase our chances of survival, but
memory and emotions sans personal awareness are only "bits" of information
to guide us to those things which are beneficial to our survival and away
from those things which are not. Jumping spiders, as an example, have great
memories. As another, elephants have great memories and deep emotions.
What caused man, above all the other animals, to evolve past the
hunter-gatherer stage? What possible purpose for survival of the species
could account for a need to do so? The great apes are remarkably humanlike,
and very close to our DNA equals. They are also self-aware. They are capable
of complex language, enjoyment and creation of art, compassion,
selflessness, tool usage. They, like us, live in advanced social groups and
form intense emotional bonds. Yet, despite all of that, they have never
found it necessary to evolve as we have in order to survive.
There is no evolutionarily adaptive reason man should have developed the
nuances of personality he displays that force him to reach out
philosophically. The limbic system is not unique to man, and its functions,
complicated though they are, have no reason to culminate in any sort of
metaphysical development. There is certainly no physiological reason man
should have ever even conceived of much less reached out to God.
>>Without any one of those
>>elements, a man is not complete and can't live.
>
> How would anyone know if a spirit went missing?
Have you ever seen a dead person, doctor?
>>The spirit guides the mind and the mind controls the actions of the body.
>>We
>>communicate with each other mind to mind and spirit to spirit by having
>>our
>>minds send commands to our bodies. Though we see the body articulating, we
>>speak to another person's mind and spirit, the body is just the tool we
>>use
>>to accomplish that communication.
>
> It sounds as if you are merely reifying abstractions of actions of
> people.
So you recognize the obvious. That's a start. :)
>>Of the three elements that make us up, in a way the body is the least,
>>since
>>it's whole purpose is merely to carry out the will of the mind and spirit.
>>Yet, if you have seen the body, you have seen the mind and spirit.
>
> Does this mean something?
It's rather elementary and self-explanatory.
>>God tried for a very long time to teach man, but He was imposing and
>>seemed
>>so "inhuman". He gave man the Law, He guided man through the prophets, He
>>forgave, He punished. But He was always so intimidating... and seemed so
>>far
>>removed from anything man could really relate to. It broke His heart when
>>Israel insisted on having an earthly king to rule over them rather than
>>Him.
>
> This is the God that supposedly murdered everyone on earth except for
> eight people?
It is man who considers death a finality, not God. Why are you so positive
that when the body dies the person no longer exists? There is no evidence of
that, and not for lack of trying to find it either. In order to make your
case, you must prove a negative. You can only prove the body is lifeless.
Past that point you must journey into the metaphysical.
And there is where the Bible tells us what happened to the souls of all
those who died in the days of Noah [1 Pet 3:18-20].
>>He got the message across that man should fear Him, but the main message
>>He
>>wanted to impart most of all got lost in all that fear. What message? That
>>all He wants is our love. That He loves us and wants us to love Him.
>
> You don't have a nice god. Why don't you invent a better one?
He's not just my God, He's yours too, whether you like or not.
>>So, most men couldn't relate man to God, but man could relate man to man.
>>Therefore, God became a man, to teach eye to eye and heart to heart. He
>>had
>>given the Law to show man how much he needed God, that man couldn't do it
>>on
>>his own. But that didn't work, and the punishment for not following the
>>Law
>>is death. Therefore, in His mercy, He took on Himself the punishment for
>>the
>>sins of all mankind, to show once and for all that it was never the
>>punishment of man He wanted, it was always and only man's love.
>>
>>Jesus is Lord - Pax
>
> Your god is not nice, but he is also ill.
Only because you choose to anthropomorphize Him. Though He took on a human
body for our sake, He was never human.
Uncle Vic
you.y...@kiss-my-big-black-ass.com) made the light shine upon us with
this:
> Denis Loubet <dlo...@io.com>, the agrarian agent, insisted:
>
>> "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lov...@thetruth.com> wrote
>
> *plonk*
>
*plink*
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Plonked by Kadaitcha Man
Free Lunch
"Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
<2oO0h.17411$TV3....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>:
>
>"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
>news:d067k2l1rus0g1kqg...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 17:42:55 GMT, in alt.atheism
>> "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
>> <zEM0h.16859$GR...@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>:
>>>
>>>
>>>Every man is one in three: body, mind and spirit.
>>
>> What evidence do you have to support that partition? The mind appears to
>> be nothing more than self-awareness of brain activities and spirit
>> doesn't have any evidence at all.
>
>Can you explain how self-awareness came about? The body is controlled by
electrochemical activities and other biochemical controls that are
outside the neuralogical system.
>electrical impulses through the nervous system to and from the brain and
>dispersed throughout the neural net. There is no real reason for
>self-awareness on a level man displays, since the messages from our five
Self-awareness is not limited to humans.
>senses should be sufficient for our survival. Memory and emotions are a
>necessary adaptation, since they increase our chances of survival, but
>memory and emotions sans personal awareness are only "bits" of information
>to guide us to those things which are beneficial to our survival and away
>from those things which are not. Jumping spiders, as an example, have great
>memories. As another, elephants have great memories and deep emotions.
>
>What caused man, above all the other animals, to evolve past the
>hunter-gatherer stage?
Cultural memory.
>What possible purpose for survival of the species
>could account for a need to do so?
None.
>The great apes are remarkably humanlike,
>and very close to our DNA equals. They are also self-aware. They are capable
>of complex language, enjoyment and creation of art, compassion,
>selflessness, tool usage. They, like us, live in advanced social groups and
>form intense emotional bonds. Yet, despite all of that, they have never
>found it necessary to evolve as we have in order to survive.
Modern human society is a cultural change, not a biological one.
>There is no evolutionarily adaptive reason man should have developed the
>nuances of personality he displays that force him to reach out
>philosophically. The limbic system is not unique to man, and its functions,
>complicated though they are, have no reason to culminate in any sort of
>metaphysical development. There is certainly no physiological reason man
>should have ever even conceived of much less reached out to God.
Humans are story-tellers. Why not tell stories about some extremely
powerful, imagined being.
>>>Without any one of those
>>>elements, a man is not complete and can't live.
>>
>> How would anyone know if a spirit went missing?
>
>Have you ever seen a dead person, doctor?
I'm not a doctor, but I have seen dead people. Spirit isn't a special
part of humans before or after.
>>>The spirit guides the mind and the mind controls the actions of the body.
>>>We
>>>communicate with each other mind to mind and spirit to spirit by having
>>>our
>>>minds send commands to our bodies. Though we see the body articulating, we
>>>speak to another person's mind and spirit, the body is just the tool we
>>>use
>>>to accomplish that communication.
>>
>> It sounds as if you are merely reifying abstractions of actions of
>> people.
>
>So you recognize the obvious. That's a start. :)
>
>>>Of the three elements that make us up, in a way the body is the least, since
>>>it's whole purpose is merely to carry out the will of the mind and spirit.
>>>Yet, if you have seen the body, you have seen the mind and spirit.
>>
>> Does this mean something?
>
>It's rather elementary and self-explanatory.
I understand what the claim is, but not why it is made. There is no
evidence for a separate mind or spirit.
>>>God tried for a very long time to teach man, but He was imposing and
>>>seemed
>>>so "inhuman". He gave man the Law, He guided man through the prophets, He
>>>forgave, He punished. But He was always so intimidating... and seemed so
>>>far
>>>removed from anything man could really relate to. It broke His heart when
>>>Israel insisted on having an earthly king to rule over them rather than
>>>Him.
>>
>> This is the God that supposedly murdered everyone on earth except for
>> eight people?
>
>It is man who considers death a finality, not God. Why are you so positive
>that when the body dies the person no longer exists? There is no evidence of
>that, and not for lack of trying to find it either. In order to make your
>case, you must prove a negative. You can only prove the body is lifeless.
>Past that point you must journey into the metaphysical.
There is no evidence that the Invisible Pink Unicorn doesn't exist or
that the Flying Spaghetti Monster won't tough Her noodly appendage to
you, either. Just because someone makes up a story, that's no reason to
demand that others disprove it.
>And there is where the Bible tells us what happened to the souls of all
>those who died in the days of Noah [1 Pet 3:18-20].
That is a claim.
>>>He got the message across that man should fear Him, but the main message
>>>He
>>>wanted to impart most of all got lost in all that fear. What message? That
>>>all He wants is our love. That He loves us and wants us to love Him.
>>
>> You don't have a nice god. Why don't you invent a better one?
>
>He's not just my God, He's yours too, whether you like or not.
I don't like or dislike. There is no evidence that any gods exist, not
even the one you believe in.
>>>So, most men couldn't relate man to God, but man could relate man to man.
>>>Therefore, God became a man, to teach eye to eye and heart to heart. He
>>>had
>>>given the Law to show man how much he needed God, that man couldn't do it
>>>on
>>>his own. But that didn't work, and the punishment for not following the
>>>Law
>>>is death. Therefore, in His mercy, He took on Himself the punishment for
>>>the
>>>sins of all mankind, to show once and for all that it was never the
>>>punishment of man He wanted, it was always and only man's love.
>>>
>>>Jesus is Lord - Pax
>>
>> Your god is not nice, but he is also ill.
>
>Only because you choose to anthropomorphize Him. Though He took on a human
>body for our sake, He was never human.
I'm not anthropomorphizing at all. I'm pointing out the problems of your
teachings.
>Jesus is Lord - Pax
>
Or not.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> >> "Mark T" <moi@09375963546864676755877579565567424> wrote in message
> >> news:4542ae78$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> >> > --
> >> > Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
> >>
> >> Why?
> >
> > Without the counsel of the Holy Spirit, Mark's interpretation of
> > Scripture will remain meaningless.
>
> So will yours
Without the LORD, your opinion is meaningless (Ecclesiastes).
You remain vanquished:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts
Your consolation prize is eternal life if you choose to surrender to
HIM:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/fcb058da12bb3f3d?
May GOD in HIS infinite grace and mercy keep your heart beating to give
you time to understand and act on this, dear neighbor Denis whom I love
unconditionally.
Prayerfully in Christ's amazing love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung
Cardiologist, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit
As for knowing who are the very elect, these you will know by the
unconditional love they have for everyone including their enemies
(Matthew 5:44-45, 1 Corinthians 13:3, James 2:14-17).
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/f4dad7fe68478acf?
, for since we have no way to determine that you are being
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Holy Spirit in everything we say, do, and write so that HIS will be
done and not our will.
Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for what HE leads us
to do.
May GOD continue to heal our hearts with HIS living water, dear sister
Sherri whom I love unconditionally.
Prayerfully in Christ's amazing love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung
Cardiologist, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit
As for knowing who are the very elect, these you will know by the
unconditional love they have for everyone including their enemies
(Matthew 5:44-45, 1 Corinthians 13:3, James 2:14-17).
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/f4dad7fe68478acf?
Big Dave
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lo...@thetruth.com> wrote in message
news:1162070130....@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> Denis Loubet wrote:
>> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> > Pax wrote:
>> >> "Mark T" <moi@09375963546864676755877579565567424> wrote in message
>> >> news:4542ae78$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>> >> > --
>> >> > Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
>> >>
>> >> Why?
>> >
>> > Without the counsel of the Holy Spirit, Mark's interpretation of
>> > Scripture will remain meaningless.
>>
>> So will yours
>
> Without the LORD, your opinion is meaningless (Ecclesiastes).
>
> You remain vanquished:
>
> http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts
>
> Your consolation prize is eternal life if you choose to surrender to
> HIM:
>
<snip>
A consolation prize is a prize meant to make a loser feel better.
Do you mean that doing as you do is the path to a consolation prize?
Barry OGrady
The sad part about Mark is that he wants to be a Christian for the warm fuzzies it gives
but he can't accept Christianity because he is too intelligent.
You are sad because mark is very vocal about his opposition to Christianity.
>Jesus is Lord - Pax
How long has Lord Pax been Jesus?
Pax is Lord Jesus
Barry
=====
Home page
http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og
Barry OGrady
>You both impress me and humble me. May your gentleness infuse us all.
That is a bad sign. Not only does Pax top post but he approves of a known Usnet
loon and sicko.
>Jesus is Lord - Pax
How long have you been Jesus?
Barry
Pax
"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
news:o8f7k21h96fp991ue...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 19:41:50 GMT, in alt.atheism
> "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
> <2oO0h.17411$TV3....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>:
>>
>>"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
>>news:d067k2l1rus0g1kqg...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 17:42:55 GMT, in alt.atheism
>>> "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
>>> <zEM0h.16859$GR...@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Every man is one in three: body, mind and spirit.
>>>
>>> What evidence do you have to support that partition? The mind appears to
>>> be nothing more than self-awareness of brain activities and spirit
>>> doesn't have any evidence at all.
>>
>>Can you explain how self-awareness came about? The body is controlled by
>
> electrochemical activities and other biochemical controls that are
> outside the neuralogical system.
It's rather hard to divide the chemical from the electrical, since dopamine
and such are required to pass on the signals, and electrical impulses
initiate chemical production, which then initiate more electrical impulses
in different areas.
>>electrical impulses through the nervous system to and from the brain and
>>dispersed throughout the neural net. There is no real reason for
>>self-awareness on a level man displays, since the messages from our five
>
> Self-awareness is not limited to humans.
As I stated elsewhere.
>>senses should be sufficient for our survival. Memory and emotions are a
>>necessary adaptation, since they increase our chances of survival, but
>>memory and emotions sans personal awareness are only "bits" of information
>>to guide us to those things which are beneficial to our survival and away
>>from those things which are not. Jumping spiders, as an example, have
>>great
>>memories. As another, elephants have great memories and deep emotions.
>>
>>What caused man, above all the other animals, to evolve past the
>>hunter-gatherer stage?
>
> Cultural memory.
Prove it.
>>What possible purpose for survival of the species
>>could account for a need to do so?
>
> None.
Exactly.
>>The great apes are remarkably humanlike,
>>and very close to our DNA equals. They are also self-aware. They are
>>capable
>>of complex language, enjoyment and creation of art, compassion,
>>selflessness, tool usage. They, like us, live in advanced social groups
>>and
>>form intense emotional bonds. Yet, despite all of that, they have never
>>found it necessary to evolve as we have in order to survive.
>
> Modern human society is a cultural change, not a biological one.
Of course it's biological, since we are. You side-stepped.
>>There is no evolutionarily adaptive reason man should have developed the
>>nuances of personality he displays that force him to reach out
>>philosophically. The limbic system is not unique to man, and its
>>functions,
>>complicated though they are, have no reason to culminate in any sort of
>>metaphysical development. There is certainly no physiological reason man
>>should have ever even conceived of much less reached out to God.
>
> Humans are story-tellers.
Why?
> Why not tell stories about some extremely powerful, imagined being.
Why envision one in the first place? What would initiate such a concept?
Point to an example somewhere to base such a fantasy on. Below you mention
pink unicorns and flying spaghetti monsters, both of those have something
from everyday life to draw on to begin the fantasy. What thing from everyday
life was used to come up with the concept of God?
Why is there in human nature the need for a God? All cultures have their
version(s). Why? Why is it built into man to seek out and worship a higher
being? How does it improve the chances of survival of the species?
Pragmatically, what possible benefits are there in belief in God, if
survival of the species is the only purpose of man?
Man seeks God because God built it into us to seek Him.
>>>>Without any one of those
>>>>elements, a man is not complete and can't live.
>>>
>>> How would anyone know if a spirit went missing?
>>
>>Have you ever seen a dead person, doctor?
>
> I'm not a doctor, but I have seen dead people. Spirit isn't a special
> part of humans before or after.
Your proof...?
>>>>The spirit guides the mind and the mind controls the actions of the
>>>>body.
>>>>We
>>>>communicate with each other mind to mind and spirit to spirit by having
>>>>our
>>>>minds send commands to our bodies. Though we see the body articulating,
>>>>we
>>>>speak to another person's mind and spirit, the body is just the tool we
>>>>use
>>>>to accomplish that communication.
>>>
>>> It sounds as if you are merely reifying abstractions of actions of
>>> people.
>>
>>So you recognize the obvious. That's a start. :)
>>
>>>>Of the three elements that make us up, in a way the body is the least,
>>>>since
>>>>it's whole purpose is merely to carry out the will of the mind and
>>>>spirit.
>>>>Yet, if you have seen the body, you have seen the mind and spirit.
>>>
>>> Does this mean something?
>>
>>It's rather elementary and self-explanatory.
>
> I understand what the claim is, but not why it is made. There is no
> evidence for a separate mind or spirit.
There is more evidence pro than con. In Parkinson's, which is when the body
underproduces dopamine, the mind tries to send commands to the body, but
can't get its signals across the synapses. In severe cases, the lack of
dopamine is so extreme the person is almost totally unable to communicate or
even move. So, in essence, he becomes an isolated mind trapped in a
nonresponsive body. He is still a thinking reasoning human being, but he can
no longer articulate. However, what people see is the nonresponsive body,
they are unable to receive communications from the actual person trapped
inside. Parkinsonism can be a hellish disease.
Freud crudely described a function similar to that of the spirit with his
concept of the superego.
>>>>God tried for a very long time to teach man, but He was imposing and
>>>>seemed
>>>>so "inhuman". He gave man the Law, He guided man through the prophets,
>>>>He
>>>>forgave, He punished. But He was always so intimidating... and seemed so
>>>>far
>>>>removed from anything man could really relate to. It broke His heart
>>>>when
>>>>Israel insisted on having an earthly king to rule over them rather than
>>>>Him.
>>>
>>> This is the God that supposedly murdered everyone on earth except for
>>> eight people?
>>
>>It is man who considers death a finality, not God. Why are you so positive
>>that when the body dies the person no longer exists? There is no evidence
>>of
>>that, and not for lack of trying to find it either. In order to make your
>>case, you must prove a negative. You can only prove the body is lifeless.
>>Past that point you must journey into the metaphysical.
>
> There is no evidence that the Invisible Pink Unicorn doesn't exist or
> that the Flying Spaghetti Monster won't tough Her noodly appendage to
> you, either. Just because someone makes up a story, that's no reason to
> demand that others disprove it.
uhhuh. Since you're arguing against, then you have chosen to do just that.
Otherwise you're just blowing hot air. I didn't initiate this conversation
with you, you chose to reply to me.
The facts are plain: Some believe in God, others don't. Either camp is a
religion of sorts. So far, your arguments in favor of your beliefs are
terribly lame. "Just because..." and "Because I said so," are replies even
small children stop accepting fairly quickly.
Going back to Freud, one thing that proves faith in God is a good thing is
how pleasingly it harmonizes and satisfies all three elements of
personality, which is quite a feat. God doesn't make us perfect, but He does
make us better able to function on a personal level as well as on a societal
one.
>>And there is where the Bible tells us what happened to the souls of all
>>those who died in the days of Noah [1 Pet 3:18-20].
>
> That is a claim.
Okay.
>>>>He got the message across that man should fear Him, but the main message
>>>>He
>>>>wanted to impart most of all got lost in all that fear. What message?
>>>>That
>>>>all He wants is our love. That He loves us and wants us to love Him.
>>>
>>> You don't have a nice god. Why don't you invent a better one?
>>
>>He's not just my God, He's yours too, whether you like or not.
>
> I don't like or dislike. There is no evidence that any gods exist, not
> even the one you believe in.
I'd have to go into armchair theoretical physics to argue my case further.
>>>>So, most men couldn't relate man to God, but man could relate man to
>>>>man.
>>>>Therefore, God became a man, to teach eye to eye and heart to heart. He
>>>>had
>>>>given the Law to show man how much he needed God, that man couldn't do
>>>>it
>>>>on
>>>>his own. But that didn't work, and the punishment for not following the
>>>>Law
>>>>is death. Therefore, in His mercy, He took on Himself the punishment for
>>>>the
>>>>sins of all mankind, to show once and for all that it was never the
>>>>punishment of man He wanted, it was always and only man's love.
>>>>
>>>>Jesus is Lord - Pax
>>>
>>> Your god is not nice, but he is also ill.
>>
>>Only because you choose to anthropomorphize Him. Though He took on a human
>>body for our sake, He was never human.
>
> I'm not anthropomorphizing at all. I'm pointing out the problems of your
> teachings.
Not really... at least not so far. All you've really done is express your
personal disbelief.
If you paint God with a human brush, you're trying to bring Him down to a
human level, and that can't be done. If I were to state the obvious: "The
ways of the universe are not our ways," could you comprehend that? If you
can accept that, then suspend your disbelief for a minute and try to imagine
One Who made the universe, higher even than anything we know... unknowable
by any sort of human standards. Can anyone limit the universe? No. Neither
can anyone limit God.
Many modern physicists have come to the conclusion there is "Intelligent
Design" behind the universe, because the probabilities are so astronomical
against creation by accident as to be completely out of the realm of
possibility. Even Hawking came out in favor of Intelligent Design a few
years ago, something I never thought would happen.
As a final exercise, ponder these simple questions:
If the universe is expanding, what is it expanding into, since spacetime is
only on the inside, not the outside? As far as anyone knows there's
*nothing* on the outside. Have you ever considered what *nothing* is? It's
the ultimate brick wall, because there is absolutely nothing there, no
dimensional space to expand into. Consider a point in front of you no bigger
than a pin's tip. That point is bigger than nothing. Yet, many physicists
say our entire universe is not only contained in nothing it's expanding into
nothing. This in spite of the fact nothing can't hold anything, much less
the universe.
Of course the Clashing Branes Theory could be the answer to that. Except for
the fact one must wonder what the branes are contained within that allows
them to clash in the first place. (There's that *nothing* again.) Besides
that, whatever caused them to begin clashing in the first place?
>>Jesus is Lord - Pax
>>
> Or not.
That's for each of us to decide.
Pax
> Like you, just a servant who appreciates the wonderful guidance of the
> Holy Spirit in everything we say, do, and write so that HIS will be
> done and not our will.
>
> Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for what HE leads us
> to do.
>
> May GOD continue to heal our hearts with HIS living water, dear sister
> Sherri whom I love unconditionally.
>
> Prayerfully in Christ's amazing love,
>
> Andrew <><
> --
> Andrew B. Chung
> Cardiologist, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
> http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit
>
> As for knowing who are the very elect, these you will know by the
> unconditional love they have for everyone including their enemies
> (Matthew 5:44-45, 1 Corinthians 13:3, James 2:14-17).
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/f4dad7fe68478acf?
Amen, Andrew. May your words always be true, and may God always bless you.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 16:46:41 GMT, "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >You both impress me and humble me. May your gentleness infuse us all.
>
> That is a bad sign. Not only does Pax top post but he approves of a known Usnet
> loon and sicko.
Name-calling simply shows that you are lost:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/eb42672896d36d4b?
This victory belongs to GOD:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/175b5dc947a0781f?
Laus Deo !
Your consolation prize is eternal life if you choose to surrender to
HIM:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/fcb058da12bb3f3d?
May GOD in HIS infinite grace and mercy keep your heart beating to give
you time to understand and act on this, dear neighbor Barry whom I love
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> > Denis Loubet wrote:
> >> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> >> > Pax wrote:
> >> >> "Mark T" <moi@09375963546864676755877579565567424> wrote in message
> >> >> news:4542ae78$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
> >> >>
> >> >> Why?
> >> >
> >> > Without the counsel of the Holy Spirit, Mark's interpretation of
> >> > Scripture will remain meaningless.
> >>
> >> So will yours
> >
> > Without the LORD, your opinion is meaningless (Ecclesiastes).
> >
> > You remain vanquished:
> >
> > http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts
> >
> > Your consolation prize is eternal life if you choose to surrender to
> > HIM:
>
>
> A consolation prize is a prize meant to make a loser feel better.
Here it would serve to indicate that you know you are lost:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/eb42672896d36d4b?
> Do you mean that doing as you do is the path to a consolation prize?
No.
This in the way to understanding that we were lost without HIM:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/a4dee2b3057fe9ec?
This victory belongs to GOD:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/175b5dc947a0781f?
Laus Deo !
Your consolation prize is indeed eternal life if you choose to
surrender to HIM:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/fcb058da12bb3f3d?
May GOD in HIS infinite mercy and grace keep your heart beating to give
you time to understand and act on this, dear neighbor David whom I love
Kadaitcha Man
news:1162046...@dscnews2.dcccd.edu...
> "Mark T" <constipated...@sci.physics.wizened.transient> wrote in
> news:ehvlqk$4qo$1...@blackhelicopter.databasix.com:
>
>>> Complaints-To: ab...@databasix.com
>
>> OH! FUCK!!!!@@@!!! DOOOMED!!! I AM DOOMED!!!!
>
> It's worse than that, you're dead Jim.
There's life there but not as we know it.
Ya cannot change the laws of Fissicks!
I can say naughty words like poo and bum.
Look at me!!!
Poo!
Bum!
Hee-hee!
Poo!
Bum!
Hee-hee!
Poo!
Bum!
Hee-hee!
Kadaitcha Man
Kadaitcha Man
Free Lunch
"Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
<zNR0h.17477$TV3....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>:
What alternative is there?
>>>What possible purpose for survival of the species
>>>could account for a need to do so?
>>
>> None.
>
>Exactly.
>
>>>The great apes are remarkably humanlike,
>>>and very close to our DNA equals. They are also self-aware. They are
>>>capable
>>>of complex language, enjoyment and creation of art, compassion,
>>>selflessness, tool usage. They, like us, live in advanced social groups
>>>and
>>>form intense emotional bonds. Yet, despite all of that, they have never
>>>found it necessary to evolve as we have in order to survive.
>>
>> Modern human society is a cultural change, not a biological one.
>
>Of course it's biological, since we are. You side-stepped.
Why do you think that society is biological? We aren't ants or bees.
>>>There is no evolutionarily adaptive reason man should have developed the
>>>nuances of personality he displays that force him to reach out
>>>philosophically. The limbic system is not unique to man, and its
>>>functions,
>>>complicated though they are, have no reason to culminate in any sort of
>>>metaphysical development. There is certainly no physiological reason man
>>>should have ever even conceived of much less reached out to God.
>>
>> Humans are story-tellers.
>
>Why?
I don't know. It seems likely that it has something to do with our
ability to talk.
>> Why not tell stories about some extremely powerful, imagined being.
>
>Why envision one in the first place? What would initiate such a concept?
I guess you were never a very young child.
>Point to an example somewhere to base such a fantasy on. Below you mention
>pink unicorns and flying spaghetti monsters, both of those have something
>from everyday life to draw on to begin the fantasy. What thing from everyday
>life was used to come up with the concept of God?
Initially, the gods were the sun and the moon, the seasons, the hearth,
the spirits of those who had lived before, the god of the hunt, of the
harvest, and of other very obvious manifestations of nature.
>Why is there in human nature the need for a God? All cultures have their
>version(s). Why? Why is it built into man to seek out and worship a higher
>being? How does it improve the chances of survival of the species?
>Pragmatically, what possible benefits are there in belief in God, if
>survival of the species is the only purpose of man?
>
>Man seeks God because God built it into us to seek Him.
That hypothesis has the problem that there is no evidence for any gods.
>>>>>Without any one of those
>>>>>elements, a man is not complete and can't live.
>>>>
>>>> How would anyone know if a spirit went missing?
>>>
>>>Have you ever seen a dead person, doctor?
>>
>> I'm not a doctor, but I have seen dead people. Spirit isn't a special
>> part of humans before or after.
>
>Your proof...?
No one has offered any evidence to show that spirit exists as a separate
part.
Yes it is hellish, but the conservatives don't care. They mock people
for having it.
The brain doesn't use chemicals the same way the rest of the body does.
>Freud crudely described a function similar to that of the spirit with his
>concept of the superego.
Not really.
The lack of a religion is not a religion. That is a fundamental error
that anyone who has taken the simplest logic class would not make.
>So far, your arguments in favor of your beliefs are
>terribly lame. "Just because..." and "Because I said so," are replies even
>small children stop accepting fairly quickly.
I never made those arguments though.
>Going back to Freud, one thing that proves faith in God is a good thing is
>how pleasingly it harmonizes and satisfies all three elements of
>personality, which is quite a feat. God doesn't make us perfect, but He does
>make us better able to function on a personal level as well as on a societal
>one.
It's not at all clear how you came to that conclusion.
Sensible scepticism as a place to start has worked quite well over time.
>If you paint God with a human brush, you're trying to bring Him down to a
>human level, and that can't be done. If I were to state the obvious: "The
>ways of the universe are not our ways," could you comprehend that? If you
>can accept that, then suspend your disbelief for a minute and try to imagine
>One Who made the universe, higher even than anything we know... unknowable
>by any sort of human standards. Can anyone limit the universe? No. Neither
>can anyone limit God.
Why should I accept any claims about any gods. All of the claims are
made by people.
>Many modern physicists have come to the conclusion there is "Intelligent
>Design" behind the universe, because the probabilities are so astronomical
>against creation by accident as to be completely out of the realm of
>possibility. Even Hawking came out in favor of Intelligent Design a few
>years ago, something I never thought would happen.
Please name such physicists.
>As a final exercise, ponder these simple questions:
>
>If the universe is expanding, what is it expanding into, since spacetime is
>only on the inside, not the outside? As far as anyone knows there's
>*nothing* on the outside. Have you ever considered what *nothing* is? It's
>the ultimate brick wall, because there is absolutely nothing there, no
>dimensional space to expand into. Consider a point in front of you no bigger
>than a pin's tip. That point is bigger than nothing. Yet, many physicists
>say our entire universe is not only contained in nothing it's expanding into
>nothing. This in spite of the fact nothing can't hold anything, much less
>the universe.
Why would you claim that the universe is expanding into something?
>Of course the Clashing Branes Theory could be the answer to that. Except for
>the fact one must wonder what the branes are contained within that allows
>them to clash in the first place. (There's that *nothing* again.) Besides
>that, whatever caused them to begin clashing in the first place?
>
>>>Jesus is Lord - Pax
>>>
>> Or not.
>
>That's for each of us to decide.
Our opinions about it don't change reality.
Free Lunch
"Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
<_2S0h.17479$TV3....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>:
some day. Don't hold your breath. He is committed to lying.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew wrote:
> > Like you, just a servant who appreciates the wonderful guidance of the
> > Holy Spirit in everything we say, do, and write so that HIS will be
> > done and not our will.
> >
> > Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for what HE leads us
> > to do.
> >
> > May GOD continue to heal our hearts with HIS living water, dear sister
> > Sherri whom I love unconditionally.
>
It will forever be my choice to remain at the side of the truth, Who is
LORD Jesus Christ, Whom I love with all my heart, soul, mind, and
strength.
> , and may God always bless you.
HIS will be done and not our wills.
>
> Jesus is Lord
"Jesus is KING of kings and LORD of lords." -- Holy Spirit
Amen !
Laus Deo ! !
Marana tha ! ! ! ! ! ! !
May GOD continue to heal our hearts with HIS living water, dear sister
Sherri whom I love unconditionally.
Prayerfully in Christ's amazing love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung
Cardiologist, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit
As for knowing who are the very elect, these you will know by the
unconditional love they have for everyone including their enemies
(Matthew 5:44-45, 1 Corinthians 13:3, James 2:14-17).
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/f4dad7fe68478acf?
p.s. A few neighbors who have been added to my prayer list... please
consider adding them to yours:
Mark T
> Scriptures are in fact accurate and useful.
Proverbs 26:4 "Answer not a fool according to his folly."
Proverbs 26:5 "Answer a fool according to his folly."
I've decided to use Proverbs 26:5
> "For everyone that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh
> to the light, lest his deeds be reproved." John 3:20
Not written by John the apostle who was dead at the time.
--
"Fundamentalism ... is characterised by and thrives on protective
stupidity." - Peter Cameron
Mark T
> One day he will stand in God's eye
How many eyes does God have?
Does God also have a nose and mouth and ears?
> His hate has no power over those who belong to God.
'As rare as a Fundamentalist who loves her enemy.
#################################################
... quoting from James Barr's book "Fundamentalism" on the three
distinguishing features of the Fundamentalist '... an assurance that those
who do not share their religious viewpoint are not really true Christians at
all.' - Peter Cameron "Heretic" (Doubleday; Sydney: 1994) p. 178
#################################################
> Matthew 10:28
--
Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
De t'ings dat yo li'ble to read in de Bible - It ain't necessarily so.
- Porgy and Bess (George Gershwin)
"We're Christians! We're not supposed to think!" Fanny Wype (Nudist Colony
Of The Dead)
"All things are probable. Try to believe." - Mark 17:1
"Really! Try to believe even if it's bloody stupid and irrational." - Mark
17:2
"Why? Because I said so, that's why! Don't ask questions. Just
believe." - Mark 17:3
Mark T
>>Jesus is Lord - Pax
>
> How long have you been Jesus?
Lord Pax is Jesus.
Jesus is Lord Pax.
Faster than a speeding bullet. More powerful than a locomotive. Able to leap
tall buildings in a single bound. Look! Up in the sky. It's a bird. It's a
plane. It's Lord Pax! Yes, it's Lord Pax - strange visitor from another
newsgroup who came to ARC with powers and abilities far beyond those of
mortal women. Lord Pax - who can change the course of mighty rivers, bend
steel with her bare hands, and who disguised as the
human Sherri, mild-mannered poster in ARC , fights a neverending battle for
Trooth, "Just us", and the Trew Kristyun Fundamentalist way.
Hail Lord Pax!
Mark T
>>>> Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
>>> Why?
>> Because God did not write the Bible - men did! (Sexism intended)
>> God does not make mistakes but the bible contains many mistakes.
>> Learn about how the Bible was put together ... and edited ....
>
> You make me so sad.
Aw!
Visit Pastor Dale K. Whangke
Wyrst Pentacostal Church
http://mypage.cooeey.com/DaleKWhangke
... and have a laugh.
Jude Alexander
"Mark T" <moi@985789589745753432476988767465908974> wrote in message
news:4543f43c$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> "terry" wroteth:
>
>> Scriptures are in fact accurate and useful.
>
> Proverbs 26:4 "Answer not a fool according to his folly."
>
> Proverbs 26:5 "Answer a fool according to his folly."
>
> I've decided to use Proverbs 26:5
I'm sure that was a difficult decision... :)
Mark T
>> "I [Jesus] am ascending to MY FATHER AND YOUR FATHER, MY GOD AND >>YOUR
>> GOD" - John 20:17
>> Does God have a God?????
>> ################################################################
>> Then God spoke all these words. He said: 'I am Yahweh your God who
>> brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You
>> shall have NO GODS (INCLUDING JESUS) EXCEPT ME.' - Exodus 20: 1-2
>> ################################################################
>> Jesus said that Yahweh is spirit. "God is spirit, and those who worship
>> Him must worship him in spirit and truth" John 4: 24
>> Is Jesus of Nazareth (a human) really Yahweh (spirit) who brought the
>> tribe of Israel out of Egypt?????
>> Prove it.
>
> Every man is one in three: body, mind and spirit.
What uni course in medicine or psychology taught you that?????
> The spirit guides the mind and the mind controls the actions of the body.
Spirit IS mind. Mind IS spirit.
There are only two type of things that make up a human the visible (body /
brain) and the invisible (spirit / mind)
That is why philosophy over hundreds of years has looked at the Spirit /
Body problem (how spirit / mind activates body ... or the Mind / Body
problem)
Study philosophy .... just like St Paul ... I have.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SPIRIT
...
2.. (n.) Life, or living substance, considered independently of corporeal
existence; an intelligence conceived of apart from any physical organization
or embodiment; vital essence, force, or energy, as distinct from matter.
3.. (n.) Temper or disposition of mind; mental condition or disposition;
intellectual or moral state; -- often in the plural; as, to be cheerful, or
in good spirits; to be downhearted, or in bad spirits.
...
7.. (n.) The intelligent, immaterial and immortal part of man; the soul,
in distinction from the body in which it resides; the agent or subject of
vital and spiritual functions, whether spiritual or material.
8.. (n.) Specifically, a disembodied soul; the human soul after it has
left the body.
...
11.. (n.) Any supernatural being, good or bad; an apparition; a specter; a
ghost; also, sometimes, a sprite,; a fairy; an elf.
...
from http://en.thinkexist.com/dictionary/meaning/Spirit/
--
Visit my Blog (including my artwork)
http://www.whitepage.com.au/strooth/
Visit my Band Page (free mp3 downloads)
http://www.soundclick.com/marktindall
Mark T
>>Every man is one in three: body, mind and spirit.
>
> What evidence do you have to support that partition?
Nil!
> The mind appears to be nothing more than self-awareness of brain
> activities and spirit
> doesn't have any evidence at all.
Mind and spirit are the same.
>>Without any one of those
>>elements, a man is not complete and can't live.
>
> How would anyone know if a spirit went missing?
You wouldn't as mind / spirit includes consciousness.
>>Of the three elements that make us up, in a way the body is the least,
>>since
>>it's whole purpose is merely to carry out the will of the mind and spirit.
>>Yet, if you have seen the body, you have seen the mind and spirit.
>
> Does this mean something?
Nope.
> This is the God that supposedly murdered everyone on earth except for
> eight people?
... only according to the Bible.
Value truth over the bible.
Mark T
>>> Scriptures are in fact accurate and useful.
>>
>> Proverbs 26:4 "Answer not a fool according to his folly."
>>
>> Proverbs 26:5 "Answer a fool according to his folly."
>>
>> I've decided to use Proverbs 26:5
>
> I'm sure that was a difficult decision... :)
Prayer and fasting for 40 days and nights ... and putting out a fleece
...which was difficult because I don't own a sheep ... and had to go out and
steal one ... and shear it ... with scissors ... and then the Lord spoke to
me in a voice out of the TV saying "Donate to this ministry and receive a
free set of steak knives!" ... but I ignored it .... then I read the Bible
... but as you can see above the Bible gave a conflicting answer on whether
I should answer or not ... and then I asked my Pasta ... but ate it before I
could get an answer .... then ... A MIRACLE! ... much later the Pasta
reappeared as something else in my toilet bowl ... and then I had my answer!
;-)
Praise Lord Pax!
A MIRACLE!!!!
--
Mark T
> There is no evolution
Oh no! A cretinist ... er ... creatioinist!
> Though He took on a human body for our sake, He was never human.
Not what the human Jesus of Nazareth said for he repeatedly called himself
the "Son of Man" emphasising his humanity.
Barry OGrady
>Complaints-To: ab...@databasix.com
Is that your ISP?
>Have nice day!
Are you leaving?
Mark T
> If you paint God with a human brush, you're trying to bring Him down to a
> human level, and that can't be done.
Though you have attempted to do so by describing the infinoite One God
Yahweh as being the same as the finite human Jesus of Nazareth.
JESUS SAID ..........
"I [Jesus] am ascending to MY FATHER AND YOUR FATHER, MY GOD AND YOUR GOD" -
John 20:17
Does God have a God?????
################################################################
Then God spoke all these words. He said: 'I am Yahweh your God who brought
you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall have NO
GODS (INCLUDING JESUS) EXCEPT ME.' - Exodus 20: 1-2
################################################################
> Many modern physicists have come to the conclusion there is "Intelligent
> Design" behind the universe
... a creatioinist fallback ... totally absurd.
> Even Hawking came out in favor of Intelligent Design a few years ago
Nope! Where did you read that rubbish from? Ex Nihilo???
...and as for the creationism ..............
NOAH'S ARK - FACTS
*******************************
.. the generally accepted size of the ark is 155 metres long, 25 metres wide
and 15 metres high and it was to contain three decks, a side-opening door
pair and a one-cubit square window at the top. ..
. It is of particular interest to speculate how Noah would have housed and
fed the 10 000 known species of termites on his wooden ark. .
. Although Noah had three sons who may have willingly helped him with the
building chores ..These four were required to acquire boat-building skills,
acquire tools, negotiate the rights or acquire a forest in an arid area,
harvest the 'gopher wood' forests, transport monstrous logs from the forest
to the boat-building site, season the timber over a number of years such
that it would not rot or split, cut the timber, build docks, scaffolds arid
workshops, build a vessel of very large heavy planks plus a maze of cages of
variable size, shape and design, collect tonnes of pitch and caulk the boat,
and finally, gather provisions for the millions of known and unknown
organisms who had cruise tickets. . Recently I asked Halvorsens, a Sydney
boat-builder, to provide me with an estimate of the building time for a
work force of four for a boat of this size. . if Noah arid his four willing
labouring sons were to attempt such a task some 4000 years ago, then they
would still be building the vessel! The building task would be slightly
compounded by the fact that some of the earlier craftsmanship would have
rotted away. ..
.. The total amount of water carried for the animals would have sunk the
ark, the total weight of provisions would have sunk the ark, the total
weight of vertebrates would have sunk the ark many times, the amount of
excreta generated would have sunk the ark every five days and the aquarium
for a pair of whales genus, would have sunk the ark many times.
Furthermore, if a couple of the large animals had the urge to procreate, the
ark would become terribly unstable. Imagine if the two 80-tonne Ultrasaurus
dinosaurs converted the snaking stinking sinking overcrowded freighter into
a love boat. The ark would have capsized! .
. On the assumption that the animals came on two by two (and not seven
pairs), each animal would have some 1150 cubic centimetres (i.e. the volume
of a milk carton) of shipboard space for living the 371 days at sea. ..
. Noah and his family would have shared this tiny ark with 30 million pairs
of known and extinct organisms. . The Bible tells us that all organisms were
loaded in a 24-hour day (Genesis 77:11-15) thereby requiring 460 organisms
per second to enter the ark over this period. .
. Noah .had to decide which humans were going to carry the diseases which
only occur in humans. Humans are the only host for numerous diseases
including measles, pueumococcal pneumonia, typhus, typhoid fever, smallpox,
leprosy, poliomyelitis, five types of syphilis and gonorrhoea, AIDS,
hepatitis, shingles, four types of rnalarial parasites, two types of
tapeworm, an intestinal worm, hookworm, three agents of filariasis, two
species of Schistosoma, pinworm, three types of lice, various types of
fever (for example, Japanese river fever), kuru, just to mention a few. The
disease kuru only occurs in the highlands of Papua New Guinea. . Poor Noah.
Which family member did he instruct to go and pick the brains of a kuru
sufferer so that the natives of the highlands of Papua New Guinea can enjoy
the disease today? Which one of his family did Noah instruct to seduce a
syphilitic in order to preserve the disease for the benefit and
transmission by post-flood hominids? How did Noah stop every, one of his
family from catching highly infectious diseases such as typhoid fever,
cholera, yellow fever and malaria? ....
. The magnitude of the feeding task is astronomical. If the crew of four
males worked 24 hours a day for the 371 days at sea, then each animal would
have received a total of six seconds of attention for the whole year. In the
six seconds, the animals would have to be fed and watered at least 3 7/1
times and presumably the stalls had to be cleaned in order to avoid an
outbreak of disease. Such animal care activities by an incredibly diseased
crew who would undertake these shipboard duties in darkness below decks on a
wildly lurching, grossly overcrowded, unstable leaking ark defies credulity.
. Assuming that the daily feeding, watering and excercising of 30 million
pairs of organisms was carried out with diligent success, the less pleasant
duty of the disposal of mountainous volumes of urine and excreta was a daily
chore for the crew. . The overworked crew would have to bucket all the waste
fluids and solids from below decks and dispose of it overboard. It is a
little difficult to calculate the volume of excreta generated by extinct
animals, however even the most basic calculations show that thousands of
tonnes of urine and excreta were generated on a daily basis by those
unwilling passengers. We must remember, that the ark had a ' ventilation
port of one cubit square so the atmosphere below decks was' obviously
indescribably fetid. . When one looks at moderately frequent spontaneous
combustion of methane in well-ventilated coal mines, one wonders how Noah
avoided the spontaneous combustion of the monstrous volumes of a
methane-oxygen mix below decks. Such an explosion would totally fragment the
unstable leaking overcrowded ark if the organisms on the ark had not already
died from suffocation, respiratory disease and outbreaks of every
conceivable pathogen. ..
*******************
From Ian Plimer's "Telling Lies For God: Reason vs Creationism" (Random
House; Sydney:1994) pp 104 -134
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> "terry" wroteth:
>
> > Scriptures are in fact accurate and useful.
>
> Proverbs 26:4 "Answer not a fool according to his folly."
This is incomplete.
Here's the complete proverb:
"Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you will be like him
yourself."
> Proverbs 26:5 "Answer a fool according to his folly."
This is also incomplete.
Here's the complete proverb:
"Answer a fool according to his folly, or he will be wise in his own
eyes."
> I've decided to use Proverbs 26:5
Yes, it remains GOD's infinite will that you retain HIS generous gift
of free will given to all souls including those belonging to fig trees
(Mark 11:12-14, 20):
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/ddb25eb1d5cf468a?
Those who chose to abide by Proverbs 26:5 are those who would chose to
follow man-made doctrines, which includes your belief that the Holy
Bible is errant and atheism's belief that there is no GOD, and thus end
up arguing incessantly about such flawed contrivances. As such groups
of people grow in number, they grow seemingly wise in each others eyes
(see Randy Pulpitfire and David Waffle as two especially notable
examples) instead of just their own eyes and become like each other as
predicted by Proverbs 26:4.
May thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for this
understanding of Proverbs 26:4-5 via the wonderful counsel of the Holy
Spirit.
Laus Deo ! ! !
This victory belongs to GOD:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/175b5dc947a0781f?
Your consolation prize is eternal life if you choose to surrender to
HIM:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/fcb058da12bb3f3d?
May GOD in HIS infinite grace and mercy keep your heart beating to give
you extra time to understand and act on this, dear neighbor Mark whom I
Mark T
>>Point to an example somewhere to base such a fantasy on. Below you mention
>>pink unicorns and flying spaghetti monsters, both of those have something
>>from everyday life to draw on to begin the fantasy. What thing from
>>everyday
>>life was used to come up with the concept of God?
>
> Initially, the gods were the sun and the moon, the seasons, the hearth,
> the spirits of those who had lived before, the god of the hunt, of the
> harvest, and of other very obvious manifestations of nature.
Yep! Sherri has obviously never read Joseph Campbell's "The Masks of God"
... nor understood how Judaism (then Christianity) came into being. One
cannopt read one's contemporary views into ancient manusacripts.
--
Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
De t'ings dat yo li'ble to read in de Bible - It ain't necessarily so.
- Porgy and Bess (George Gershwin)
"We're Christians! We're not supposed to think!" Fanny Wype (Nudist Colony
Mark T
> I suppose that Andrew may accidentally tell us something that is true some
> day.
He may be very good at cardiology ... but obviously not so good in theology.
--
Fundamentalism - the anus of the body of Christ.
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
"Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > Is Jesus of Nazareth (a human) really Yahweh (spirit) who brought the
> > tribe of Israel out of Egypt?????
> >
> > Prove it.
>
> Every man is one in three: body, mind and spirit. Without any one of those
> elements, a man is not complete and can't live.
theres actually a simpler way to deal with this
just say
i dont know
the gospel really doesnt talk about the nature of jesus
or what exactly his relation to god is
it does present him as the guide but not the destination
everything else like the nicean creed came afterwards
as the church was trying to establish itself as a temporal power
one of the basis of its power became the churchs insistence
that its priests were infallible
which also meant the priests had to have all the answers
hence we are now burden with this immense superstructure of dogma
built on the sandy shores of politics
simply because priests couldnt lord over the ignorant if the priests saud
i dont know
meow arf meow - they are performing horrible experiments in space
major grubert is watching you - beware the bakalite
there can only be one or two - the airtight garage has you neo
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> >> What evidence do you have to support that partition? The mind appears to
> >> be nothing more than self-awareness of brain activities and spirit
> >> doesn't have any evidence at all.
> >
> >Can you explain how self-awareness came about? The body is controlled by
>
> electrochemical activities and other biochemical controls that are
> outside the neuralogical system.
the brain and all its activities are yet beyond explanation
so anybody pretending they have definitive answers to the questions
is resorting to their own dogma
Kurt Gavin
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lo...@thetruth.com> wrote in message
> "Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you will be like him
> yourself."
Yes, Andrew, that's why many of us answer your posts as we do - mockingly.
Hey, I got a book for you:
The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason (Paperback)
a.. Paperback: 224 pages
a.. Publisher: W. W. Norton; Reprint edition (October 10, 2005)
a.. Language: English
a.. ISBN: 0393327655
Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com
Sam Harris cranks out blunt, hard-hitting chapters to make his case for why
faith itself is the most dangerous element of modern life. And if the
devil's in the details, then you'll find Satan waiting at the back of the
book in the very substantial notes section where Harris saves his more
esoteric discussions to avoid sidetracking the urgency of his message.
Interestingly, Harris is not just focused on debunking religious faith,
though he makes his compelling arguments with verve and intellectual
clarity. The End of Faith is also a bit of a philosophical Swiss Army knife.
Once he has presented his arguments on why, in an age of Weapons of Mass
Destruction, belief is now a hazard of great proportions, he focuses on
proposing alternate approaches to the mysteries of life. Harris recognizes
the truth of the human condition, that we fear death, and we often crave
"something more" we cannot easily define, and which is not met by
accumulating more material possessions. But by attempting to provide the
cure for the ills it defines, the book bites off a bit more than it can
comfortably chew in its modest page count (however the rich Bibliography
provides more than enough background for an intrigued reader to follow up
for months on any particular strand of the author' musings.)
Harris' heart is not as much in the latter chapters, though, but in
presenting his main premise. Simply stated, any belief system that speaks
with assurance about the hereafter has the potential to place far less value
on the here and now. And thus the corollary -- when death is simply a door
translating us from one existence to another, it loses its sting and
finality. Harris pointedly asks us to consider that those who do not fear
death for themselves, and who also revere ancient scriptures instructing
them to mete it out generously to others, may soon have these weapons in
their own hands. If thoughts along the same line haunt you, this is your
book.--Ed Dobeas --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.
<snip bogus links>
Mark T
saxophonist, exuded:
> Thickheaded street-walker with saturated snooch and sawed-off
> baby-pillows wants to meet listless mallet for strenuous zoinkering.
> Mail me at <moi@985789589745753432476988767465908974>
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
> > Design" behind the universe
>
> ... a creatioinist fallback ... totally absurd.
the problem is undecideable
until biology is quantified to point where it can make numerical predictions
currently all we got are subjective opinions
that evolution has been faster than chance would permit
or that evolution has been at pace with chance
Kadaitcha Man
<mair_...@yahoo.com>, the overweening tentsman, jawed:
>>> "Intelligent Design" behind the universe
>>
>> ... a creatioinist fallback ... totally absurd.
>
> the problem is undecideable
> until biology is quantified to point where it can make numerical
> predictions
That is not going to happen for a long time. Biologists cannot even agree on
the process of evolution, which is appropriately called "a scientific
story". The only thing they can actually agree on is that humans share a
very large proportion of DNA with garden shrubs.
--
alt.usenet.kooks - Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005 and April 2006
"K-Man's particular genius, however, lies not merely in his humour,
but his ability to make posters who had previously seemed reasonably
well-balanced turn into foaming, frothing, death threat-uttering
maniacs" - Snarky, Demon Lord of Confusion
Thou base notorious knave. Thou slanders of the age.
Free Lunch
<mair_fheal-331BD...@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>:
>In article <o8f7k21h96fp991ue...@4ax.com>,
> Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>
>> >> What evidence do you have to support that partition? The mind appears to
>> >> be nothing more than self-awareness of brain activities and spirit
>> >> doesn't have any evidence at all.
>> >
>> >Can you explain how self-awareness came about? The body is controlled by
>>
>> electrochemical activities and other biochemical controls that are
>> outside the neuralogical system.
>
>the brain and all its activities are yet beyond explanation
>so anybody pretending they have definitive answers to the questions
>is resorting to their own dogma
Just because we don't understand everything in the brain, that doesn't
mean we don't understand anything about the brain.
Olrik
Kadaitcha Man wrote:
> Denis Loubet <dlo...@io.com>, the agrarian agent, insisted:
>
> > "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lov...@thetruth.com> wrote
>
> *plonk*
Shit, there's hope for you yet...
Olrik
> --
> alt.usenet.kooks - Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
> September 2005 and April 2006
>
> "K-Man's particular genius, however, lies not merely in his humour,
> but his ability to make posters who had previously seemed reasonably
> well-balanced turn into foaming, frothing, death threat-uttering
> maniacs" - Snarky, Demon Lord of Confusion
>
> Thou foolish extravagant spirit. Thou bum-bailiff.
Steve O
>> May GOD continue to heal our hearts with HIS living water, dear sister
>> Sherri whom I love unconditionally.
Ewww!
--
Steve O
a.a. #2240 (apathist chapter)
"Faith doesn't move mountains - it levels buildings."
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 18:14:57 -0700, in alt.atheism
> mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
> <mair_...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> <mair_fheal-331BD...@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>:
> >In article <o8f7k21h96fp991ue...@4ax.com>,
> > Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> >
> >> >> What evidence do you have to support that partition? The mind appears to
> >> >> be nothing more than self-awareness of brain activities and spirit
> >> >> doesn't have any evidence at all.
> >> >
> >> >Can you explain how self-awareness came about? The body is controlled by
> >>
> >> electrochemical activities and other biochemical controls that are
> >> outside the neuralogical system.
> >
> >the brain and all its activities are yet beyond explanation
> >so anybody pretending they have definitive answers to the questions
> >is resorting to their own dogma
>
> Just because we don't understand everything in the brain, that doesn't
> mean we don't understand anything about the brain.
show me the neuron the encodes self awareness
Free Lunch
<mair_fheal-BC6F5...@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>:
>In article <8vb8k21i931qlhdd5...@4ax.com>,
> Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 18:14:57 -0700, in alt.atheism
>> mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
>> <mair_...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> <mair_fheal-331BD...@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>:
>> >In article <o8f7k21h96fp991ue...@4ax.com>,
>> > Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>> >
>> >> >> What evidence do you have to support that partition? The mind appears to
>> >> >> be nothing more than self-awareness of brain activities and spirit
>> >> >> doesn't have any evidence at all.
>> >> >
>> >> >Can you explain how self-awareness came about? The body is controlled by
>> >>
>> >> electrochemical activities and other biochemical controls that are
>> >> outside the neuralogical system.
>> >
>> >the brain and all its activities are yet beyond explanation
>> >so anybody pretending they have definitive answers to the questions
>> >is resorting to their own dogma
>>
>> Just because we don't understand everything in the brain, that doesn't
>> mean we don't understand anything about the brain.
>
>show me the neuron the encodes self awareness
Why would you think that self-awareness is anything but an expected
emergent property of all complex brains?
Olrik
Pax wrote:
> "Mark T" <moi@09375963534546587698988706743567424> wrote in message
> news:45435590$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> > "Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lov...@thetruth.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "Jesus is KING of kings and LORD of lords." -- Holy Spirit
> >
> > No, that is Yahweh.
> >
> > "I [Jesus] am ascending to MY FATHER AND YOUR FATHER, MY GOD AND YOUR
> > GOD" - John 20:17
> >
> > Does God have a God?????
> >
> > ################################################################
> > Then God spoke all these words. He said: 'I am Yahweh your God who
> > brought
> > you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall have
> > NO
> > GODS (INCLUDING JESUS) EXCEPT ME.' - Exodus 20: 1-2
> > ################################################################
> >
> > Him must worship him in spirit and truth" John 4: 24
> >
> > tribe of Israel out of Egypt?????
> >
> > Prove it.
>
> Every man is one in three: body, mind and spirit. Without any one of those
> elements, a man is not complete and can't live.
Water. You need water. And food.
>
> The spirit guides the mind and the mind controls the actions of the body.
Is called the "nervous system". We have pills and surgical procedures
to fuck with the "mind" and the "spirit".
> We
> communicate with each other mind to mind and spirit to spirit by having our
> minds send commands to our bodies. Though we see the body articulating, we
> speak to another person's mind and spirit, the body is just the tool we use
> to accomplish that communication.
What? No telepathy?
>
> Of the three elements that make us up, in a way the body is the least, since
> it's whole purpose is merely to carry out the will of the mind and spirit.
> Yet, if you have seen the body, you have seen the mind and spirit.
"Do not judge a book by its cover."
>
> God tried for a very long time to teach man, but He was imposing and seemed
> so "inhuman". He gave man the Law, He guided man through the prophets, He
> forgave, He punished. But He was always so intimidating... and seemed so far
> removed from anything man could really relate to. It broke His heart when
> Israel insisted on having an earthly king to rule over them rather than Him.
Israel? What about the rest of the world? The main monotheist religions
come from the same deserts. "god" ignored the rest of the planet.
Funny.
> He got the message across that man should fear Him, but the main message He
> wanted to impart most of all got lost in all that fear. What message? That
> all He wants is our love. That He loves us and wants us to love Him.
Why? What kind of "god" would need the applause and thanks of its
"creation"? It's completely absurd.
> So, most men couldn't relate man to God, but man could relate man to man.
> Therefore, God became a man, to teach eye to eye and heart to heart. He had
> given the Law to show man how much he needed God, that man couldn't do it on
> his own.
> But that didn't work,
That says a lot about "god"...
> and the punishment for not following the Law
> is death. Therefore, in His mercy, He took on Himself the punishment for the
> sins of all mankind, to show once and for all that it was never the
> punishment of man He wanted, it was always and only man's love.
lol
>
> Jesus is Lord - Pax
Forget "jesus". I hate go-betweens.
Olrik
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
expected? expected?
expected?
you believe you have system that will have answer the question eventually
but it is unable to answer the question today
thats just your way of saying dogma
if you want to avoid dogma just accept the limits of your knowledge
and say simply -i dont know-
Olrik
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:
> Like you, just a servant who appreciates the wonderful guidance of the
> Holy Spirit in everything we say, do, and write so that HIS will be
> done and not our will.
Your "god" gave you "free will", why not use it? Or are you just a
puppet? Why do you reject using your will? Are you afraid of the
consequences?
>
> Many thanks, much praise, and all the glory to GOD for what HE leads us
> to do.
Oh, indeed! "He" leads me to mock you for your constant instability.
Amen!
<Holy Spirit guided snip>
Olrik
Kadaitcha Man
Where in the challenge posed to you, you flapwitted fucktard, is there any
indication that poster believes what you pretend they might believe? Now,
deal with the challenge, fuckwad.
--
alt.usenet.kooks - Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005 and April 2006
"K-Man's particular genius, however, lies not merely in his humour,
but his ability to make posters who had previously seemed reasonably
well-balanced turn into foaming, frothing, death threat-uttering
maniacs" - Snarky, Demon Lord of Confusion
Thou doghearted nut. Thou rotting reverent braggart.
Kadaitcha Man
exhorted:
> Your "god" gave you "free will"
Proof, please.
--
alt.usenet.kooks - Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005 and April 2006
"K-Man's particular genius, however, lies not merely in his humour,
but his ability to make posters who had previously seemed reasonably
well-balanced turn into foaming, frothing, death threat-uttering
maniacs" - Snarky, Demon Lord of Confusion
Thou lumpish hodgepudding. Thou alcoholic parasite.
olri...@gmail.com
Kadaitcha Man wrote:
> Olrik <olri...@gmail.com>, the surveyor of nothing in particular,
> exhorted:
>
> > Your "god" gave you "free will"
>
> Proof, please.
Don't ask me. Ask the bible believers like "Chung".
Olrik
Kadaitcha Man
>> Olrik <olri...@gmail.com>, the surveyor of nothing in particular,
>> exhorted:
>>
>>> Your "god" gave you "free will"
>>
>> Proof, please.
>
> Don't ask me. Ask the bible believers like "Chung".
There is no free will. Ask Uncle Vic...
[QUOTE]
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Kadaitcha Man
(fuck-you...@kiss-my-big-black-ass.com) made the light shine upon
us with this:
> Uncle Vic <add...@withheld.com>, the quilt weaver, hectored:
>
>> Sam Harris doesn't guide my life, I do.
>
> So, you're walking along the footpath, minding your own business, when
> suddenly Andrew Chung, flattens the accelerator and rides up the
> footpath...
*plunk*
[/QUOTE]
There is only limited freedom of will.
--
alt.usenet.kooks - Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005 and April 2006
"K-Man's particular genius, however, lies not merely in his humour,
but his ability to make posters who had previously seemed reasonably
well-balanced turn into foaming, frothing, death threat-uttering
maniacs" - Snarky, Demon Lord of Confusion
Thou shadow. Thou stinking haddock.
olri...@gmail.com
Kadaitcha Man wrote:
> olri...@gmail.com, the cockeyed burglar, deprecated:
> > Kadaitcha Man wrote:
> >> Olrik <olri...@gmail.com>, the surveyor of nothing in particular,
> >> exhorted:
> >>
> >>> Your "god" gave you "free will"
> >>
> >> Proof, please.
> >
> > Don't ask me. Ask the bible believers like "Chung".
>
> There is no free will. Ask Uncle Vic...
Haven't you plonked him too? Twice?
Olrik
Kadaitcha Man
>> olri...@gmail.com, the cockeyed burglar, deprecated:
>>> Kadaitcha Man wrote:
>>>> Olrik <olri...@gmail.com>, the surveyor of nothing in particular,
>>>> exhorted:
>>>>
>>>>> Your "god" gave you "free will"
>>>>
>>>> Proof, please.
>>>
>>> Don't ask me. Ask the bible believers like "Chung".
>>
>> There is no free will. Ask Uncle Vic...
>
> Haven't you plonked him too? Twice?
No. Not at all. What gives you that idea?
--
alt.usenet.kooks - Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005 and April 2006
"K-Man's particular genius, however, lies not merely in his humour,
but his ability to make posters who had previously seemed reasonably
well-balanced turn into foaming, frothing, death threat-uttering
maniacs" - Snarky, Demon Lord of Confusion
"If the truth be known, the only reason Osama is still on the loose is
because he himself hasn't fallen victim to the K-Man." - Wog George
Thou bragging jack. Thou thing most brutish.
Pax
"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
news:3eq7k2p8s6s9ub2vf...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 23:33:51 GMT, in alt.atheism
> "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
> <zNR0h.17477$TV3....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>:
>>
>>
>>"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
>>news:o8f7k21h96fp991ue...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 19:41:50 GMT, in alt.atheism
>>> "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
>>> <2oO0h.17411$TV3....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>:
>>>>
>>>>"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
>>>>news:d067k2l1rus0g1kqg...@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 17:42:55 GMT, in alt.atheism
>>>>> "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
>>>>> <zEM0h.16859$GR...@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Every man is one in three: body, mind and spirit.
>>>>>
>>>>> to
>>>>> be nothing more than self-awareness of brain activities and spirit
>>>>> doesn't have any evidence at all.
>>>>
>>>>Can you explain how self-awareness came about? The body is controlled by
>>>
>>> electrochemical activities and other biochemical controls that are
>>> outside the neuralogical system.
>>
>>dopamine
>>and such are required to pass on the signals, and electrical impulses
>>initiate chemical production, which then initiate more electrical impulses
>>in different areas.
>>
>>>>electrical impulses through the nervous system to and from the brain and
>>>>dispersed throughout the neural net. There is no real reason for
>>>>self-awareness on a level man displays, since the messages from our five
>>>
>>> Self-awareness is not limited to humans.
>>
>>As I stated elsewhere.
>>
>>>>senses should be sufficient for our survival. Memory and emotions are a
>>>>necessary adaptation, since they increase our chances of survival, but
>>>>memory and emotions sans personal awareness are only "bits" of
>>>>information
>>>>to guide us to those things which are beneficial to our survival and
>>>>away
>>>>from those things which are not. Jumping spiders, as an example, have
>>>>great
>>>>memories. As another, elephants have great memories and deep emotions.
>>>>
>>>>What caused man, above all the other animals, to evolve past the
>>>>hunter-gatherer stage?
>>>
>>> Cultural memory.
>>
>>Prove it.
>
> What alternative is there?
That you give up your attempts at rebuttal.
>>>>What possible purpose for survival of the species
>>>>could account for a need to do so?
>>>
>>> None.
>>
>>Exactly.
>>
>>>>The great apes are remarkably humanlike,
>>>>and very close to our DNA equals. They are also self-aware. They are
>>>>capable
>>>>of complex language, enjoyment and creation of art, compassion,
>>>>selflessness, tool usage. They, like us, live in advanced social groups
>>>>and
>>>>form intense emotional bonds. Yet, despite all of that, they have never
>>>>found it necessary to evolve as we have in order to survive.
>>>
>>> Modern human society is a cultural change, not a biological one.
>>
>>Of course it's biological, since we are. You side-stepped.
>
> Why do you think that society is biological? We aren't ants or bees.
I'm beginning to think you're very young. Look up the definition of
"biological"... it stems from "biology" which concerns...?
>>>>There is no evolutionarily adaptive reason man should have developed the
>>>>nuances of personality he displays that force him to reach out
>>>>philosophically. The limbic system is not unique to man, and its
>>>>functions,
>>>>complicated though they are, have no reason to culminate in any sort of
>>>>metaphysical development. There is certainly no physiological reason man
>>>>should have ever even conceived of much less reached out to God.
>>>
>>> Humans are story-tellers.
>>
>>Why?
>
> I don't know. It seems likely that it has something to do with our
> ability to talk.
Talking is in no way unique to humans, *all* living things "talk" in some
capacity or other. Just because we can't understand their conversations
doesn't mean other living species don't "talk" each other.
So, again, why are humans story-tellers?
>>> Why not tell stories about some extremely powerful, imagined being.
>>
>>Why envision one in the first place? What would initiate such a concept?
>
> I guess you were never a very young child.
Alright, explain the world-based examples behind the imaginary jump to an
omniscient God Who made it all, is greater than it all, and is intimately
involved in every aspect of it all.
>>Point to an example somewhere to base such a fantasy on. Below you mention
>>pink unicorns and flying spaghetti monsters, both of those have something
>>from everyday life to draw on to begin the fantasy. What thing from
>>everyday
>>life was used to come up with the concept of God?
>
> Initially, the gods were the sun and the moon, the seasons, the earth,
> the spirits of those who had lived before, the god of the hunt, of the
> harvest, and of other very obvious manifestations of nature.
It's logical worship of the natural elements that dominate human survival
might evolve... if you first accept the possibility worship of any sort
would evolve for purely survival and procreative reasons, which is
doubtful... but why spirits? Why would such a concept as "spirit" ever
emerge? There is no biological basis or necessity for such a belief, neither
is there any practically applicable indicator that would lead man to
conclude something such as the spirit exists. In other words, there is no
need or physical cause that would initiate a belief in spirits of any sort
in order to assure survival of the species.
It is the concept of spirit which ties directly to God.
>>Why is there in human nature the need for a God? All cultures have their
>>version(s). Why? Why is it built into man to seek out and worship a higher
>>being? How does it improve the chances of survival of the species?
>>Pragmatically, what possible benefits are there in belief in God, if
>>survival of the species is the only purpose of man?
>>
>>Man seeks God because God built it into us to seek Him.
>
> That hypothesis has the problem that there is no evidence for any gods.
Quite the contrary, such evidence is blatant within both biology and
cosmology, for instance. Even noted former atheists like Stephen Hawking
have become at least agnostic due to findings that can't be explained away
by applying the rules of chance. The most interesting thing about it is
that, as scientists discover more, the evidence for there being a Creator
becomes more and more overwhelming. Science is discovering God, not proving
He doesn't exist.
>>>>>>Without any one of those
>>>>>>elements, a man is not complete and can't live.
>>>>>
>>>>> How would anyone know if a spirit went missing?
>>>>
>>>>Have you ever seen a dead person, doctor?
>>>
>>> I'm not a doctor, but I have seen dead people. Spirit isn't a special
>>> part of humans before or after.
>>
>>Your proof...?
>
> No one has offered any evidence to show that spirit exists as a separate
> part.
That we believe in spirits at all with no earthly reason to have ever
conceived of them is proof... but I doubt you'll accept that. :)
Okay, let me try this...
Physicists have concluded that our universe is comprised of ten physical
dimensions plus time, yet we are aware of and can manipulate (as far as we
know) only three physical dimensions. What of our existence within the other
seven physical dimensions that we can't see, feel, or perceive in any way
other than mathematically? What part(s) of us exist in those seven invisible
(to us) dimensions?
>>>>>>The spirit guides the mind and the mind controls the actions of the
>>>>>>body.
>>>>>>We
>>>>>>communicate with each other mind to mind and spirit to spirit by
>>>>>>having
>>>>>>our
>>>>>>minds send commands to our bodies. Though we see the body
>>>>>>articulating,
>>>>>>we
>>>>>>speak to another person's mind and spirit, the body is just the tool
>>>>>>we
>>>>>>use
>>>>>>to accomplish that communication.
>>>>>
>>>>> It sounds as if you are merely reifying abstractions of actions of
>>>>> people.
>>>>
>>>>So you recognize the obvious. That's a start. :)
>>>>
>>>>>>Of the three elements that make us up, in a way the body is the least,
>>>>>>since
>>>>>>it's whole purpose is merely to carry out the will of the mind and
>>>>>>spirit.
>>>>>>Yet, if you have seen the body, you have seen the mind and spirit.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does this mean something?
>>>>
>>>>It's rather elementary and self-explanatory.
>>>
>>> I understand what the claim is, but not why it is made. There is no
>>> evidence for a separate mind or spirit.
>>
>>There is more evidence pro than con. In Parkinson's, which is when the
>>body
>>underproduces dopamine, the mind tries to send commands to the body, but
>>can't get its signals across the synapses. In severe cases, the lack of
>>dopamine is so extreme the person is almost totally unable to communicate
>>or
>>even move. So, in essence, he becomes an isolated mind trapped in a
>>nonresponsive body. He is still a thinking reasoning human being, but he
>>can
>>no longer articulate. However, what people see is the nonresponsive body,
>>they are unable to receive communications from the actual person trapped
>>inside. Parkinsonism can be a hellish disease.
>
> Yes it is hellish, but the conservatives don't care. They mock people
> for having it.
>
> The brain doesn't use chemicals the same way the rest of the body does.
Yes and no... but a nonrelative sidebar to the topic under discussion.
>>Freud crudely described a function similar to that of the spirit with his
>>concept of the superego.
>
> Not really.
Yes, really. (I have replied with a nonstatement to your nonstatement...
gee, I feel all better now.)
Let's not let this conversation degenerate into a nanny-nanny-boo-boo
exchange, okay?
>>>>>>God tried for a very long time to teach man, but He was imposing and
>>>>>>seemed
>>>>>>so "inhuman". He gave man the Law, He guided man through the prophets,
>>>>>>He
>>>>>>forgave, He punished. But He was always so intimidating... and seemed
>>>>>>so
>>>>>>far
>>>>>>removed from anything man could really relate to. It broke His heart
>>>>>>when
>>>>>>Israel insisted on having an earthly king to rule over them rather
>>>>>>than
>>>>>>Him.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the God that supposedly murdered everyone on earth except for
>>>>> eight people?
>>>>
>>>>It is man who considers death a finality, not God. Why are you so
>>>>positive
>>>>that when the body dies the person no longer exists? There is no
>>>>evidence
>>>>of
>>>>that, and not for lack of trying to find it either. In order to make
>>>>your
>>>>case, you must prove a negative. You can only prove the body is
>>>>lifeless.
>>>>Past that point you must journey into the metaphysical.
>>>
>>> There is no evidence that the Invisible Pink Unicorn doesn't exist or
>>> that the Flying Spaghetti Monster won't tough Her noodly appendage to
>>> you, either. Just because someone makes up a story, that's no reason to
>>> demand that others disprove it.
>>
>>uhhuh. Since you're arguing against, then you have chosen to do just that.
>>Otherwise you're just blowing hot air. I didn't initiate this conversation
>>with you, you chose to reply to me.
>>
>>The facts are plain: Some believe in God, others don't. Either camp is a
>>religion of sorts.
>
> The lack of a religion is not a religion. That is a fundamental error
> that anyone who has taken the simplest logic class would not make.
Dictionary.com states as one of the definitions of "religion": "something
one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or
conscience."
As an aside, The Jargon File states that "religion" is defined among hackers
as "Agnostic. Atheist. Non-observant Jewish. Neo-pagan. Very commonly, three
or more of these are combined in the same person. Conventional faith-holding
Christianity is rare though not unknown." [[The Jargon File is "a
comprehensive compendium of hacker slang illuminating many aspects of
hackish tradition, folklore, and humor."]]
Further, when one chooses to proselytize and seeks to institutionalize his
beliefs, he is treating those beliefs as his faith. His adherence to those
beliefs defines them as his religion, which he staunchly defends.
In addition, if people of similar beliefs seek out like-minded others and
form groups for the purpose of bolstering each other in their beliefs
(alt.atheism for example), their beliefs become formalized into the
equivalent of a religion, and that group becomes a "church". Especially
since the word "church" has nothing to do with any building but rather with
the congregation(s) of like-minded people who come together for the purpose
of strengthening their commonly held beliefs through fellowship with one
another.
>>So far, your arguments in favor of your beliefs are
>>terribly lame. "Just because..." and "Because I said so," are replies even
>>small children stop accepting fairly quickly.
>
> I never made those arguments though.
Words to that effect suffice. Noncomments do not a comment make. :)
>>Going back to Freud, one thing that proves faith in God is a good thing is
>>how pleasingly it harmonizes and satisfies all three elements of
>>personality, which is quite a feat. God doesn't make us perfect, but He
>>does
>>make us better able to function on a personal level as well as on a
>>societal
>>one.
>
> It's not at all clear how you came to that conclusion.
That's as clear and I can make it for you. You have to seek further clarity
on your own... or not... as you choose. :)
>>>>And there is where the Bible tells us what happened to the souls of all
>>>>those who died in the days of Noah [1 Pet 3:18-20].
>>>
>>> That is a claim.
>>
>>Okay.
I want to add here that you used an example from the same Book I used to
give you the answer. If you won't accept my use of the Bible in my rebuttal,
don't use it as the premise for your argument.
>>>>>>He got the message across that man should fear Him, but the main
>>>>>>message
>>>>>>He
>>>>>>wanted to impart most of all got lost in all that fear. What message?
>>>>>>That
>>>>>>all He wants is our love. That He loves us and wants us to love Him.
>>>>>
>>>>> You don't have a nice god. Why don't you invent a better one?
>>>>
>>>>He's not just my God, He's yours too, whether you like or not.
>>>
>>> I don't like or dislike. There is no evidence that any gods exist, not
>>> even the one you believe in.
>>
>>I'd have to go into armchair theoretical physics to argue my case further.
>>
>>>>>>So, most men couldn't relate man to God, but man could relate man to
>>>>>>man.
>>>>>>Therefore, God became a man, to teach eye to eye and heart to heart.
>>>>>>He
>>>>>>had
>>>>>>given the Law to show man how much he needed God, that man couldn't do
>>>>>>it
>>>>>>on
>>>>>>his own. But that didn't work, and the punishment for not following
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>Law
>>>>>>is death. Therefore, in His mercy, He took on Himself the punishment
>>>>>>for
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>sins of all mankind, to show once and for all that it was never the
>>>>>>punishment of man He wanted, it was always and only man's love.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Jesus is Lord - Pax
>>>>>
>>>>> Your god is not nice, but he is also ill.
>>>>
>>>>Only because you choose to anthropomorphize Him. Though He took on a
>>>>human
>>>>body for our sake, He was never human.
>>>
>>> I'm not anthropomorphizing at all. I'm pointing out the problems of your
>>> teachings.
>>
>>Not really... at least not so far. All you've really done is express your
>>personal disbelief.
>
> Sensible scepticism as a place to start has worked quite well over time.
True enough. I agree.
>>If you paint God with a human brush, you're trying to bring Him down to a
>>human level, and that can't be done. If I were to state the obvious: "The
>>ways of the universe are not our ways," could you comprehend that? If you
>>can accept that, then suspend your disbelief for a minute and try to
>>imagine
>>One Who made the universe, higher even than anything we know... unknowable
>>by any sort of human standards. Can anyone limit the universe? No. Neither
>>can anyone limit God.
>
> Why should I accept any claims about any gods. All of the claims are
> made by people.
Only if you refuse to accept scientific evidence.
>>Many modern physicists have come to the conclusion there is "Intelligent
>>Design" behind the universe, because the probabilities are so astronomical
>>against creation by accident as to be completely out of the realm of
>>possibility. Even Hawking came out in favor of Intelligent Design a few
>>years ago, something I never thought would happen.
>
> Please name such physicists.
Besides Hawking? Okay, here are a few, but by no means all. (If you want
more names, find them yourself.) You should at least recognize Paul Davies,
he's rather famous, even among lay-persons.
John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1986); F. Bertola and U. Curi, eds., The
Anthropic Principle (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993); Paul
Davies, The Cosmic Blueprint (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1988); Michael J.
Denton, Nature's Destiny (New York: The Free Press, 1998); George
Greenstein, The Symbiotic Universe (New York: William Morrow, 1988); Hugh
Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, 3d ed.(Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress,
2001); Peter D. Ward and Donald Brownlee, Rare Earth (New York: Copernicus,
2000).
>>As a final exercise, ponder these simple questions:
>>
>>If the universe is expanding, what is it expanding into, since spacetime
>>is
>>only on the inside, not the outside? As far as anyone knows there's
>>*nothing* on the outside. Have you ever considered what *nothing* is? It's
>>the ultimate brick wall, because there is absolutely nothing there, no
>>dimensional space to expand into. Consider a point in front of you no
>>bigger
>>than a pin's tip. That point is bigger than nothing. Yet, many physicists
>>say our entire universe is not only contained in nothing it's expanding
>>into
>>nothing. This in spite of the fact nothing can't hold anything, much less
>>the universe.
>
> Why would you claim that the universe is expanding into something?
I see conversation on that level isn't for you, okay, I accept that. I'll
pull it back a notch.
>>Of course the Clashing Branes Theory could be the answer to that. Except
>>for
>>the fact one must wonder what the branes are contained within that allows
>>them to clash in the first place. (There's that *nothing* again.) Besides
>>that, whatever caused them to begin clashing in the first place?
>>
>>>>Jesus is Lord - Pax
>>>>
>>> Or not.
>>
>>That's for each of us to decide.
>
> Our opinions about it don't change reality.
Oh, SO very true!
Pax
"Mark T" <moi@985789589745753432476988767465908974> wrote in message
news:4543...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>>> "I [Jesus] am ascending to MY FATHER AND YOUR FATHER, MY GOD AND >>YOUR
>>> GOD" - John 20:17
>>> Does God have a God?????
>>> ################################################################
>>> Then God spoke all these words. He said: 'I am Yahweh your God who
>>> brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You
>>> shall have NO GODS (INCLUDING JESUS) EXCEPT ME.' - Exodus 20: 1-2
>>> ################################################################
>>> Jesus said that Yahweh is spirit. "God is spirit, and those who worship
>>> Him must worship him in spirit and truth" John 4: 24
>>> Is Jesus of Nazareth (a human) really Yahweh (spirit) who brought the
>>> tribe of Israel out of Egypt?????
>>> Prove it.
Only if I can use the Bible. :)
>> Every man is one in three: body, mind and spirit.
>
> What uni course in medicine or psychology taught you that?????
Think I'll have to go with psychology for 100, Mark.
>> The spirit guides the mind and the mind controls the actions of the body.
>
> Spirit IS mind. Mind IS spirit.
Then what have doctors measured leaving the body at the time of death,
through a minute drop in overall bodyweight, after residual air in the
lungs, body excretions, etc. have been accounted for? They are unable to
discover why the body loses that additional bit of weight at the time of
death. Many of them have concluded it to be evidence of the spirit leaving
the body.
> There are only two type of things that make up a human the visible (body /
> brain) and the invisible (spirit / mind)
The "mind" as characterized by the functions of the brain, ceases to exist
at the time of death.
> That is why philosophy over hundreds of years has looked at the Spirit /
> Body problem (how spirit / mind activates body ... or the Mind / Body
> problem)
>
> Study philosophy .... just like St Paul ... I have.
I have... and psychology, natural science, medical science and theoretical
physics, as well as the Bible, theology and apologetics, to name a few. Oh,
and the fine art of winning at poker... sort of a failure there. <grin>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> SPIRIT
>
> ...
> 2.. (n.) Life, or living substance, considered independently of corporeal
> existence; an intelligence conceived of apart from any physical
> organization
> or embodiment; vital essence, force, or energy, as distinct from matter.
> 3.. (n.) Temper or disposition of mind; mental condition or disposition;
> intellectual or moral state; -- often in the plural; as, to be cheerful,
> or
> in good spirits; to be downhearted, or in bad spirits.
> ...
> 7.. (n.) The intelligent, immaterial and immortal part of man; the soul,
> in distinction from the body in which it resides; the agent or subject of
> vital and spiritual functions, whether spiritual or material.
> 8.. (n.) Specifically, a disembodied soul; the human soul after it has
> left the body.
> ...
> 11.. (n.) Any supernatural being, good or bad; an apparition; a specter;
> a
> ghost; also, sometimes, a sprite,; a fairy; an elf.
> ...
>
> from http://en.thinkexist.com/dictionary/meaning/Spirit/
That was useful. :)
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
> > Like you, just a servant who appreciates the wonderful guidance of the
> > Holy Spirit in everything we say, do, and write so that HIS will be
> > done and not our will.
>
> Your "god" gave you "free will", why not use it?
Wouldn't be able to love you if I didn't use the free will that GOD has
generously given all souls including those belonging to even fig trees
(Mark 11:12-14, 20):
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/ddb25eb1d5cf468a?
> Or are you just a puppet?
No.
> Why do you reject using your will?
I have not. Being obedient is a choice made through free will.
> Are you afraid of the consequences?
I remain in reverent fear and eternal love of LORD GOD Almighty:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/175b5dc947a0781f?
You on the other hand, remain lost:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/eb42672896d36d4b?
This victory belongs to GOD:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts
Laus Deo ! ! !
Your consolation prize is eternal life if you choose to surrender to
HIM:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/fcb058da12bb3f3d?
May GOD in HIS infinite mercy and grace continue to keep your heart
beating to give you extra time to understand and act on this, dear
neighbor Olrik whom I love unconditionally.
Jude Alexander
"Mark T" <moi@985789589745753432476988767465908974> wrote in message
news:4543...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
>>>> Scriptures are in fact accurate and useful.
>>>
>>> Proverbs 26:4 "Answer not a fool according to his folly."
>>>
>>> Proverbs 26:5 "Answer a fool according to his folly."
>>>
>>> I've decided to use Proverbs 26:5
>>
>> I'm sure that was a difficult decision... :)
>
>
> Prayer and fasting for 40 days and nights ... and putting out a fleece
> ...which was difficult because I don't own a sheep ... and had to go out
> and steal one ... and shear it ... with scissors ... and then the Lord
> spoke to me in a voice out of the TV saying "Donate to this ministry and
> receive a free set of steak knives!" ... but I ignored it .... then I read
> the Bible ... but as you can see above the Bible gave a conflicting answer
> on whether I should answer or not ... and then I asked my Pasta ... but
> ate it before I could get an answer .... then ... A MIRACLE! ... much
> later the Pasta reappeared as something else in my toilet bowl ... and
> then I had my answer! ;-)
>
> Praise Lord Pax!
>
> A MIRACLE!!!!
The fleece part is pretty funny and asking your pasta on your plate! lol
>
> --
>
> "We're Christians! We're not supposed to think!" Fanny Wype (Nudist
> ColonyOf The Dead)
Rowland Croucher
> Wouldn't be able to love you if I didn't use the free will that
> GOD has generously given all souls including those belonging
> to even fig trees (Mark 11:12-14, 20):
You're not supposed to love him.
Luke 14:26 "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother,
his wife and children, his brothers and sisters. yes, even his own life,he
cannot be my disciple."
--
Krieg! Rowland Croucher
Christian achievements
http://broomleigh.org/
Free Lunch
"Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
<4tZ0h.24670$7I1....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>:
>
>"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
>news:3eq7k2p8s6s9ub2vf...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 23:33:51 GMT, in alt.atheism
>> "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
>> <zNR0h.17477$TV3....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>:
>>>
>>>
>>>"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
>>>news:o8f7k21h96fp991ue...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 19:41:50 GMT, in alt.atheism
>>>> "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
>>>> <2oO0h.17411$TV3....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>:
>>>>>What caused man, above all the other animals, to evolve past the
>>>>>hunter-gatherer stage?
>>>>
>>>> Cultural memory.
>>>
>>>Prove it.
>>
>> What alternative is there?
>
>That you give up your attempts at rebuttal.
That's not an alternative explanation. You haven't offered a testable
one.
...
>>>>>The great apes are remarkably humanlike,
>>>>>and very close to our DNA equals. They are also self-aware. They are
>>>>>capable of complex language, enjoyment and creation of art, compassion,
>>>>>selflessness, tool usage. They, like us, live in advanced social groups
>>>>>and form intense emotional bonds. Yet, despite all of that, they have never
>>>>>found it necessary to evolve as we have in order to survive.
>>>>
>>>> Modern human society is a cultural change, not a biological one.
>>>
>>>Of course it's biological, since we are. You side-stepped.
>>
>> Why do you think that society is biological? We aren't ants or bees.
>
>I'm beginning to think you're very young. Look up the definition of
>"biological"... it stems from "biology" which concerns...?
Life. Yes, living creatures form society, but that doesn't make society
life. Biology relies on chemistry, but we don't call it chemistry or try
to understand it exclusively from the chemical reactions.
>>>>>There is no evolutionarily adaptive reason man should have developed the
>>>>>nuances of personality he displays that force him to reach out
>>>>>philosophically. The limbic system is not unique to man, and its
>>>>>functions,
>>>>>complicated though they are, have no reason to culminate in any sort of
>>>>>metaphysical development. There is certainly no physiological reason man
>>>>>should have ever even conceived of much less reached out to God.
>>>>
>>>> Humans are story-tellers.
>>>
>>>Why?
>>
>> I don't know. It seems likely that it has something to do with our
>> ability to talk.
>
>Talking is in no way unique to humans, *all* living things "talk" in some
>capacity or other. Just because we can't understand their conversations
>doesn't mean other living species don't "talk" each other.
Storytelling is more than just talking.
>So, again, why are humans story-tellers?
>
>>>> Why not tell stories about some extremely powerful, imagined being.
>>>
>>>Why envision one in the first place? What would initiate such a concept?
>>
>> I guess you were never a very young child.
>
>Alright, explain the world-based examples behind the imaginary jump to an
>omniscient God Who made it all, is greater than it all, and is intimately
>involved in every aspect of it all.
Remember that the conception of the God in the above paragraph is a very
recent one in the history of humanity. Polytheism -- with magically
powerful, but not all-powerful, gods was the norm. Even today, only the
Abrahamic religions fit your description.
>>>Point to an example somewhere to base such a fantasy on. Below you mention
>>>pink unicorns and flying spaghetti monsters, both of those have something
>>>from everyday life to draw on to begin the fantasy. What thing from
>>>everyday
>>>life was used to come up with the concept of God?
>>
>> Initially, the gods were the sun and the moon, the seasons, the earth,
>> the spirits of those who had lived before, the god of the hunt, of the
>> harvest, and of other very obvious manifestations of nature.
>
>It's logical worship of the natural elements that dominate human survival
>might evolve... if you first accept the possibility worship of any sort
>would evolve for purely survival and procreative reasons, which is
>doubtful... but why spirits? Why would such a concept as "spirit" ever
>emerge?
Why not? What name do you give to the inexplicable?
>There is no biological basis or necessity for such a belief, neither
>is there any practically applicable indicator that would lead man to
>conclude something such as the spirit exists. In other words, there is no
>need or physical cause that would initiate a belief in spirits of any sort
>in order to assure survival of the species.
Ever listen to the wind on a stormy night?
>It is the concept of spirit which ties directly to God.
Not really.
>>>Why is there in human nature the need for a God? All cultures have their
>>>version(s). Why? Why is it built into man to seek out and worship a higher
>>>being? How does it improve the chances of survival of the species?
>>>Pragmatically, what possible benefits are there in belief in God, if
>>>survival of the species is the only purpose of man?
>>>
>>>Man seeks God because God built it into us to seek Him.
>>
>> That hypothesis has the problem that there is no evidence for any gods.
>
>Quite the contrary, such evidence is blatant within both biology and
>cosmology, for instance. Even noted former atheists like Stephen Hawking
>have become at least agnostic due to findings that can't be explained away
>by applying the rules of chance.
Please provide a citation.
>The most interesting thing about it is
>that, as scientists discover more, the evidence for there being a Creator
>becomes more and more overwhelming. Science is discovering God, not proving
>He doesn't exist.
Where? What evidence can you point to?
>>>>>>>Without any one of those
>>>>>>>elements, a man is not complete and can't live.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How would anyone know if a spirit went missing?
>>>>>
>>>>>Have you ever seen a dead person, doctor?
>>>>
>>>> I'm not a doctor, but I have seen dead people. Spirit isn't a special
>>>> part of humans before or after.
>>>
>>>Your proof...?
>>
>> No one has offered any evidence to show that spirit exists as a separate
>> part.
>
>That we believe in spirits at all with no earthly reason to have ever
>conceived of them is proof... but I doubt you'll accept that. :)
>
>Okay, let me try this...
>
>Physicists have concluded that our universe is comprised of ten physical
>dimensions plus time, yet we are aware of and can manipulate (as far as we
>know) only three physical dimensions. What of our existence within the other
>seven physical dimensions that we can't see, feel, or perceive in any way
>other than mathematically? What part(s) of us exist in those seven invisible
>(to us) dimensions?
I don't see how string theory works for this.
...
>>>> There is no evidence that the Invisible Pink Unicorn doesn't exist or
>>>> that the Flying Spaghetti Monster won't tough Her noodly appendage to
>>>> you, either. Just because someone makes up a story, that's no reason to
>>>> demand that others disprove it.
>>>
>>>uhhuh. Since you're arguing against, then you have chosen to do just that.
>>>Otherwise you're just blowing hot air. I didn't initiate this conversation
>>>with you, you chose to reply to me.
>>>
>>>The facts are plain: Some believe in God, others don't. Either camp is a
>>>religion of sorts.
>>
>> The lack of a religion is not a religion. That is a fundamental error
>> that anyone who has taken the simplest logic class would not make.
>
>Dictionary.com states as one of the definitions of "religion": "something
>one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or
>conscience."
The lack of a religion still isn't a religion. Don't start playing
Humpty Dumpty here.
>As an aside, The Jargon File states that "religion" is defined among hackers
>as "Agnostic. Atheist. Non-observant Jewish. Neo-pagan. Very commonly, three
>or more of these are combined in the same person. Conventional faith-holding
>Christianity is rare though not unknown." [[The Jargon File is "a
>comprehensive compendium of hacker slang illuminating many aspects of
>hackish tradition, folklore, and humor."]]
>
>Further, when one chooses to proselytize and seeks to institutionalize his
>beliefs, he is treating those beliefs as his faith. His adherence to those
>beliefs defines them as his religion, which he staunchly defends.
>
>In addition, if people of similar beliefs seek out like-minded others and
>form groups for the purpose of bolstering each other in their beliefs
>(alt.atheism for example), their beliefs become formalized into the
>equivalent of a religion, and that group becomes a "church". Especially
>since the word "church" has nothing to do with any building but rather with
>the congregation(s) of like-minded people who come together for the purpose
>of strengthening their commonly held beliefs through fellowship with one
>another.
>
>>>So far, your arguments in favor of your beliefs are
>>>terribly lame. "Just because..." and "Because I said so," are replies even
>>>small children stop accepting fairly quickly.
>>
>> I never made those arguments though.
>
>Words to that effect suffice. Noncomments do not a comment make. :)
You misrepresent what I said.
>>>Going back to Freud, one thing that proves faith in God is a good thing is
>>>how pleasingly it harmonizes and satisfies all three elements of
>>>personality, which is quite a feat. God doesn't make us perfect, but He does
>>>make us better able to function on a personal level as well as on a societal
>>>one.
>>
>> It's not at all clear how you came to that conclusion.
>
>That's as clear and I can make it for you. You have to seek further clarity
>on your own... or not... as you choose. :)
>
>>>>>And there is where the Bible tells us what happened to the souls of all
>>>>>those who died in the days of Noah [1 Pet 3:18-20].
>>>>
>>>> That is a claim.
>>>
>>>Okay.
>
>I want to add here that you used an example from the same Book I used to
>give you the answer. If you won't accept my use of the Bible in my rebuttal,
>don't use it as the premise for your argument.
I use it to make comments about how people have understood the God of
Abraham.
...
>>>> I'm not anthropomorphizing at all. I'm pointing out the problems of your
>>>> teachings.
>>>
>>>Not really... at least not so far. All you've really done is express your
>>>personal disbelief.
>>
>> Sensible scepticism as a place to start has worked quite well over time.
>
>True enough. I agree.
>
>>>If you paint God with a human brush, you're trying to bring Him down to a
>>>human level, and that can't be done. If I were to state the obvious: "The
>>>ways of the universe are not our ways," could you comprehend that? If you
>>>can accept that, then suspend your disbelief for a minute and try to
>>>imagine
>>>One Who made the universe, higher even than anything we know... unknowable
>>>by any sort of human standards. Can anyone limit the universe? No. Neither
>>>can anyone limit God.
>>
>> Why should I accept any claims about any gods. All of the claims are
>> made by people.
>
>Only if you refuse to accept scientific evidence.
What scientific evidence in support of gods exists?
>>>Many modern physicists have come to the conclusion there is "Intelligent
>>>Design" behind the universe, because the probabilities are so astronomical
>>>against creation by accident as to be completely out of the realm of
>>>possibility. Even Hawking came out in favor of Intelligent Design a few
>>>years ago, something I never thought would happen.
>>
>> Please name such physicists.
>
>Besides Hawking? Okay, here are a few, but by no means all. (If you want
>more names, find them yourself.) You should at least recognize Paul Davies,
>he's rather famous, even among lay-persons.
Please tell me exactly where Hawking came out in favor of Intelligent
Design. Did you actually read the article or did you read a quote mined
by Creationists?
No, you made an assumption that isn't valid based on the physics we
know. As far as we know, there is no 'something' for the universe to
expand into.
Free Lunch
"Kadaitcha Man" <fuck-you...@kiss-my-big-black-ass.com> wrote in
<qrak79$qi1$w...@inconsiderable-kumquats.net>:
Neurons don't encode self-awareness. The question didn't make sense. You
apparently couldn't understand that.
Kadaitcha Man
And still you have not answered the question. Wasn't it you who just bitched
and bleated at someone over not providing a testable response? I'm sure it
was.
--
alt.usenet.kooks - Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker:
September 2005 and April 2006
"K-Man's particular genius, however, lies not merely in his humour,
but his ability to make posters who had previously seemed reasonably
well-balanced turn into foaming, frothing, death threat-uttering
maniacs" - Snarky, Demon Lord of Confusion
"If the truth be known, the only reason Osama is still on the loose is
because he himself hasn't fallen victim to the K-Man." - Wog George
Thou store of muttons. Thou goatish, abhorrent lucifer.
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
then what does encode self awareness? the glia? the dura mater?
since i believe of the human soul
i dont have a problem claiming there is something nonphysical
to the human mind
but if you believe the brain is all there is
than the everything attribued to mind spirit or brain
has to be to expressed in neuron wirings and firings
Big Dave
"Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <lo...@thetruth.com> wrote in message
news:1162079602....@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Big Dave wrote:
>> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> >> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> >> >> "Mark T" <moi@09375963546864676755877579565567424> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:4542ae78$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>> >> >> > --
>> >> >> > Quoting the Bible is NOT quoting God.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Why?
>> >> >
>> >> > Without the counsel of the Holy Spirit, Mark's interpretation of
>> >> > Scripture will remain meaningless.
>> >>
>> >> So will yours
>> >
>> > Without the LORD, your opinion is meaningless (Ecclesiastes).
>> >
>> > You remain vanquished:
>> >
>> > http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts
>> >
>> > Your consolation prize is eternal life if you choose to surrender to
>> > HIM:
>>
>>
>> A consolation prize is a prize meant to make a loser feel better.
>
> Here it would serve to indicate that you know you are lost:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/eb42672896d36d4b?
>
>> Do you mean that doing as you do is the path to a consolation prize?
>
> No.
>
<snip>
So, do you type all of this glory glory crap each time you reply to a
message, or do you cut and paste it.
Which do you think jesus wants you to do?
Do you think jesus cares if you labor to type his praise, or if you just
cut and paste his praise?
Just curious.
Pax
"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message news:gpc9k2p3ol42g16u9...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 29 Oct 2006 08:18:08 GMT, in alt.atheism
> "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
> <4tZ0h.24670$7I1....@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>:
>>
>>"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
>>news:3eq7k2p8s6s9ub2vf...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 23:33:51 GMT, in alt.atheism
>>> "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
>>> <zNR0h.17477$TV3....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
>>>>news:o8f7k21h96fp991ue...@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 19:41:50 GMT, in alt.atheism
>>>>> "Pax" <Sherri...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
>>>>> <2oO0h.17411$TV3....@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>:
> ...
>>>>>>What caused man, above all the other animals, to evolve past the
>>>>>>hunter-gatherer stage?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cultural memory.
>>>>
>>>>Prove it.
>>>
>>> What alternative is there?
>>
>>That you give up your attempts at rebuttal.
>
> That's not an alternative explanation. You haven't offered a testable
> one.
It's time for you to put up or shut up. Do a little work your end, and prove your assertions.
Cultural memory is not unique to humanity, many forms of life display it, some to a far greater extent than do humans... to the point that, like birds (for example), it's hard-wired into them from birth. Therefore it can't be the reason for man's evolution past the hunter-gatherer stage.
> ...
>>>>>>The great apes are remarkably humanlike,
>>>>>>and very close to our DNA equals. They are also self-aware. They are
>>>>>>capable of complex language, enjoyment and creation of art, compassion,
>>>>>>selflessness, tool usage. They, like us, live in advanced social groups
>>>>>>and form intense emotional bonds. Yet, despite all of that, they have never
>>>>>>found it necessary to evolve as we have in order to survive.
>>>>>
>>>>> Modern human society is a cultural change, not a biological one.
>>>>
>>>>Of course it's biological, since we are. You side-stepped.
>>>
>>> Why do you think that society is biological? We aren't ants or bees.
>>
>>I'm beginning to think you're very young. Look up the definition of
>>"biological"... it stems from "biology" which concerns...?
>
> Life. Yes, living creatures form society, but that doesn't make society
> life.
Do you know what hymenoptera (ants, bees, wasps, etc.) are called? "Social insects".
What I said was life forms societies, they are a function of life, a biological by-product. Societies are *only* a functional outcome of biological processes, you can't have a society without life.
> Biology relies on chemistry, but we don't call it chemistry or try
> to understand it exclusively from the chemical reactions.
>>>>>>There is no evolutionarily adaptive reason man should have developed the
>>>>>>nuances of personality he displays that force him to reach out
>>>>>>philosophically. The limbic system is not unique to man, and its
>>>>>>functions,
>>>>>>complicated though they are, have no reason to culminate in any sort of
>>>>>>metaphysical development. There is certainly no physiological reason man
>>>>>>should have ever even conceived of much less reached out to God.
>>>>>
>>>>> Humans are story-tellers.
>>>>
>>>>Why?
>>>
>>> I don't know. It seems likely that it has something to do with our
>>> ability to talk.
>>
>>Talking is in no way unique to humans, *all* living things "talk" in some
>>capacity or other. Just because we can't understand their conversations
>>doesn't mean other living species don't "talk" each other.
>
> Storytelling is more than just talking.
>>So, again, why are humans story-tellers?
>>>>> Why not tell stories about some extremely powerful, imagined being.
>>>>
>>>>Why envision one in the first place? What would initiate such a concept?
>>>
>>> I guess you were never a very young child.
>>
>>Alright, explain the world-based examples behind the imaginary jump to an
>>omniscient God Who made it all, is greater than it all, and is intimately
>>involved in every aspect of it all.
>
> Remember that the conception of the God in the above paragraph is a very
> recent one in the history of humanity. Polytheism -- with magically
> powerful, but not all-powerful, gods was the norm. Even today, only the
> Abrahamic religions fit your description.
>>>>Point to an example somewhere to base such a fantasy on. Below you mention
>>>>pink unicorns and flying spaghetti monsters, both of those have something
>>>>from everyday life to draw on to begin the fantasy. What thing from
>>>>everyday
>>>>life was used to come up with the concept of God?
>>>
>>> Initially, the gods were the sun and the moon, the seasons, the earth,
>>> the spirits of those who had lived before, the god of the hunt, of the
>>> harvest, and of other very obvious manifestations of nature.
>>
>>It's logical worship of the natural elements that dominate human survival
>>might evolve... if you first accept the possibility worship of any sort
>>would evolve for purely survival and procreative reasons, which is
>>doubtful... but why spirits? Why would such a concept as "spirit" ever
>>emerge?
>
> Why not? What name do you give to the inexplicable?
>>There is no biological basis or necessity for such a belief, neither
>>is there any practically applicable indicator that would lead man to
>>conclude something such as the spirit exists. In other words, there is no
>>need or physical cause that would initiate a belief in spirits of any sort
>>in order to assure survival of the species.
>
> Ever listen to the wind on a stormy night?
>>It is the concept of spirit which ties directly to God.
>
> Not really.
>>>>Why is there in human nature the need for a God? All cultures have their
>>>>version(s). Why? Why is it built into man to seek out and worship a higher
>>>>being? How does it improve the chances of survival of the species?
>>>>Pragmatically, what possible benefits are there in belief in God, if
>>>>survival of the species is the only purpose of man?
>>>>
>>>>Man seeks God because God built it into us to seek Him.
>>>
>>> That hypothesis has the problem that there is no evidence for any gods.
>>
>>Quite the contrary, such evidence is blatant within both biology and
>>cosmology, for instance. Even noted former atheists like Stephen Hawking
>>have become at least agnostic due to findings that can't be explained away
>>by applying the rules of chance.
>
> Please provide a citation.
>>The most interesting thing about it is
>>that, as scientists discover more, the evidence for there being a Creator
>>becomes more and more overwhelming. Science is discovering God, not proving
>>He doesn't exist.
>
> Where? What evidence can you point to?
>>>>>>>>Without any one of those
>>>>>>>>elements, a man is not complete and can't live.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How would anyone know if a spirit went missing?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Have you ever seen a dead person, doctor?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not a doctor, but I have seen dead people. Spirit isn't a special
>>>>> part of humans before or after.
>>>>
>>>>Your proof...?
>>>
>>> No one has offered any evidence to show that spirit exists as a separate
>>> part.
>>
>>That we believe in spirits at all with no earthly reason to have ever
>>conceived of them is proof... but I doubt you'll accept that. :)
>>
>>Okay, let me try this...
>>
>>Physicists have concluded that our universe is comprised of ten physical
>>dimensions plus time, yet we are aware of and can manipulate (as far as we
>>know) only three physical dimensions. What of our existence within the other
>>seven physical dimensions that we can't see, feel, or perceive in any way
>>other than mathematically? What part(s) of us exist in those seven invisible
>>(to us) dimensions?
>
> I don't see how string theory works for this.
>>>>> There is no evidence that the Invisible Pink Unicorn doesn't exist or
>>>>> that the Flying Spaghetti Monster won't tough Her noodly appendage to
>>>>> you, either. Just because someone makes up a story, that's no reason to
>>>>> demand that others disprove it.
>>>>
>>>>uhhuh. Since you're arguing against, then you have chosen to do just that.
>>>>Otherwise you're just blowing hot air. I didn't initiate this conversation
>>>>with you, you chose to reply to me.
>>>>
>>>>The facts are plain: Some believe in God, others don't. Either camp is a
>>>>religion of sorts.
>>>
>>> The lack of a religion is not a religion. That is a fundamental error
>>> that anyone who has taken the simplest logic class would not make.
>>
>>Dictionary.com states as one of the definitions of "religion": "something
>>one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or
>>conscience."
>
> The lack of a religion still isn't a religion. Don't start playing
> Humpty Dumpty here.
>>As an aside, The Jargon File states that "religion" is defined among hackers
>>as "Agnostic. Atheist. Non-observant Jewish. Neo-pagan. Very commonly, three
>>or more of these are combined in the same person. Conventional faith-holding
>>Christianity is rare though not unknown." [[The Jargon File is "a
>>comprehensive compendium of hacker slang illuminating many aspects of
>>hackish tradition, folklore, and humor."]]
>>
>>Further, when one chooses to proselytize and seeks to institutionalize his
>>beliefs, he is treating those beliefs as his faith. His adherence to those
>>beliefs defines them as his religion, which he staunchly defends.
>>
>>In addition, if people of similar beliefs seek out like-minded others and
>>form groups for the purpose of bolstering each other in their beliefs
>>(alt.atheism for example), their beliefs become formalized into the
>>equivalent of a religion, and that group becomes a "church". Especially
>>since the word "church" has nothing to do with any building but rather with
>>the congregation(s) of like-minded people who come together for the purpose
>>of strengthening their commonly held beliefs through fellowship with one
>>another.
>>
>>>>So far, your arguments in favor of your beliefs are
>>>>terribly lame. "Just because..." and "Because I said so," are replies even
>>>>small children stop accepting fairly quickly.
>>>
>>> I never made those arguments though.
>>
>>Words to that effect suffice. Noncomments do not a comment make. :)
>
> You misrepresent what I said.
>>>>Going back to Freud, one thing that proves faith in God is a good thing is
>>>>how pleasingly it harmonizes and satisfies all three elements of
>>>>personality, which is quite a feat. God doesn't make us perfect, but He does
>>>>make us better able to function on a personal level as well as on a societal
>>>>one.
>>>
>>> It's not at all clear how you came to that conclusion.
>>
>>That's as clear and I can make it for you. You have to seek further clarity
>>on your own... or not... as you choose. :)
>>
>>>>>>And there is where the Bible tells us what happened to the souls of all
>>>>>>those who died in the days of Noah [1 Pet 3:18-20].
>>>>>
>>>>> That is a claim.
>>>>
>>>>Okay.
>>
>>I want to add here that you used an example from the same Book I used to
>>give you the answer. If you won't accept my use of the Bible in my rebuttal,
>>don't use it as the premise for your argument.
>
> I use it to make comments about how people have understood the God of
> Abraham.
>>>>> I'm not anthropomorphizing at all. I'm pointing out the problems of your
>>>>> teachings.
>>>>
>>>>Not really... at least not so far. All you've really done is express your
>>>>personal disbelief.
>>>
>>> Sensible scepticism as a place to start has worked quite well over time.
>>
>>True enough. I agree.
>>
>>>>If you paint God with a human brush, you're trying to bring Him down to a
>>>>human level, and that can't be done. If I were to state the obvious: "The
>>>>ways of the universe are not our ways," could you comprehend that? If you
>>>>can accept that, then suspend your disbelief for a minute and try to
>>>>imagine
>>>>One Who made the universe, higher even than anything we know... unknowable
>>>>by any sort of human standards. Can anyone limit the universe? No. Neither
>>>>can anyone limit God.
>>>
>>> Why should I accept any claims about any gods. All of the claims are
>>> made by people.
>>
>>Only if you refuse to accept scientific evidence.
>
> What scientific evidence in support of gods exists?
>>>>Many modern physicists have come to the conclusion there is "Intelligent
>>>>Design" behind the universe, because the probabilities are so astronomical
>>>>against creation by accident as to be completely out of the realm of
>>>>possibility. Even Hawking came out in favor of Intelligent Design a few
>>>>years ago, something I never thought would happen.
>>>
>>> Please name such physicists.
>>
>>Besides Hawking? Okay, here are a few, but by no means all. (If you want
>>more names, find them yourself.) You should at least recognize Paul Davies,
>>he's rather famous, even among lay-persons.
>
> Please tell me exactly where Hawking came out in favor of Intelligent
> Design. Did you actually read the article or did you read a quote mined
> by Creationists?
Hawking: God may play dice after all
Famed physicist presents divine-snowball theory for start of universe
Posted: May 23, 2002
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=27721
>>John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle
>>(New York: Oxford University Press, 1986); F. Bertola and U. Curi, eds., The
>>Anthropic Principle (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993); Paul
>>Davies, The Cosmic Blueprint (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1988); Michael J.
>>Denton, Nature's Destiny (New York: The Free Press, 1998); George
>>Greenstein, The Symbiotic Universe (New York: William Morrow, 1988); Hugh
>>Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, 3d ed.(Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress,
>>2001); Peter D. Ward and Donald Brownlee, Rare Earth (New York: Copernicus,
>>2000).
>>>>As a final exercise, ponder these simple questions:
>>>>
>>>>If the universe is expanding, what is it expanding into, since spacetime
>>>>is
>>>>only on the inside, not the outside? As far as anyone knows there's
>>>>*nothing* on the outside. Have you ever considered what *nothing* is? It's
>>>>the ultimate brick wall, because there is absolutely nothing there, no
>>>>dimensional space to expand into. Consider a point in front of you no
>>>>bigger
>>>>than a pin's tip. That point is bigger than nothing. Yet, many physicists
>>>>say our entire universe is not only contained in nothing it's expanding
>>>>into
>>>>nothing. This in spite of the fact nothing can't hold anything, much less
>>>>the universe.
>>>
>>> Why would you claim that the universe is expanding into something?
>>
>>I see conversation on that level isn't for you, okay, I accept that. I'll
>>pull it back a notch.
>
> No, you made an assumption that isn't valid based on the physics we
> know. As far as we know, there is no 'something' for the universe to
> expand into.
Why don't you grab a handful of nothing, sit it on your desk and put something in it.
(Wish I could watch you try.)
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>
> > GOD has generously given all souls including those belonging
> > to even fig trees (Mark 11:12-14, 20):
>
> You're not supposed to love him.
Actually, loving others is the second of the two most important
commandments on which all the laws and all the prophets hang.
> Luke 14:26 "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother,
> his wife and children, his brothers and sisters. yes, even his own life,he
> cannot be my disciple."
This is **before** becoming reborn of HIS living water and Holy Spirit:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/15fd908b7bd5e0cb?
In order to receive GOD's love into your heart, it is necessary to
spurn the love of others including self-love. This is hating others
while loving GOD with all ones heart, soul, mind and strength becoming
a new creature in GOD's love, thereby loving others in GOD's name (John
3:16).
This victory belongs to GOD, Whom I love with all my heart, soul, mind,
and strength:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/175b5dc947a0781f?
Laus Deo !
Your consolation prize is eternal life if you choose to surrender to
HIM:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/fcb058da12bb3f3d?
May GOD in His infinite grace and mercy keep your heart beating to give
you time to understand and act on this, dear neighbor Rowland whom I
Rowland Croucher
> [ . . ] and all the prophets hang.
Good idea. Why bother with the electric chair or lethal injections?
>> Luke 14:26 "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his
>> father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers
>> and sisters. yes, even his own life,he cannot be my disciple."
>
> This is **before** becoming reborn of HIS living
> water and Holy Spirit:
Good guess, Andrew, but it's a poor translation. Desert would be better
than hate. As always, Jesus is saying He alone must come first, you must
put aside, or desert, everything else.
> Laus Deo !
Ich verstehe nicht.
> May GOD in His infinite grace and mercy keep your heart
> beating to give you time to understand and act on this,
> dear neighbor Rowland whom I love unconditionally.
Oh Andrew! Andrew!
http://www.callme.nm.ru/schild.swf?namee=Andrew+Chung
> Prayerfully in Christ's amazing love,
Your conversion amazes me more.
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>
>
> Good idea.
Obeying Jesus' two commandments is a good idea.
> Why bother with the electric chair or lethal injections?
If everyone were to obey Jesus' two commandments, there would be no
need for either.
> >> Luke 14:26 "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his
> >> father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers
> >> and sisters. yes, even his own life,he cannot be my disciple."
> >
> > This is **before** becoming reborn of HIS living
> > water and Holy Spirit:
>
> Good guess, Andrew, but it's a poor translation.
Guessing is not my style. Nor am I a translator. This remains a Holy
Spirit-guided understanding of Scripture.
> Desert would be better than hate.
No. The disciples were not required to desert their families but
rather to do the will of their heavenly Father. Indeed, Jesus did not
abandon HIS mother Mary but at the time of HIS crucifixion entrusted
her care to John, whom HE loved.
> As always, Jesus is saying He alone must come first, you must
> put aside, or desert, everything else.
No. Jesus' message has always been about receiving GOD's love into our
hearts so that we can do the will of HIS Father, thereby becoming HIS
brethren (John 3:16).
"These who do the will of My Father are My family." -- LORD Jesus
Christ
Amen !
> > Laus Deo !
>
> Ich verstehe nicht.
Sorry you don't understand. Please forgive all my iniquities.
This victory still belongs to GOD, Whom I love with all my heart, soul,
mind, and strength:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/175b5dc947a0781f?
Your consolation prize is eternal life if you choose to surrender to
Him:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/fcb058da12bb3f3d?
May GOD in His infinite mercy and grace keep your heart beating to give
you extra time to understand and act on this, dear neighbor Rowland
whom I love unconditionally.
Prayerfully in Christ's amazing love,
Andrew <><
The God of Odd Statements
>>>He got the message across that man should fear Him, but the main message
>>>He
>>>wanted to impart most of all got lost in all that fear. What message?
>>>That all He wants is our love. That He loves us and wants us to love
>>>Him.
>>
>> You don't have a nice god. Why don't you invent a better one?
>
> He's not just my God, He's yours too, whether you like or not.
Not Mine.
--
________________________________________________________________________
Hail Eris! mhm 29x21; TM#5
Demon Lord of Confusion
COOSN-029-06-71069
Supreme High Overlord of rec.radio.*
Chuck Lysaght: Tarred & Feathered!
"Q: What do you call someone in the White House who is honest, caring,
and well-read?
A: A tourist." -- Anonymous
"It would be offly hard for any of you to abuse me on usenet. Really. I
have the advantage. I could easily turn alt.usenet.kooks into a cesspool
of encoded posts. Bringing the noise ratio up so high as to make the
group worthless. Anybody who can code could do this, why nobody has
bothered before now is beyond me. The ultimate spamming engine..
'BAWAHAHA'" -- Dustbin "Outer Filth" K00k's delusions of grandeur
reached new heights, in Message-ID:
<Xns98355D29419...@69.28.186.121>
"Immorality: The morality of those who are having a better time." -- H.
L. Mencken
"Consider that language a moment. 'Purposefully and materially
supported hostilities against the United States' is in the eye of the
beholder, and this administration has proven itself to be astonishingly
impatient with criticism of any kind. The broad powers given to Bush by
this legislation allow him to capture, indefinitely detain, and refuse a
hearing to any American citizen who speaks out against Iraq or any other
part of the so-called 'War on Terror.'
"If you write a letter to the editor attacking Bush, you could be
deemed as purposefully and materially supporting hostilities against the
United States. If you organize or join a public demonstration against
Iraq, or against the administration, the same designation could befall
you. One dark-comedy aspect of the legislation is that senators or House
members who publicly disagree with Bush, criticize him, or organize
investigations into his dealings could be placed under the same
designation. In effect, Congress just gave Bush the power to lock them
up." -- William Rivers Pitt
"It has become clear in recent months that a critical mass of the American
people have seen through the lies of the Bush administration; with the
president's polls at an historic low, growing resistance to the war Iraq,
and the Democrats likely to take back the Congress in mid-term elections,
the Bush administration is on the ropes. And so it is particularly
worrying that President Bush has seen fit, at this juncture to, in effect,
declare himself dictator." -- Frank Morales
http://www.uruknet.biz/?p=m27769&hd=0&size=1&l=e&fark
"No man in History, including JESUS CHRIST, has directly revealed to
the World the SATANIC WEAPON used to enslave mankind -- INTELLECTUAL
THOUGHT!!" -- Ray Karczewski repeatedly proves his words in every post
he makes
Stephen Knight
<lo...@thetruth.com> wrote:
>Actually, loving others is the second of the two most important
>commandments on which all the laws and all the prophets hang.
Hypocritical piece of shit.
You openly state you're not here to convert but to inform,
expressly so atheists will be punished... forever.
Isn't that like, "Glad I gave you AIDS, but you didn't ask for a
condom so it's your fault".
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>
> >Actually, loving others is the second of the two most important
> >commandments on which all the laws and all the prophets hang.
>
> Hypocritical piece of shit.
Name-calling simply shows that you remain defeated:
http://HeartMDPhD.com/Convicts
Laus Deo !
Prayerfully in Christ's amazing love,
Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung
Cardiologist, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
http://HeartMDPhD.com/HolySpirit
As for knowing who are the very elect, these you will know by the
unconditional love they have for everyone including their enemies
(Matthew 5:44-45, 1 Corinthians 13:3, James 2:14-17).
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/f4dad7fe68478acf?
Free Lunch
<mair_fheal-DF317...@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>:
Nothing.
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
then it doesnt exist? you are not aware of yourself?