What was the point of Jesus riding an ass, looking like an ass?
TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu
commanded my respect, but him riding an ass!?
On Apr 12, 10:22 pm, kenny <kmacad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> hey i'm new to the group and as i browsed through the recent
> discussions i thought i'd top this one off with a funny picture from
> a kid's christian coloring book....
>
> http://bobhockey.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/jesus_riding_dinosaur1.jpg
Jesus! He sure would have impressed more people by riding a dinosaur
than by riding an ass.
And then what was the point of him riding an ass, looking like an ass?
You know what I think? THEY ARE COMPULSIVE LIARS!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
THE WISE TIBETAN MONKEY SAYS
"Nothing's sacred but the truth!"
TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu
> "TibetanMonkey, the-Monkey-with-the-Bag-of-Shit"<comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:c572b8ad-582d-4976...@e7g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
>
> When and where do you ride your bicycle?
>
> I need to test the bumper(s) of my new culling SUV, nicknamed "Come to Jesus
> time"
I have a holy reply to you: "Kiss my holy ass!"
Don Klipstein
>I must confess that Jesus riding a British classic bicycle would have
>commanded my respect, but him riding an ass!?
>
>On Apr 12, 10:22 pm, kenny <kmacad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> hey i'm new to the group and as i browsed through the recent
>> discussions i thought i'd top this one off with a funny picture from
>> a kid's christian coloring book....
>>
>> http://bobhockey.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/jesus_riding_dinosaur1.jpg
>
>Jesus! He sure would have impressed more people by riding a dinosaur
>than by riding an ass.
>
>And then what was the point of him riding an ass, looking like an ass?
>
>You know what I think? THEY ARE COMPULSIVE LIARS!
What makes one think that Jesus should have ridden a dinosaur around
2,000 years ago?
Only fundamentalists who insist that the earth is only something like
6,000 years old claim that known dinosaurs, or even whatever the bones
said to be from dinosaurs "actually" came from, existed more recently than
63-65 million years ago!
- Don Klipstein (d...@misty.com)
Rod Speed
It was a joke, Joyce.
TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu
> In <d5a655ce-461b-4392-9bac-b04a346d6...@u34g2000yqu.googlegroups.com>,
Christians never ask questions: They just follow. They love dinosaurs;
they love Jesus; they love money.
Don Klipstein
How about Christians who have good liking to what Jesus favored,
including lesser of love for money? How about Christians who give great
weight to dinosaurs being *at least essentially* extincted by a
cataclysmic event that they trust scientists to have occurred a goodly
63 to likely 65 million years ago, and who trust scientists who have
determined that Planet Earth formed around or somwewhat over 4 billion
years ago and that the Sun formed around 4.5 bilion years ago?
(To those in UK - where I say "billion" I mean multiplied by 1E+09,
as in how I have heard somewhat "thousand million". I have heard a bit
that in UK billion is square of milion as opposed to "thousand-million".)
- Don Klipstein (d...@misty.com)
TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu
> In <0389816f-99fd-4d42-9e7a-90f50a8a7...@30g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>,
If you didn't vote for Bush and Blair, then you are OK. And if you
ride a bike, then you get a round trip ticket to heaven. ;)
Don Klipstein
TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu wrote:
>On Apr 14, 10:59 pm, d...@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote:
<Whatever I said, mostly on dinosaurs and prospects of Jesus riding one>
>If you didn't vote for Bush and Blair, then you are OK. And if you
>ride a bike, then you get a round trip ticket to heaven. ;)
I ride bikes on average maybe 10,000-11,000 miles per year, and drive
cars maybe on average 4,400 miles per year. I drive trucks maybe on
average 70 miles per year, and I have yet to drive an SUV.
One more thing: My personal faith already included consideration for
some prospect that I largely achieved a ticket into heaven, but that it is
likely a round trip one - and I have to come back (get reincarnated), even
though the Bible shows little support for this.
I voted against Bush in both elections where I had/maintained a choice.
(I could not have voted against him in primary elections because I chose
to have my voter registration to vote in primary elections within the
political party most able to oppose Bush.)
I could not have voted against Blair because I live and have lived where
I was able to vote against Bush.
Any comments about how I can get or have lost my chance at a 1-way
ticket to heaven as opposed to a round-trip one?
- Don Klipstein (d...@misty.com)
TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu
> In <f2f61373-27c2-46ba-a942-3f9a64f1e...@b23g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
You are safe, I think. We can only pray we can ride bikes in Heaven
with all peace of mind.
It's kind of hellish here.
Tom Sherman °_°
with us.
--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
Don Klipstein
>On Apr 15, 11:03 pm, d...@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote:
(In short, stuff about my prospects of me having achieved a ticket to
heaven, and that it may be a round-trip one that may require me to be
reincarnated.)
>You are safe, I think. We can only pray we can ride bikes in Heaven
>with all peace of mind.
>
>It's kind of hellish here.
One thing I can think of: What happens if I get to Heaven? Do I get
issued a harp, or for that matter any other musical instrument?
And then, what would I do with it?
I suspect that the way I suspect things work in Heaven, I can use a
musical instrument as some sort of aircraft that I can drive in a manner
like a flying motorcycle, and not needing fuel, other than possibly
caloric energy from heavenly food that I have some chance of using
telekinetically in Heaven. (If it flies and gets to land on clouds,
then there is less need for such a vehicle to actually need wheels.)
And, if I had to go to heaven anytime soon, I would probably drive such
a thing like a bicycle messenger.
And should I not be able to use a musical instrument as a witch's broom,
by some accounts I would have wings. I would surely make use of those!
Unless, I get a musical instrument and don't get to fly and then play
the darn thing. The problem for me there is that I have a bit of an
obsession with one title by one band, resulting in major part from a very
personally touching spectacular weather event doing its thing at a highly
opportune single minute of one year.
(June 26th, 1988, in midtown Manhattan, it rained from 5 AM to 11:58 AM.
Then, the clouds moved out fast like a carpet being yanked out of the sky.
At 11:59 and 30 seconds, the sky had just become majority clear and blue
and the sun came out. At that moment, I had my hands on one of the
handles of a float in a major parade that was scheduled to start moving at
noon.)
My little musical obsession is with a title that from its relevant
artist has many versions, one of which has over 4 minutes of instrumental-
only content despite being of the "Hi-NRG" gendre (or subgendre of disco?),
despite Hi-NRG normally having vocals. I consider that piece of
instrumental dance music to be gorgeous and beautiful even with its disco
beat, and to be the masterpiece by what I consider to be at least somewhat
of a "musical genious" of a producer.
That is one specific version of that title, and the version name here is
"New York Mix". That one experienced a mutation in my mind into becoming
"Easter music", with brass, organ, a tympani drum and orchestral strings
and no "disco beat".
Should I go to heaven and get a musical instrument, there is one thing I
fear could hit me: I could get voted out, or at least become unpopular
there. As in, "You, Don, may get tired of 'Relax' by Frankie Goes to
Hollywood in 50,000 years, and most others here are likely to get tired of
that 49,999 years, 12 months and at least 2 weeks sooner than that!"
(Leading to, "You need to live at least one more life on Earth and
expend your unheavenly insane personal energy!" Maybe same fate if I fly
around like a bicycle messenger with a flying motorcycle or with wings
instead!)
- Don Klipstein (d...@misty.com)
Don Klipstein
>On 4/14/2010 12:18 AM, Don Klipstein wrote:
<In short, expressing strong skepticism of dinosaurs existing and being
alive much more recently than 63-65 million years ago>
>Some dinosaurs with feathers survived, and their descendants are still
>with us.
Can you cite what dinosaurs survived to be still with us, along with
citing that such animals are considered dinosaurs as opposed to some sort
of birds or a subclass/super-order/order of mammals (monotremes)?
(It appears to me that dinosaurs were either a bird-ish-like subclass of
reptiles, or otherwise achieving a "class" of its own in the chordate
phylum of the animal kingdom.)
(Wikipedia does mention that there is one "clade" of animals that
evolved directly from dinosaurs, from specifically "theropod" dinosaurs,
and that is the "class" of birds.)
(It does appear to me that mammals evolved from birds, due to existence
of somewhat-birdlike mammals in Australia where evolution appears to me to
have often progressed more slowly while Australia was an "island" isolated
from other continents that Australia longer-ago was connected to with land
routes.)
- Don Klipstein (d...@misty.com)
TibetanMonkey, the-Monkey-with-the-Bag-of-Shit
> In <d74511a6-2559-4d60-a616-f62d07066...@z11g2000yqz.googlegroups.com>,
That's a detailed description of Heaven that almost makes me motivated
to leave earth sooner or later, and join the paradise.
The problem I see though is that things are going to be too easy up
there and that leads to boredom as we know:
You want a bicycle, two, three... you have them. It's almost like a
consumer society, but instead of having them stashed in the garage,
you go riding --or flying-- all over the place. You don't fear SUVs
because you don't die from accidents. The pedaling is only optional
because happy people don't need to sweat for nothing. Motorcycling is
mostly used to travel between planets, and musical instruments play
Bach's cantatas even if you don't know a note.
I hope we can get people motivated to die with this.
TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu
> ok, so scientists study topics like cosmology and such the entirety of
> their lives. Are they bored? What about boundless vistas being opened
> up once we cast off these mortal bands?
>
> No, you're just being goofy. And I really don't see it that way.
Well, they have a busy mind, but in Heaven everything's figured out by
God.
It's like the shepherd takes you the green pasture and all you got to
do is eat.
TibetanMonkey, Originator of the Banana Kung-Fu
> "TibetanMonkey, the-Monkey-with-the-Bag-of-Shit" <nolionnoprob...@yahoo.com>
> wrote in messagenews:5b792b77-03a2-4e33...@g11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Apr 16, 11:33 pm, d...@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote:
> >> In <d74511a6-2559-4d60-a616-f62d07066...@z11g2000yqz.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
> > That's a detailed description of Heaven that almost makes me motivated
> > to leave earth sooner or later, and join the paradise.
>
> our country, and reduce the deficit.
> Your donation will reduce your lifetime carbon footprint, and let the poor
> baby seals grow up in Alaska.
>
> Join us to evolve up;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqSZhwu1Rwo
Very powerful statement that all Christian should listen to before
they die, so they can be ready to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
It has a part two or it just ends abruptly? I'm "dying" to see what
else he has to say.
TibetanMonkey, the-Monkey-with-the-Bag-of-Shit
> > Ok, lessee. In the presence of the Almighty, the Creator of all of the
> > heavens and the earth...we're going to be bored to tears.
> During the first 500 trillions years it should a novelty seeing the
> creator for the first 500 trillions, trillions times. I am sure that
> we all be very excited during that initial period. But during the
> second 500 trillions trillions, trillions years, that excitement will
> wane slightly. After that and till the end of eternity it will start
> to be a bit of a "same old same". Yes, I guess boring will be the
> right word, but off course only after 500 trillion, trillions,
> trillions, trillions years.
Very, very good. Are you talking about "eons" or some even greater
amount of time?
But perhaps God will provide amenities such as the Cirque du Soleil or
the Roman Circus, where the NONBELIEVERS are fed to the lions...
454
> In article <hq9gdq$l0k$2...@news.eternal-september.org>, Tom Sherman °_°
> wrote:
>> On 4/14/2010 12:18 AM, Don Klipstein wrote:
>
> <In short, expressing strong skepticism of dinosaurs existing and
> being alive much more recently than 63-65 million years ago>
>
>> Some dinosaurs with feathers survived, and their descendants are
>> still with us.
>
> Can you cite what dinosaurs survived to be still with us, along with
> citing that such animals are considered dinosaurs as opposed to some
> sort of birds or a subclass/super-order/order of mammals (monotremes)?
>
> (It appears to me that dinosaurs were either a bird-ish-like
> subclass of reptiles, or otherwise achieving a "class" of its own in
> the chordate phylum of the animal kingdom.)
>
> (Wikipedia does mention that there is one "clade" of animals that
> evolved directly from dinosaurs, from specifically "theropod"
> dinosaurs, and that is the "class" of birds.)
> (It does appear to me that mammals evolved from birds,
> due to existence of somewhat-birdlike mammals in Australia
Which mammals would those be ?
where evolution appears to
> me to have often progressed more slowly while Australia was an
> "island" isolated from other continents that Australia longer-ago was
> connected to with land routes.)
That lack of a connection happened long before any of that level of evolution.
> - Don Klipstein (d...@misty.com)
Don Klipstein
>Don Klipstein wrote:
>> In article <hq9gdq$l0k$2...@news.eternal-september.org>, Tom Sherman °_°
>> wrote:
>>> On 4/14/2010 12:18 AM, Don Klipstein wrote:
>>
>> <In short, expressing strong skepticism of dinosaurs existing and
>> being alive much more recently than 63-65 million years ago>
>>
>>> Some dinosaurs with feathers survived, and their descendants are
>>> still with us.
>>
>> Can you cite what dinosaurs survived to be still with us, along with
>> citing that such animals are considered dinosaurs as opposed to some
>> sort of birds or a subclass/super-order/order of mammals (monotremes)?
>>
>> (It appears to me that dinosaurs were either a bird-ish-like
>> subclass of reptiles, or otherwise achieving a "class" of its own in
>> the chordate phylum of the animal kingdom.)
>>
>> (Wikipedia does mention that there is one "clade" of animals that
>> evolved directly from dinosaurs, from specifically "theropod"
>> dinosaurs, and that is the "class" of birds.)
>> (It does appear to me that mammals evolved from birds,
>> due to existence of somewhat-birdlike mammals in Australia
>
>Which mammals would those be ?
The monotremes. The most widely known example is the duck-billed
platypus, a monotreme in the "prototheria" subclass of mammals. The other
4 living examples are the three long-beaked echidnas and the short-beaked
echidna.
>>where evolution appears to
>> me to have often progressed more slowly while Australia was an
>> "island" isolated from other continents that Australia longer-ago was
>> connected to with land routes.)
>
>That lack of a connection happened long before any of that level of evolution.
Australia separated from the southern supercontinent Gondwana about 96
million years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_(continent)
Marsupial mammals were in existence in the early Cretaceous period (as
in closer to 145.5 million years ago than to 65.5 million years ago).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cretaceous
It is currently thought that marsupial and placental mammals resulted
from a branching in mammal evolution later than one that resulted in
modern monotremes including the duck-billed platypus and long-beaked
echidnas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotremata
That same article says that even placental mammals were in existence in
the late Cretaceous period. However, eutherian mammals (includes
placentals and extinct mammals more like placentals than marsupials) were
noted to exist as long as 125 million years ago. Placental mammals came
into existence more than 105 million years ago and had divided into 3
divisions of some sort by 100 million years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placentals
The oldest known momotreme specimen was dated to 123 million years ago,
though there is thought that they first came into existence in the early
Cretaceous period (more recently than 145.5 million years ago) or even the
late Jurassic period (longer ago than 145.5 million years).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotremata
- Don Klipstein (d...@misty.com)
Rod Speed
They are nothing like a bird. They just evolved a beak, in
the same way that some fish did, like a swordfish etc.
> The other 4 living examples are the three long-beaked
> echidnas and the short-beaked echidna.
They are nothing like birds either. There is no evidence that they evolved from birds.
And other australian mammals did not evolve from them either.
>>> where evolution appears to
>>> me to have often progressed more slowly while Australia was an
>>> "island" isolated from other continents that Australia longer-ago
>>> was connected to with land routes.)
>>
>> That lack of a connection happened long before any of that level of
>> evolution.
>
> Australia separated from the southern supercontinent Gondwana about
> 96 million years ago.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_(continent)
Have fun explaining the humans there.
454
They are nothing like a bird. They just evolved a beak,
in the same way that some fish did, like a swordfish etc.
And plenty of reptiles have eggs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platypus#Evolution
does not say that they evolved from birds.
> The other 4 living examples are the three long-beaked
> echidnas and the short-beaked echidna.
They are nothing like birds either. There is no evidence that they evolved from birds.
And other australian mammals did not evolve from them either.
>>> where evolution appears to
>>> me to have often progressed more slowly while Australia was an
>>> "island" isolated from other continents that Australia longer-ago
>>> was connected to with land routes.)
>>
>> That lack of a connection happened long before any of that level of
>> evolution.
>
> Australia separated from the southern supercontinent Gondwana about
> 96 million years ago.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_(continent)
Have fun explaining the humans there.
> Marsupial mammals were in existence in the early Cretaceous period
TibetanMonkey, the-Monkey-with-the-Bag-of-Shit
Humans came from clay, says the Bible.
Don Klipstein
Turns out you have a point. I did do a bit of web searching, and ran
into:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_mammals
That one says mammals evolved within the synapsid lineage, which started
as mammal-like reptiles.
>> The other 4 living examples are the three long-beaked
>> echidnas and the short-beaked echidna.
>
>They are nothing like birds either. There is no evidence that they
>evolved from birds.
>
>And other australian mammals did not evolve from them either.
>
>>>> where evolution appears to
>>>> me to have often progressed more slowly while Australia was an
>>>> "island" isolated from other continents that Australia longer-ago
>>>> was connected to with land routes.)
>>>
>>> That lack of a connection happened long before any of that level of
>>> evolution.
>>
>> Australia separated from the southern supercontinent Gondwana about
>> 96 million years ago.
>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_(continent)
>
>Have fun explaining the humans there.
Or humans in Hawaii and other places more remote from Africa/Eurasia
than Australia is?
The Wikipedia article on Australia says it is estimated that humans
first arrived from southeast Asia via land bridges and short sea
crossings. The sea level was definitely a lot lower then.
- Don Klipstein (d...@misty.com)