Obama might have been behind the OK tornado. Alex Jones says so.

[Busboy Jefe]

Following a long tangent, Jones returned to the caller's subject.
While he explained that "natural tornadoes" do exist and that he's not
sure if a government "weather weapon" was involved in the Oklahoma
disaster, Jones warned nonetheless that the government "can create and
steer groups of tornadoes."

According to Jones, this possibility hinges on whether people spotted
helicopters and small aircraft "in and around the clouds, spraying and
doing things." He added, "if you saw that, you better bet your bottom
dollar they did this, but who knows if they did. You know, that's the
thing, we don't know."

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/05/21/alex-jones-explains-how-government-weather-weap/194167

Windghazi!

Times like these I'm glad I live in a big city. You rural folk, though
-- watch out. The angry black man's gonna wipe you out! Cyclones and
drones and Alex Jones...oh my!

El Jefe

[mss]

Busboy Jefe spoke unto us saying:

> Following a long tangent, Jones returned to the caller's subject.
> While he explained that "natural tornadoes" do exist and that he's not
> sure if a government "weather weapon" was involved in the Oklahoma
> disaster, Jones warned nonetheless that the government "can create and
> steer groups of tornadoes."
>
> According to Jones, this possibility hinges on whether people spotted
> helicopters and small aircraft "in and around the clouds, spraying and
> doing things." He added, "if you saw that, you better bet your bottom
> dollar they did this, but who knows if they did. You know, that's the
> thing, we don't know."

Just thinking to myself, if [God punishes]* the unbelievers, what's he doing to
the faithful in Oklahoma?

* It all traces back to Mesopotamian myth Jefe...

Adon: 'Lord' [Hebrew].
Adonai: 'My Lord' [Hebrew].
Allah: 'The God' [singular/Aramaic].
Ba'al: 'The Lord of ...' [singular/Canaanite].
Ba'al Hadad: Lord of thunder [Canaanite] compare with El Shaddai.
Baali: 'My Lord' [Hebrew].
Beelzebub: 'Lord of the flies' [Canaanite].
El Shaddai: 'God of the mountain' - El <god> Shaddai <mountain dweller> [Canaanite, but Moses ripped it off...]
El: 'God of the other gods' epithet [Canaanite & 1st word the Hebrews used for God].
Elah: Note also the similarity to 'Allah', see Eloah.
Eloah: 'He who is the object of fear or reverence' [singular/Hebrew].
Elohim: Plural of Eloah [Hebrew] Plural? wtf? yup based on older myths...
Elus: Deity [Canaanite].
Elyon: The God Most High [Hebrew].
God: Name. See Gudan [English].
Gudan: To 'call', 'invoke', or 'pray', or 'hoot', see Huta, Odin.
Guth: A pagan idol [Gothic].
Got: God [Gothic/Old German].
Hallelujah: 'Praise ye' [or hail] + 'the Lord', see Yah, Yahweh, Huta.
Huta: 'One to whom sacrifices are made' [Sanskrit/Indo-European].
Ilah: 'The Gods' [plural/Aramaic], see Elah, Allah.
Jehovah/JHVH: Personal name [English/German].
Odin: War god whom provided 'inspiration', 'rage', 'frenzy', [Anglo-Saxon] see Gudan.
Woden: [Anglo-Saxon] See Wotan.
Wotan: In Norse mythology Wotan was the highest of the gods. See Odin.
Yah: See Bal/El/Yahweh [Hebrew].
Yahweh/YHWH: Personal name [Hebrew].

--
Later on,
Mike

[AJ]

On Jun 1, 6:47 am, mss <em...@invalid.foo> wrote:
> Just thinking to myself, if [God punishes]* the unbelievers, what's he doing to
> the faithful in Oklahoma?

2 words atheists can never understand, "free will."

[Tattoo Vampire]

AJ <misfits...@aol.com> wrote:

> 2 words atheists can never understand, "free will."

So explain everything to us, Pastor AJ. Why does God let the righteous
suffer? I thought Sky Daddy Junior let himself be hung from a telephone pole
to wash away everyone's sins and heal the world.

[steveh99]

In article <XnsA1D29585EA9...@178.63.61.145>,
sit...@this.computer says...

AJ doesn't care about God, the Bible, or moral right/wrong unless he is
trying to prop himself up to look like the good little church goin, tax
paying puppet with the picket fence around his lil ol house in da hills

[83LowRider]

steveh99 wrote:

>
> AJ doesn't care about God, the Bible, or moral right/wrong unless he
> is trying to prop himself up to look like the good little church
> goin, tax paying puppet with the picket fence around his lil ol house
> in da hills

That's pretty funny little stevie... because I am betting
that YOU believe in God. Do you? Will you deny Him?
God doesn't like people that deny Him, ya know....

And yet, if you DO believe -- you've sucked every
atheist dick in this group and not once 'stood up'.

You are fucking pathetic.

[steveh99]

In article <kodhmg$eln$1...@dont-email.me>, 83low...@nywilldo.com says...

LOL
I think it's priceless knowing I get under your thick skin you cronie
keep dancing you mud turtle

[AJ]

On Jun 1, 1:41 pm, Tattoo Vampire <sitt...@this.computer> wrote:

Atheist think God is going to swoop down like Superman and save us
all. It doesn't work like that. IMO, people are awarded or punished
in the afterlife.

[AJ]

On Jun 1, 2:31 pm, steveh99 <steve...@roadrunner.com> wrote:
> In article <kodhmg$el...@dont-email.me>, 83lowri...@nywilldo.com says...

Well Judas, are you going to answer his question or keep sucking that
dick?

[steveh99]

In article <dd0dcdd5-e196-4fea-8a3e-
3d190d...@b2g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>, misfits...@aol.com
says...

Shouldnt mankind punish this so called "god" for allowing more than
6,000,000 jews to suffer in dumb anguish and die horrible deaths in WWI?

[steveh99]

In article <MPG.2c142d624...@news.eternal-september.org>,
stev...@roadrunner.com says...

WWII rather

[83LowRider]

steveh99 wrote:

>> That's pretty funny little stevie... because I am betting
>> that YOU believe in God. Do you? Will you deny Him?
>> God doesn't like people that deny Him, ya know....
>>
>> And yet, if you DO believe -- you've sucked every
>> atheist dick in this group and not once 'stood up'.
>>
>> You are fucking pathetic.
>
> LOL
> I think it's priceless knowing I get under your thick skin you cronie
> keep dancing you mud turtle

How are you under MY skin little stevie?

You're the one that won't answer a question...
I answer all questions. Do YOU believe
in God little stevie?

Will you once again deny Him?

Or will you once again dance, dance dance... all
around a very simple question?
I'm betting you dance.

If you're an atheist --> you'd have said so while sucking
the scrotum of your 'friends' here. Yet, you've never done
that, have you stevie? Say it loud and proud motherfucker...

"I believe in GODDD" or "fuck a bunch of Sky Daddy shit".
Or --- once again -- show yourself as a pussy. Pussy.

[83LowRider]

steveh99 wrote:

>> Shouldnt mankind punish this so called "god" for allowing more than
>> 6,000,000 jews to suffer in dumb anguish and die horrible deaths in
>> WWI?
>
> WWII rather

God didn't put them there... man did.
Man also punished and killed many of
those responsible, as an example to others
as well as for the punishment it deserved.

God will get His punishment too... either way.
Where will you be little stevie? Are you ready to
say it loud and proud... "fuck you God"...? or
WiLl Ye ReCeIvE the baby Jesus into your heart?
Say it stevie... just fucking say it.

[Tattoo Vampire]

AJ <misfits...@aol.com> wrote:

> Atheist think God is going to swoop down like Superman and save us
> all. It doesn't work like that. IMO, people are awarded or punished
> in the afterlife.

When you die, you take an eternal dirt nap. There is no afterlife.

You're a fine one to lecture about God, by the way.

[AJ]

On Jun 1, 4:10 pm, steveh99 <steve...@roadrunner.com> wrote:
> In article <dd0dcdd5-e196-4fea-8a3e-
> 3d190d119...@b2g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>, misfitskiss...@aol.com

> says...
>
>
>
> > On Jun 1, 1:41 pm, Tattoo Vampire <sitt...@this.computer> wrote:
> > > AJ <misfitskiss...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > 2 words atheists can never understand, "free will."
>
> > > So explain everything to us, Pastor AJ. Why does God let the righteous
> > > suffer? I thought Sky Daddy Junior let himself be hung from a telephone pole
> > > to wash away everyone's sins and heal the world.
>
> > Atheist think God is going to swoop down like Superman and save us
> > all.  It doesn't work like that.  IMO, people are awarded or punished
> > in the afterlife.
>
> Shouldnt mankind punish this so called "god" for allowing more than
> 6,000,000 jews to suffer in dumb anguish and die horrible deaths in WWI?

What part of "free will" don't you understand? How do you know those
6,000,000 Jews aren't rejoicing in heaven right now while the Nazis
are burning in Hell? IMO, a human's body is just a shell and there
is a soul.

[steveh99]

In article <f0f63439-6b70-4872-8553-3a8c2098ee09
@b2g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>, misfits...@aol.com says...

point is no loving god would allow his children, especially babes burn
alive in furnaces

[steveh99]

In article <kodoek$j9a$1...@dont-email.me>, 83low...@nywilldo.com says...

You're boring

[steveh99]

In article <XnsA1D2B1CBE85...@178.63.61.145>,
sit...@this.computer says...

hHe is a ypocrite you mean?

[Tattoo Vampire]

steveh99 <stev...@roadrunner.com> wrote:

> hHe is a ypocrite you mean?

Somewhat... he's talked about banging women other than his wife and dealing
in pirated copies of copyrighted materials. Those aren't very Christian
things to do. ;-)

[mss]

AJ spoke unto us saying:

> 2 words atheists can never understand, "free will."

And one word myth believers will never understand - reality!

--
Later on,
Mike

[mss]

AJ spoke unto us saying:

> Atheist think God is going to swoop down like Superman and save us
> all. It doesn't work like that. IMO, people are awarded or punished
> in the afterlife.

Do you proof of this ever happening even once?

--
Later on,
Mike

[mss]

83LowRider spoke unto us saying:

> How are you under MY skin little stevie?
>
> You're the one that won't answer a question...
> I answer all questions. Do YOU believe
> in God little stevie?
>
> Will you once again deny Him?
>
> Or will you once again dance, dance dance... all
> around a very simple question?
> I'm betting you dance.
>
> If you're an atheist --> you'd have said so while sucking
> the scrotum of your 'friends' here. Yet, you've never done
> that, have you stevie? Say it loud and proud motherfucker...
>
> "I believe in GODDD" or "fuck a bunch of Sky Daddy shit".
> Or --- once again -- show yourself as a pussy. Pussy.

83, back up. I didn't force the god issue with you, & you in turn
ought to show steve the same courtesy. Just relax, its no biggie.

--
Later on,
Mike

[steveh99]

In article <MPG.2c1446734...@reader.albasani.net>,
em...@invalid.foo says...

Thanks Mike.. Appreciate the nice words..
Some guys here suffer from little dick syndrome. Probably comes from
sitting on riding mowers too long

[steveh99]

In article <XnsA1D2BCFE52C...@178.63.61.145>,
sit...@this.computer says...

Neither is threatening to knock peoples teeth out, or blowing some poor
bloke away that happens to walk through his yard by mistake

[steveh99]

In article <MPG.2c1444e72...@reader.albasani.net>,
em...@invalid.foo says...

>
> AJ spoke unto us saying:
>
> > 2 words atheists can never understand, "free will."
>
> And one word myth believers will never understand - reality!

lol

[mss]

steveh99 spoke unto us saying:

> Thanks Mike.. Appreciate the nice words..
> Some guys here suffer from little dick syndrome. Probably comes from
> sitting on riding mowers too long

No prob steve. 83 knows better, just chewing his tail because I
figure he'll think about it some.

<long winded rant ahead, turn back now if you're short of time>

83...

Imagine this, high from above you look down on a mountain...

- there's ol' steve on the shaded side, there's snow in the crevices
& its cold & dark, he's climbing up.

- 180 degs from steve. you see aj, he's on the sunny side, its hot
& windy, he too climbs up.

- and another still postioned bewtween those two who sees that same
snow now melted & running down as water, he's climbing up as well.

You can plainly discern that all three are climbing the SAME mountain
& yet all three experience a slightly differing reality-tunnel...

Same problem, different perspective - its relative. Think about it...
Just because someone does not fulfill *your* criteria in no way implies
that said other is wrong, it simply means *you* have trouble dealing with
someone else. Tell me true 83 - where does the line between reality &
fantasy blur? The answer is simple. That line, that distinction, that
'reality-tunnel' exists ONLY in your mind.

My friend <assuming you'll allow me that much>, 'belief' is the death of
intelligence. Humor me here & let me expand on this: As soon as one
believes a doctrine of any sort, one assumes 'certitude', that is,
he *stops thinking* about aspect 'x'. And the more certitude one assumes,
the less there is left to think about overall. Further, a person sure of
everything would never have any need to think about anything and might be
considered clinically brain-dead under current medical standards.

Do you see the trap?

When you attempt to coerce steve to swear an oath of alliance that conforms
to your view of reality <& what really gets my hackles up, disparage him
because he chooses not to>, you've unwittingly made the mistake in thinking
that what *you see* in life is real for all others, & its not. Civil
disobedience... thank goodness for her eh? Without it, without eating from
the tree of knowledge, why I'd dare say we'd still be mindless apes believing
whatever view the king ape* attempted to force upon others.

You wanna tell me to stay out of it? No sir, don't think so. See, I just happen
to think <hope> you know better than to slag someone because you think you can.
Not talking about points of view here, cool, bash away, all ready noted thats
realtive. I'm talking about wantonly giving steve the person a hard time because
you think he's easy game. Maybe one day he feels one way, maybe another the next,
& that's his right to do so. And you can sure enough bet your ass I'll defend that.

* 'We tried to freight sound with the vague thoughts that flitted
like shadows through our consciousness. The Hairless One began to
chatter loudly. By his noises he expressed anger against Red-Eye
and desire to hurt Red-Eye. Thus far he got, and thus far we
understood. But when he tried to express the cooperative impulse
that stirred within him, his noises became gibberish. Then Big-Face,
with brow-bristling and chest-pounding, began to chatter. One after
another of us joined in the orgy of rage, until even old Marrow-Bone
was mumbling and spluttering with his cracked voice and withered lips.
Some one seized a stick and began pounding a log.' - Before Adam by
Jack London

--
Later on,
Mike

[steveh99]

In article <MPG.2c147b62c...@reader.albasani.net>,
em...@invalid.foo says...

The problem here is there is this BS attitude "you are either with us or
against us" There is no middle ground.. You either kiss 83's, AJ's asses
or you are the enemy, So being that (cant speak for anyone else) I don't
kiss anyones ass, I am perceived as an enemy. Which is fine by me. I was
here in 96 when this group was first created. I didnt come here to kiss
anybody's ass then and I dont now

[83LowRider]

mss wrote:

>> If you're an atheist --> you'd have said so while sucking
>> the scrotum of your 'friends' here. Yet, you've never done
>> that, have you stevie? Say it loud and proud motherfucker...
>>
>> "I believe in GODDD" or "fuck a bunch of Sky Daddy shit".
>> Or --- once again -- show yourself as a pussy. Pussy.
>
> 83, back up.

I'm not sure how to answer this one - 'no', 'why', 'fuck off',
or 'make me'... there's any number of choices here.

> I didn't force the god issue with you,

Bullshit, you brought it up a few times.
You can't 'force' the God issue -- you can't
make another person believe <or not>.
But you were indeed 'pushy' over the issue.
And that's fine -- I can deal with that, as I
CHOSE to be involved in the discussion.

> & you in turn ought to show steve
> the same courtesy.

I've shown steve every courtesy that he has shown
me. Any 'courtesy' you feel you've extended in
our conversations <and not sure what those would
have been> I've equally extended to you. Is there
ANYWHERE you've been cussed or belittled over
your beliefs in our back-and-forths?

> Just relax, its no biggie.

Mike, I couldn't BE any more chilled...
And it kinda is a 'biggie'. It's a simple and legitimate
question to someone who has put his vague comments
into play many times. We know where you stand, where
AJ and I stand.... we know where Jefe, TV and lab
stand regarding their beliefs. If someone is going to mock
God/religion -- the question is not only relevant, it's
critical. And he still hasn't answered it.

[83LowRider]

steveh99 wrote:

> Thanks Mike.. Appreciate the nice words..
> Some guys here suffer from little dick syndrome. Probably comes from
> sitting on riding mowers too long

Mike is an atheist stevie... are you?

[83LowRider]

mss wrote:


> Tell me true 83 - where does the line between reality &
> fantasy blur? The answer is simple. That line, that distinction, that
> 'reality-tunnel' exists ONLY in your mind.

Nope... your primary concept is flawed. Reality never
changes.... only perception. Our national reality is that
our country is broke. Perception will dictate the seriousness
of that matter, but the reality is the same.

> My friend <assuming you'll allow me that much>, 'belief' is the death
> of intelligence. Humor me here & let me expand on this: As soon as one
> believes a doctrine of any sort, one assumes 'certitude', that is,
> he *stops thinking* about aspect 'x'. And the more certitude one
> assumes,

Is this more 'God-talk'? Or are you speaking of the secular?

Either way, your statement is false. And maybe 'false' isn't
the correct word.... let's call it fatally flawed. When George
Wallace was running for president - he was known as a
racist... yet in his final years his best, maybe only friend, was
a black guy that pushed him around in his wheelchair. Robert
Byrd was a senior KKK member... did he reform? or was he
still a racist prick when he died? Does someone that was raised
Christian and turned Muslim? do they not go against your theory?
While your parents may have been fervent Christians, and
while they may have REMAINED that way their entire life,
that does not in any way mean your parents suffered a
"death of intelligence", it means they were commited to their
beliefs. There is no desire left anywhere in my body to
take another math class... is that a "DOI"? If you're not taking
a science class at this very moment.... have YOU suffered
a "DOI"?

> the less there is left to think about overall. Further, a person sure
> of everything would never have any need to think about anything and
> might be considered clinically brain-dead under current medical
> standards.

A 'smart' individual never stops learning. Although you'll not
see me taking any more math and science, there's plenty to
be learned every day -- even if just sitting at the computer.
The entire world is at our fingertips, it's up to the individual
when they decide to 'stop learning'.

> Do you see the trap?

No.

> When you attempt to coerce steve to swear an oath of alliance that
> conforms to your view of reality <& what really gets my hackles
> up, disparage him > because he chooses not to>, you've unwittingly
> made the mistake in thinking
> that what *you see* in life is real for all others, & its not.

I'm not sure what the hell you're smoking, but pass it around dude.

This is real simple -- I asked steve if he believed in God.
I've not talked shit to you, Jefe, lab or anyone else here who
has said that they don't believe. I'll not heckle steve over it
either. What I "see" has no bearing on this whatsoever.

> Civil disobedience... thank goodness for her eh?

Funny you'd say that and then follow it up by trying
to tell me to lay off of steve. You'd impose your will
upon ME, to NOT impose my will upon steve.

Ironic, isn't it?

> Without it, without eating from the tree of knowledge,
> why I'd dare say we'd still be mindless apes
> believing whatever view the king ape* attempted to
> force upon others.

More superflous banter. Man has an innate desire and
need to learn. That isn't an option, it's a given. No different
than the apes.... as they TOO have learned and progessed
over time. They were the first species we found to use a
tool. Even apes adapt and learn. I see the religious inference
you're attempting to make... that if we just followed that
'stupid-old religious shit', that we'd still all be neanderthals.
And that ain't the case. Many or most of the greatest minds
this world has seen have been very religious men. To
imply that one can't exist without the other is pure nonsense.
What Thomas Edison believed <religiously> has no bearing
on his natural curiosity and his desire to better mankind.

> You wanna tell me to stay out of it? No sir, don't think so. See, I
> just happen
> to think <hope> you know better than to slag someone because you
> think you can.

No one can tell/make another person to stay out of a public
discussion/forum. My statement was to say that you have
no horse in this race. You're more than welcome to come
to the aid of the feeble... but be aware that 'we' see that for
what it is. Noble? if you want to consider it so... that's fine.

> Not talking about points of view here, cool, bash
> away, all ready noted thats realtive. I'm talking about wantonly
> giving steve the person a hard time because you think he's easy game.

Why would you assume that? Are you saying that YOU think
steve is incompetent? That's what it sounds like from here.

That's kind of presumptive and rude of you isn't it?

You see where this is going?

> Maybe one day he feels one way, maybe another the next, & that's his
> right to do so.

Listen... people either believe in God, they don't (atheist)
or they're not sure (agnostic).... at least in a general sense.

Is THAT SOMETHING THAT CHANGES day to day?
Maybe it hinges on the days he takes his meds vs. those
days that he doesn't? or does he catch an old episode of
Jim and Tammy Bakker and simply get pulled back in?
Enquiring minds want to know!!!

> And you can sure enough bet your ass I'll defend > that.

Defend whatever you wish... selectively of course!
All I've ever ASKED of steve... is that HE TOO, defend
what he says.

> * 'We tried to freight sound with the vague thoughts that flitted
> like shadows through our consciousness. The Hairless One began to
> chatter loudly. By his noises he expressed anger against Red-Eye
> and desire to hurt Red-Eye. Thus far he got, and thus far we
> understood. But when he tried to express the cooperative impulse
> that stirred within him, his noises became gibberish. Then Big-Face,
> with brow-bristling and chest-pounding, began to chatter. One after
> another of us joined in the orgy of rage, until even old Marrow-Bone
> was mumbling and spluttering with his cracked voice and withered lips.
> Some one seized a stick and began pounding a log.' - Before Adam by
> Jack London

Uhhhh.... am I Red-Eye or Big-Face in this scenario?
An enraged mob in this group <regardless of 'side'>
will total about 4 bodies. steve and FVH are 'grunters'
at best... TV may be smart enough to use a stick, but
that's debatable.

[83LowRider]

steveh99 wrote:

> The problem here is there is this BS attitude "you are either with us
> or against us" There is no middle ground.. You either kiss 83's, AJ's
> asses or you are the enemy, So being that (cant speak for anyone
> else) I don't kiss anyones ass, I am perceived as an enemy. Which is
> fine by me. I was here in 96 when this group was first created. I
> didnt come here to kiss anybody's ass then and I dont now

Total bullshit.

There is no 'us'... there's about 5 regular posters here.

Ass-kissing? AJ rarely replies to my posts... but I'd bet
ten bucks that FVH still tags almost every AJ post. And
you, little stevie, tag almost every post made by your leftist
heroes here. Talk about some ass-kissin'!

Enemies? Where? You're not my enemy steve.. you never
have been. I don't mind you cashing my check so much....
but I shouldn't have to listen to your insane drivel while
doing so. I am fully aware that 'your kind' are out there in
abundance... that "your" vote now outnumbers mine... but
I don't have to like it nor do I have to keep silent about it.
I'm paying you dammit, I've got a right to tell you to shut up
or back it up.

And WHEN you 'came here' has no bearing. Nothing matters
here except the words that you try to pound out on your
keyboard. As faulty as they may be.

[83LowRider]

steveh99 wrote:

>> And one word myth believers will never understand - reality!
>
> lol

Another generic response. Are you a believer or
not? Have you given yourself to the Lawd thy God?
been baptised by 'da Holy Waters? Or are you a
man void of God? Tell us stevie.... just do it.

[83LowRider]

mss wrote:

>> Atheist think God is going to swoop down like Superman and save us
>> all. It doesn't work like that. IMO, people are awarded or punished
>> in the afterlife.
>
> Do you proof of this ever happening even once?

Yes. Justin Bieber was dead for 15 seconds after an
alcohol-fueled binge. Satan awakened him and gave
him back to us. Satan then laughed his ass off.

[mss]

83LowRider spoke unto us saying:

> Mike is an atheist stevie... are you?

Maybe he is, maybe he's not. Why do you belive?

--
Later on,
Mike

[mss]

83LowRider spoke unto us saying:

> Nope... your primary concept is flawed. Reality never
> changes.... only perception. Our national reality is that
> our country is broke. Perception will dictate the seriousness
> of that matter, but the reality is the same.

Reality is the same for all you'd wager? Chuckle, prove it. This
means you'd have to understand all realities. 'Reality' is a word
in the -English language- which happens to be (a) a noun and (b) singular.
Thinking in the -English language- programs us to conceptualize 'reality'
as one block-like entity, sort of like a huge New York skyscraper,
where every part is just another 'room' within the same building.
This linguistic -only- construct is so pervasive that some folks cannot
'think' outside it at all. The notion that reality is a noun, a solid
thing like a brick or a baseball bat, derives from the evolutionary
fact that our nervous systems normally organize the dance of energy
into such block-like things, probably as instant bio-survival cues.
steve has his, you your's, & I my own.

> Is this more 'God-talk'? Or are you speaking of the secular?
>
> Either way, your statement is false. And maybe 'false' isn't
> the correct word.... let's call it fatally flawed. When George
> Wallace was running for president - he was known as a
> racist... yet in his final years his best, maybe only friend, was
> a black guy that pushed him around in his wheelchair. Robert
> Byrd was a senior KKK member... did he reform? or was he
> still a racist prick when he died? Does someone that was raised
> Christian and turned Muslim? do they not go against your theory?
> While your parents may have been fervent Christians, and
> while they may have REMAINED that way their entire life,
> that does not in any way mean your parents suffered a
> "death of intelligence", it means they were commited to their
> beliefs. There is no desire left anywhere in my body to
> take another math class... is that a "DOI"? If you're not taking
> a science class at this very moment.... have YOU suffered
> a "DOI"?

Whoosh right over your head 83... look what happens with those you
noted whom committed <locked in> to one way of viewing the world.
Maybe another time, bummer.

> A 'smart' individual never stops learning. Although you'll not
> see me taking any more math and science, there's plenty to
> be learned every day -- even if just sitting at the computer.
> The entire world is at our fingertips, it's up to the individual
> when they decide to 'stop learning'.

You bet, & after the same fashion, let another find his own path.

> I'm not sure what the hell you're smoking, but pass it around dude.

Papyrus, typically found in books, though ancient folk used to
roll up scrolls.

> Funny you'd say that and then follow it up by trying
> to tell me to lay off of steve. You'd impose your will
> upon ME, to NOT impose my will upon steve.

Right, you poke him, then I'll poke you.

> Ironic, isn't it?

Very =)

> More superflous banter. Man has an innate desire and
> need to learn. That isn't an option, it's a given. No different
> than the apes.... as they TOO have learned and progessed
> over time. They were the first species we found to use a
> tool. Even apes adapt and learn. I see the religious inference
> you're attempting to make... that if we just followed that
> 'stupid-old religious shit', that we'd still all be neanderthals.
> And that ain't the case. Many or most of the greatest minds
> this world has seen have been very religious men. To
> imply that one can't exist without the other is pure nonsense.
> What Thomas Edison believed <religiously> has no bearing
> on his natural curiosity and his desire to better mankind.

To imply belief is stop learning, ie - to say 'x' is solved & one need
not ever again think abut it again, open your eyes. Religion requires
just such belief & what if knowledge comes in to play that utterly
disproves what one believes? What then?

> No one can tell/make another person to stay out of a public
> discussion/forum. My statement was to say that you have
> no horse in this race. You're more than welcome to come
> to the aid of the feeble... but be aware that 'we' see that for
> what it is. Noble? if you want to consider it so... that's fine.

Knock knock - YOU'RE THE ONE with difficulties understanding.
steve's wise enough to not say he knows either way. That's
where he's at on his journey, he's not sure - that's his prerogative 83.

> Why would you assume that? Are you saying that YOU think
> steve is incompetent? That's what it sounds like from here.

No but I am saying you are acting as much yourself when you ought
to be a little more humble about the issue.

> That's kind of presumptive and rude of you isn't it?

Yes sir, very rude. How does it feel when thrown back in your face?
I know I'd grab a clue if someone handed me a breath-mint, why
not you?

> You see where this is going?

Yup, primed & ready.

> Listen... people either believe in God, they don't (atheist)
> or they're not sure (agnostic).... at least in a general sense.
>
> Is THAT SOMETHING THAT CHANGES day to day?
> Maybe it hinges on the days he takes his meds vs. those
> days that he doesn't? or does he catch an old episode of
> Jim and Tammy Bakker and simply get pulled back in?
> Enquiring minds want to know!!!

Sure, sometimes I think there is, then get up the next day
& think there's not.I do it all the time. So what is that to you?
Would you that one not be honest instead? 83, the only constant
is change...

> Defend whatever you wish... selectively of course!
> All I've ever ASKED of steve... is that HE TOO, defend
> what he says.

You know, I certainly will.

> Uhhhh.... am I Red-Eye or Big-Face in this scenario?
> An enraged mob in this group <regardless of 'side'>
> will total about 4 bodies. steve and FVH are 'grunters'
> at best... TV may be smart enough to use a stick, but
> that's debatable.

Ha! You ARE thinking about it - I knew it! But honestly,
Just hoping that's you'd take Matthew 5:41 to heart.
Even an atheist can understand that...

--
Later on,
Mike

[mss]

steveh99 spoke unto us saying:

> The problem here is there is this BS attitude "you are either with us or
> against us" There is no middle ground.. You either kiss 83's, AJ's asses
> or you are the enemy, So being that (cant speak for anyone else) I don't
> kiss anyones ass, I am perceived as an enemy. Which is fine by me. I was
> here in 96 when this group was first created. I didnt come here to kiss
> anybody's ass then and I dont now

You're right steve. If one doesn't agree, then they're considered the enemy.
You know, I can disagree all the day long & still be friends with folks.
I wish some others here would realize that...

Bottom line: You keep on truckin' don't be goaded into a verbal slap-down
just for shits & giggles. No one here knows the future with any degree of
accuracy. Its wise to be able to change your mind as often as you see fit.

Rock on man =)

--
Later on,
Mike

[mss]

83LowRider spoke unto us saying:

> Another generic response. Are you a believer or
> not? Have you given yourself to the Lawd thy God?
> been baptised by 'da Holy Waters? Or are you a
> man void of God? Tell us stevie.... just do it.

Just shut up 83.

--
Later on,
Mike

[mss]

83LowRider spoke unto us saying:

> Yes. Justin Bieber was dead for 15 seconds after an
> alcohol-fueled binge. Satan awakened him and gave
> him back to us. Satan then laughed his ass off.

Chuckle, get outta here 83.

coffee...

--
Later on,
Mike

[83LowRider]

mss wrote:

>> Mike is an atheist stevie... are you?
>
> Maybe he is, maybe he's not. Why do you belive?

Why do you feel a need to speak for steve?

You claim to not care what he may believe, but
you sure as hell took a deep interest in what I believed.
You've brought it up more than once in the last 12
hours.

[steveh99]

In article <kof36t$tmd$1...@dont-email.me>, 83low...@nywilldo.com says...

What I believe is of no business, no concern, and no consequnce of
yours.

[steveh99]

In article <MPG.2c14f1d9a...@reader.albasani.net>,
em...@invalid.foo says...

>
> 83LowRider spoke unto us saying:
>
> > Mike is an atheist stevie... are you?
>
> Maybe he is, maybe he's not. Why do you belive?

I am still trying to understand why he is so interested in my religious
beliefs

[steveh99]

In article <MPG.2c14fe885...@reader.albasani.net>,
em...@invalid.foo says...

Well said Mike and thank you

[83LowRider]

mss wrote:

>> Nope... your primary concept is flawed. Reality never
>> changes.... only perception. Our national reality is that
>> our country is broke. Perception will dictate the seriousness
>> of that matter, but the reality is the same.
>
> Reality is the same for all you'd wager? Chuckle, prove it. This
> means you'd have to understand all realities. 'Reality' is a word
> in the -English language- which happens to be (a) a noun and (b)
> singular. Thinking in the -English language- programs us to
> conceptualize 'reality' as one block-like entity, sort of like a huge
> New York skyscraper,
> where every part is just another 'room' within the same building.
> This linguistic -only- construct is so pervasive that some folks
> cannot 'think' outside it at all. The notion that reality is a noun,
> a solid thing like a brick or a baseball bat, derives from the
> evolutionary
> fact that our nervous systems normally organize the dance of energy
> into such block-like things, probably as instant bio-survival cues.
> steve has his, you your's, & I my own.

My car weighs 3200 pounds - is made up of metal and
plastic and leather and rubber. That is a reality. It has the
exact same appearance to all who view it. If one person
sees it as awesome and another sees it as ugly... that is
perception. The reality doesn't change even when the
perception may vary.

> Whoosh right over your head 83... look what happens with those you
> noted whom committed <locked in> to one way of viewing the world.
> Maybe another time, bummer.

It's you who failed to understand. They were indeed 'locked
in' on their point of view... to the point of fanaticism even.
But that doesn't mean they failed to learn/change. It was
my point --> that one doesn't have to actively persue any given
subject to realize that there may be an alternative or a different
perspective. Age changes perception. The times change it too,
as well as many other factors. But again, you seemed to have
locked this in -- on religion, all the while telling me I shouldn't
be talking religion with stevie.

>> A 'smart' individual never stops learning. Although you'll not
>> see me taking any more math and science, there's plenty to
>> be learned every day -- even if just sitting at the computer.
>> The entire world is at our fingertips, it's up to the individual
>> when they decide to 'stop learning'.
>
> You bet, & after the same fashion, let another find his own path.

He's a grown fucking man. What the hell? This hasn't got
ANYTHING to do with him 'finding his own path'. If he
ain't found it by 40, then he's lost.

>> Funny you'd say that and then follow it up by trying
>> to tell me to lay off of steve. You'd impose your will
>> upon ME, to NOT impose my will upon steve.
>
> Right, you poke him, then I'll poke you.
>
>> Ironic, isn't it?
>
> Very =)

> To imply belief is stop learning, ie - to say 'x' is solved & one need
> not ever again think abut it again, open your eyes. Religion requires
> just such belief & what if knowledge comes in to play that utterly
> disproves what one believes? What then?

Religion again? Okay... then how do you account for the
many who change religions? How do you account for those
that fall away from religion? How do you account for those
that knew NO religion, then became converts? Your blanket
statement is NOT an absolute truth.

> Knock knock - YOU'RE THE ONE with difficulties understanding.
> steve's wise enough to not say he knows either way. That's
> where he's at on his journey, he's not sure - that's his prerogative
> 83.

Total crap. You're putting words in his mouth.
YOU don't know what he believes, one way or the other.
And to call him 'wise' in any capacity is simply playing
up to steve.

NO ONE is made to join Fight Club.
And the real #1 rule of Fight Club? no one is allowed
to whine while in the ring. steve told you flat out that
he has been here for many many years. And it ain't
to talk about Kiss. If he feels manly enough to jump
in every political conversation --> he's fair game.

> No but I am saying you are acting as much yourself when you ought
> to be a little more humble about the issue.

Not your place, in any way, to make that judgement unless
you are willing to admit steve is not smart enough/capable
of forming his own opinions. If you were to say to me that
'steve is a retard, ease up on him'... then you'd at least have
some validity to your request. USENET is NOT about humility.

>> That's kind of presumptive and rude of you isn't it?
>
> Yes sir, very rude. How does it feel when thrown back in your face?
> I know I'd grab a clue if someone handed me a breath-mint, why
> not you?

Because this ain't about bad breath. This is about him
jumping in every thread with his stupid comments and
then being told <by you> that he isn't to be held accountable.

>> Is THAT SOMETHING THAT CHANGES day to day?
>> Maybe it hinges on the days he takes his meds vs. those
>> days that he doesn't? or does he catch an old episode of
>> Jim and Tammy Bakker and simply get pulled back in?
>> Enquiring minds want to know!!!
>
> Sure, sometimes I think there is, then get up the next day
> & think there's not.I do it all the time. So what is that to you?
> Would you that one not be honest instead? 83, the only constant
> is change...

We're talking about a belief in a higher power, not if
there was a moral lesson to be learned from watching
the Dukes of Hazzard movie. In that arena there are
only 3 options... and they DON'T change, day to day.

>> Defend whatever you wish... selectively of course!
>> All I've ever ASKED of steve... is that HE TOO, defend
>> what he says.
>
> You know, I certainly will.

And again, this ain't about you.

[mss]

83LowRider spoke unto us saying:

> My car weighs 3200 pounds - is made up of metal and
> plastic and leather and rubber. That is a reality. It has the
> exact same appearance to all who view it. If one person
> sees it as awesome and another sees it as ugly... that is
> perception. The reality doesn't change even when the
> perception may vary.

No? Then ask the one afflicted with synesthesia, or the blind, the deaf.
Their *differing experiences* are 100% accurate. How is that 83? I'll
tell you how, its because the change is *only* in your noggin. Proof:

<read the next line silently, then read it aloud>

They shall come to know good.

What changed there? Certainly the characters/letters did not,
the *only* change was in your head. Yet both interpretations
are equally valid realities <note the plurality> coming not
only from the same sentence, but the same person as well.
Reality is indeed <all togther now> relative.

> It's you who failed to understand. They were indeed 'locked
> in' on their point of view... to the point of fanaticism even.
> But that doesn't mean they failed to learn/change. It was
> my point --> that one doesn't have to actively persue any given
> subject to realize that there may be an alternative or a different
> perspective. Age changes perception. The times change it too,
> as well as many other factors. But again, you seemed to have
> locked this in -- on religion, all the while telling me I shouldn't
> be talking religion with stevie.

I don't know how to rebut this, I mean on the one hand you seem to be
saying yes they're locked in, while on the other they're not... in as much
as steve is concerned I'm saying however he replies yes/no/dunno thats his
right, & I hope he keeps you on your toes because he can <& does> have it
any way he wants - battaboom!

> He's a grown fucking man. What the hell? This hasn't got
> ANYTHING to do with him 'finding his own path'. If he
> ain't found it by 40, then he's lost.

Then why are you continually attempting to 'extract a confession'.
You've freely admitted elsewhere that's a tactic you use, & I might
add, tried to deploy against me with utter failure.

> Religion again? Okay...

Yes - because that's what you're badgering him about 83 c'mon man.

> ...then how do you account for the

> many who change religions? How do you account for those
> that fall away from religion? How do you account for those
> that knew NO religion, then became converts? Your blanket
> statement is NOT an absolute truth.

So lemme get this right: I defend the point of view that
says its alright to change one's mind as often as desired,
& now you're under the impression I don't feel that way?

I think a person can change for/againt/undecedided,
whenever, however, they want to. But here's the kicker 83,
if one changes his mind that's his concern not another's.

> Total crap. You're putting words in his mouth.
> YOU don't know what he believes, one way or the other.
> And to call him 'wise' in any capacity is simply playing
> up to steve.

You're right I don't know, & don't need to know. You're the one
following him around pestering him for a definitive answer.
You've said yourself pursuant to a like minded conversation
between ourselves that you didn't know if god was real either,
so why in the world would you demand an answer from another you
yourself can not provide... that's nuts.

> NO ONE is made to join Fight Club.
> And the real #1 rule of Fight Club? no one is allowed
> to whine while in the ring. steve told you flat out that
> he has been here for many many years. And it ain't
> to talk about Kiss. If he feels manly enough to jump
> in every political conversation --> he's fair game.

This is not a movie 83, are you so easily duped by mass
media? I don't think so. Its about showing another kindness
every now & again. The whole of my reasoning was based on the
assumption that somewhere in your mind was an area I could reach,
& that others would follow your lead if you stepped up to bat
& simply showed some kindness. No doubt you'll have lots fun
ripping me a new one when I showed some humility...

> Not your place, in any way, to make that judgement unless
> you are willing to admit steve is not smart enough/capable
> of forming his own opinions. If you were to say to me that
> 'steve is a retard, ease up on him'... then you'd at least have
> some validity to your request. USENET is NOT about humility.

'Not your place...' Chuckle, you Mr. Morality, are something else.
Did not your god inquire of Cain:

God: Where is Abel thy brother?

Cain: I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?

You wanna get up in steve's mix about religion? Will then stand up
& be counted as one who offered respite or STFU. Will we spend all
our time tearing down other's in your imaginary fight club, or can
we bring a little humanity into play?

> Because this ain't about bad breath. This is about him
> jumping in every thread with his stupid comments and
> then being told <by you> that he isn't to be held accountable.

Let's hold our ourselves accountable 1st & foremost hmm?

> We're talking about a belief in a higher power, not if
> there was a moral lesson to be learned from watching
> the Dukes of Hazzard movie. In that arena there are
> only 3 options... and they DON'T change, day to day.

Of course, your reality is the only one so you must
be right!

> And again, this ain't about you.

And pray tell, what you have decided it is about 83?

--
Later on,
Mike

[83LowRider]

mss wrote:

>> Another generic response. Are you a believer or
>> not? Have you given yourself to the Lawd thy God?
>> been baptised by 'da Holy Waters? Or are you a
>> man void of God? Tell us stevie.... just do it.
>
> Just shut up 83.

Or?

[mss]

83LowRider spoke unto us saying:

> Or?

And.

--
Later on,
Mike

[83LowRider]

mss wrote:

> No? Then ask the one afflicted with synesthesia, or the blind, the
> deaf. Their *differing experiences* are 100% accurate. How is that
> 83? I'll tell you how, its because the change is *only* in your
> noggin. Proof:

We are getting waaaaay beyond any point you
attempted to make. I know what you were trying
to get across... and what your implications were.
Your point holds partial truth... we can be sooo
sure of something that we fail to consider other
possibilities. My reply is to say that your theory
is not 100%, and I gave many examples to prove it.
If your statement was bulletproof -- there would never
be a divorce... as with all your heart, all your soul,
a promise to God -- all those things -- and yet life
or outlooks or circumstances change. If you applied
your statement to politics --> I would not be able to
give Obama credit where due, bringing home soldiers,
drones, killin' pirates, etc. If applied to religion, no
devout christian would ever leave the church nor would
any atheist 'find God'. And these things do indeed
happen on a regular basis. There will indeed be racists
that will NEVER consider a different view. There will
be religious nuts, political nuts, etc... that will hold to
your theory 100%. We call those people... fanatics.
They're a small percentage, they've always existed, they
always will.

> Then why are you continually attempting to 'extract a confession'.
> You've freely admitted elsewhere that's a tactic you use, & I might
> add, tried to deploy against me with utter failure.

Oh no, no, no. It isn't a failure to not get a reply. Not at all.
While I'll answer virtually any question --> it says VOLUMES
about someone when they won't do the same.

>> Religion again? Okay...
>
> Yes - because that's what you're badgering him about 83 c'mon man.

Me badgering him is a result of his own willing involvement.
It is no small point to call him out on this matter.
For you and I to have a 'God conversation', it is imperative
for me to know your position. No? He's made numerous
comments, I noticed he's strangely never made a definitive
stance... and called him on it. Others demand that AJ or
I be accountable for our views... stevie gets no free pass.

> So lemme get this right: I defend the point of view that
> says its alright to change one's mind as often as desired,
> & now you're under the impression I don't feel that way?

He never said he 'didn't know'... he never said he
has 'flip-flopped'. He has <for most years> never
really said anything. He's fucking vanilla, he's a fence
rider that wants to get in on a conversation without
adding a damn thing to it. He'll give a reacharound
to those that throw him a sympathetic nod, he'll
post the same stupidity to me or to AJ. And sometimes..
it just gets old.

> I think a person can change for/againt/undecedided,
> whenever, however, they want to. But here's the kicker 83,
> if one changes his mind that's his concern not another's.

Who have I ever given shit to.... for changing their mind?
Not you... you changed yours regarding religion -- and
Jefe seems to have had a 'spiritual background' as well...
and decided they didn't believe.... so be it. Have I ever
written a single word to you, in order to try and convert
you back? No. I am not, and never was... out to prove
stevie to be some Godless fool. Nor was it my intent to
prove that he DOES believe in God. It was my intent to
show that he is a pussy for not taking a stance. I respect
someone on the opposing side far more than I do the
buzzards hanging around for scraps.

>> Total crap. You're putting words in his mouth.
>> YOU don't know what he believes, one way or the other.
>> And to call him 'wise' in any capacity is simply playing
>> up to steve.
>
> You're right I don't know, & don't need to know. You're the one
> following him around pestering him for a definitive answer.
> You've said yourself pursuant to a like minded conversation
> between ourselves that you didn't know if god was real either,
> so why in the world would you demand an answer from another you
> yourself can not provide... that's nuts.

I asked him for nothing more than his opinion on
a simple 5 word sentence.... "do you believe in God".
After 15 years of conversation... it's a pretty damn
harmless <and fair> question. I ain't askin' about his
wifes va-jay-jay, if he's ever blown a sailor or anything
regarding his personal details. Now then... he's given
out tons of personal details <as many of us here have
over the years>, so this should have been a very easy
answer for him.

> This is not a movie 83, are you so easily duped by mass
> media? I don't think so. Its about showing another kindness
> every now & again.

I'm an EXCEPTIONALLY kind person. We donate to
many humanitarian and animal events/charities. I give
all I can to my friends and family, in time and in free
work. I'll be the first to help out a stranger or buy him
a meal or help an old lady with her garbage. Nothing is
beneath me in that regard. But USENET is soooo far
removed from real life. You may try to liken this to me
being an asshole IRL. That's so NOT true. The part of
this that carries over to my actual life/attitude is this -->
In real life, as in this newsgroup, I will not tolerate liars
or bullshitters to surround me. In real life --- none of my
friends will get away with those things. At the least, they
will no longer be in my circle of friends. I will NOT tolerate
a liar. I will NOT tolerate an antagonistic asshole. I WILL
call them on their lies or their bullshit. Same here.

> The whole of my reasoning was based on the
> assumption that somewhere in your mind was an area I could reach,
> & that others would follow your lead if you stepped up to bat
> & simply showed some kindness. No doubt you'll have lots fun
> ripping me a new one when I showed some humility...

I've never 'ripped' you for anything. I've said a few times
that even with our disagreements, I enjoy the banter.
I've said the same to Jefe. I've made apologies for personal
attacks on steve in the past too. If I were an asshole in
real life, would I have these civil debates with you? or Jefe?
or make an apology to steve? No.

>> Not your place, in any way, to make that judgement unless
>> you are willing to admit steve is not smart enough/capable
>> of forming his own opinions. If you were to say to me that
>> 'steve is a retard, ease up on him'... then you'd at least have
>> some validity to your request. USENET is NOT about humility.
>
> 'Not your place...' Chuckle, you Mr. Morality, are something else.
> Did not your god inquire of Cain:
>
> God: Where is Abel thy brother?
>
> Cain: I know not: Am I my brother's keeper?

I 'keep' him <steve> already. I put bread on his table.
Along with many others. There isn't an ounce of guilt
in my body because I'm fully aware of what I do to help
my fellow man. Both forced <taxes> and voluntarily.

> You wanna get up in steve's mix about religion? Will then stand up
> & be counted as one who offered respite or STFU. Will we spend all
> our time tearing down other's in your imaginary fight club, or can
> we bring a little humanity into play?

I am not judging steve <religiously> in any way. I'm
making a point. What he believes, or doesn't, has
no bearing on my life whatsoever. We've never met,
we never will, he's as anonymous to you and me as
some streetwalker in Russia. You nor I care one iota
what his religous beliefs are.

> Let's hold our ourselves accountable 1st & foremost hmm?

We can ONLY be accountable for ourselves.
Your intervention makes you feel good, helping
out the handicapped <so to speak>. I've already
applauded you for it... but this is kind of like a parent
spanking their kid... you may disagree with it, but
it ain't your kid. He's a grown-ass man and deserves
to be held accountable. If he cannot tell us what he
believes, why should he considered anything other
than a nuisance?

>> We're talking about a belief in a higher power, not if
>> there was a moral lesson to be learned from watching
>> the Dukes of Hazzard movie. In that arena there are
>> only 3 options... and they DON'T change, day to day.
>
> Of course, your reality is the only one so you must
> be right!

Nothing remotely like that ever said or considered.
There are 3 main options are there not? A God, no God
or just don't know. Pick one. Any one you want. I'll
not call anyone 'stupid' for any one they pick. He KNOWS
which of these 3 he falls under. I just asked him to state it.

> And pray tell, what you have decided it is about 83?

Clarity. Being honest with yourself and with others.
It's about being above-board. Nothing more.

[mss]

83LowRider spoke unto us saying:

> We are getting waaaaay beyond any point you
> attempted to make. I know what you were trying
> to get across... and what your implications were.
> Your point holds partial truth... we can be sooo
> sure of something that we fail to consider other
> possibilities. My reply is to say that your theory
> is not 100%, and I gave many examples to prove it.
> If your statement was bulletproof -- there would never
> be a divorce... as with all your heart, all your soul,
> a promise to God -- all those things -- and yet life
> or outlooks or circumstances change. If you applied
> your statement to politics --> I would not be able to
> give Obama credit where due, bringing home soldiers,
> drones, killin' pirates, etc. If applied to religion, no
> devout christian would ever leave the church nor would
> any atheist 'find God'. And these things do indeed
> happen on a regular basis. There will indeed be racists
> that will NEVER consider a different view. There will
> be religious nuts, political nuts, etc... that will hold to
> your theory 100%. We call those people... fanatics.
> They're a small percentage, they've always existed, they
> always will.

Yeppers good thoughts, but I risk driving this way off topic.
Still its nifty batting these ideas back & forth. Another thread
sometimes!

> Oh no, no, no. It isn't a failure to not get a reply. Not at all.
> While I'll answer virtually any question --> it says VOLUMES
> about someone when they won't do the same.

I see your point, but that's not always the case 83, its not
that cut & dried 100% of the time. Lack of an anwser does not
mean any preformed ideas on your part are true, that's like
saying because someone did'nt call me at 8:am they left the
country...

> Me badgering him is a result of his own willing involvement.
> It is no small point to call him out on this matter.
> For you and I to have a 'God conversation', it is imperative
> for me to know your position. No? He's made numerous
> comments, I noticed he's strangely never made a definitive
> stance... and called him on it. Others demand that AJ or
> I be accountable for our views... stevie gets no free pass.

Nor should he get a fee pass, but its perfectly fine to say
on Monday God is great, & then on Tuesday, renege <--sp?>.

> He never said he 'didn't know'... he never said he
> has 'flip-flopped'. He has <for most years> never
> really said anything. He's fucking vanilla, he's a fence
> rider that wants to get in on a conversation without
> adding a damn thing to it. He'll give a reacharound
> to those that throw him a sympathetic nod, he'll
> post the same stupidity to me or to AJ. And sometimes..
> it just gets old.

But c'mon, that's where he's at, lots to consider on
these issues. I think its hard to decide lots of times
myself, I bet you're not that different.

> Who have I ever given shit to.... for changing their mind?
> Not you... you changed yours regarding religion -- and
> Jefe seems to have had a 'spiritual background' as well...
> and decided they didn't believe.... so be it. Have I ever
> written a single word to you, in order to try and convert
> you back? No. I am not, and never was... out to prove
> stevie to be some Godless fool. Nor was it my intent to
> prove that he DOES believe in God. It was my intent to
> show that he is a pussy for not taking a stance. I respect
> someone on the opposing side far more than I do the
> buzzards hanging around for scraps.

You know, I'm in a rock & a hard place here. I respect
you for sticking to your guns, but not allowing another
to remain undecided, I dunno, seems none to patient
to me. Its your characterization of him, likes its less
than manly, not cool. Shit man, I like steve, I want to
find common ground.

> I asked him for nothing more than his opinion on
> a simple 5 word sentence.... "do you believe in God".
> After 15 years of conversation... it's a pretty damn
> harmless <and fair> question. I ain't askin' about his
> wifes va-jay-jay, if he's ever blown a sailor or anything
> regarding his personal details. Now then... he's given
> out tons of personal details <as many of us here have
> over the years>, so this should have been a very easy
> answer for him.

Yeah but that's what you think, if he feels different
that ain't hurting anyone 83.

> I'm an EXCEPTIONALLY kind person. We donate to
> many humanitarian and animal events/charities. I give
> all I can to my friends and family, in time and in free
> work. I'll be the first to help out a stranger or buy him
> a meal or help an old lady with her garbage. Nothing is
> beneath me in that regard. But USENET is soooo far
> removed from real life. You may try to liken this to me
> being an asshole IRL. That's so NOT true. The part of
> this that carries over to my actual life/attitude is this -->
> In real life, as in this newsgroup, I will not tolerate liars
> or bullshitters to surround me. In real life --- none of my
> friends will get away with those things. At the least, they
> will no longer be in my circle of friends. I will NOT tolerate
> a liar. I will NOT tolerate an antagonistic asshole. I WILL
> call them on their lies or their bullshit. Same here.

Yes I do think you are kind, which is precisely why I've no qualms
hammering your ass on the issue. I wish you'd at least try to...
I dunno, just renew the good points with him. I dunno what
to say, tried of arguing, I never win these championship
matches at any rate lol.

> I've never 'ripped' you for anything. I've said a few times
> that even with our disagreements, I enjoy the banter.
> I've said the same to Jefe. I've made apologies for personal
> attacks on steve in the past too. If I were an asshole in
> real life, would I have these civil debates with you? or Jefe?
> or make an apology to steve? No.

Alright, alright. I got fired-up. Showing mercy is <I know
very obvious to you from my rants> a big deal to me. This is
one little fucked up news group, sorta like some Seinfield episode.

> I 'keep' him <steve> already. I put bread on his table.
> Along with many others. There isn't an ounce of guilt
> in my body because I'm fully aware of what I do to help
> my fellow man. Both forced <taxes> and voluntarily.

Not gonna take the bait sorry. steve's my buddy & I see
no need to bad mouth him.

> I am not judging steve <religiously> in any way. I'm
> making a point. What he believes, or doesn't, has
> no bearing on my life whatsoever. We've never met,
> we never will, he's as anonymous to you and me as
> some streetwalker in Russia. You nor I care one iota
> what his religous beliefs are.

Fine, I hope maybe you two can hammer out a truce.

> We can ONLY be accountable for ourselves.
> Your intervention makes you feel good, helping
> out the handicapped <so to speak>. I've already
> applauded you for it... but this is kind of like a parent
> spanking their kid... you may disagree with it, but
> it ain't your kid. He's a grown-ass man and deserves
> to be held accountable. If he cannot tell us what he
> believes, why should he considered anything other
> than a nuisance?

83, sigh, man enough with the little jabs to steve, please.

> Clarity. Being honest with yourself and with others.
> It's about being above-board. Nothing more.

Yes sir, can't disagree with that. We all do the
best we can.

--
Later on,
Mike

[AJ]

On Jun 1, 5:34 pm, Tattoo Vampire <sitt...@this.computer> wrote:

> steveh99 <steve...@roadrunner.com> wrote:
> > hHe is a ypocrite you mean?
>
> Somewhat... he's talked about banging women other than his wife and dealing
> in pirated copies of copyrighted materials. Those aren't very Christian
> things to do. ;-)

AND I've always said I'm a sinner.

[AJ]

On Jun 1, 6:52 pm, mss <em...@invalid.foo> wrote:
> AJ spoke unto us saying:
>

> > Atheist think God is going to swoop down like Superman and save us
> > all.  It doesn't work like that.  IMO, people are awarded or punished
> > in the afterlife.
>
> Do you proof of this ever happening even once?
>

> --
> Later on,
> Mike

Do you have proof it hasn't?

[AJ]

On Jun 1, 6:51 pm, mss <em...@invalid.foo> wrote:
> AJ spoke unto us saying:
>

> > 2 words atheists can never understand, "free will."

>
> And one word myth believers will never understand - reality!
>

> --
> Later on,
> Mike

Then who created infinity? Do you really believe we are the only
living things in infinity?

[mss]

AJ spoke unto us saying:

> Do you have proof it hasn't?

Does god have the power to prevent suffering?

If god does have the power to stop suffering
<& suffering still happens> then he doesnt care.

If god does not have the power to prevent suffering,
then he's not god.

What say you?

--
Later on,
Mike

[mss]

AJ spoke unto us saying:

> Then who created infinity?

An interesting question...

Well lets see, if infinity has no beginning, then no one
created it by virtue of the fact it had no beginning...

> Do you really believe we are the only living things in infinity?

There could be lots of things, even god-like things... <but I don't
feel that these super-entities are running around worried about what
were doing when we're naked chuckle>.

So who knows? Its always possible that other's visited earth in the past
& humans thought they were god-like. Arthur C. Clarke once noted:

'Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.'

--
Later on,
Mike

[AJ]

On Jun 3, 10:31 am, mss <em...@invalid.foo> wrote:
> AJ spoke unto us saying:
>
> > Then who created infinity?
>
> An interesting question...
>
> Well lets see, if infinity has no beginning, then no one
> created it by virtue of the fact it had no beginning...

What if in the beginning, there was nothing?

>
> > Do you really believe we are the only living things in infinity?
>
> There could be lots of things, even god-like things... <but I don't
> feel that these super-entities are running around worried about what
> were doing when we're naked chuckle>.

I do believe there is a God, and I agree that he probably isn't
worried about what
were doing when we're naked.

>
> So who knows? Its always possible that other's visited earth in the past
> & humans thought they were god-like. Arthur C. Clarke once noted:
>
> 'Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.'

Agreed, and if any of that is ever proven, I might change my mind.

[mss]

AJ spoke unto us saying:

> What if in the beginning, there was nothing?

I've wrestled with this too AJ... If there was nothing,
absolutely nothing at all, then there was no god either.
If there was nothing but there was god, there's still nothing
to build the universe from... & also there was no place
in which to create it.

The closest we've gotten in understanding this problem is
realizing the our universe is a part of larger multiverse
<sometimes called the omniverse> one area under goes a big-bang,
while another collapses via a 'big-crunch'. And on it goes forever...

> I do believe there is a God, and I agree that he probably isn't
> worried about what were doing when we're naked.

=) Yeah that part is silly.

> Agreed, and if any of that is ever proven, I might change my mind.

Well, best bet is always keep an open mind, I mean, if god
came down for a visit, I know I'd wanna know & check it out.

--
Later on,
Mike

[AJ]

On Jun 3, 10:53 am, mss <em...@invalid.foo> wrote:
> AJ spoke unto us saying:
>
> > What if in the beginning, there was nothing?
>
> I've wrestled with this too AJ... If there was nothing,
> absolutely nothing at all, then there was no god either.
> If there was nothing but there was god, there's still nothing
> to build the universe from... & also there was no place
> in which to create it.

Well as we see today, there is something and it had to start from
something or someone.

>
> The closest we've gotten in understanding this problem is
> realizing the our universe is a part of larger multiverse
> <sometimes called the omniverse> one area under goes a big-bang,
> while another collapses via a 'big-crunch'. And on it goes forever...
>
> > I do believe there is a God, and I agree that he probably isn't
> > worried about what were doing when we're naked.
>
> =) Yeah that part is silly.
>
> > Agreed, and if any of that is ever proven, I might change my mind.
>
> Well, best bet is always keep an open mind, I mean, if god
> came down for a visit, I know I'd wanna know & check it out.

Keep an open mind indeed. Don't presume that all believers are closed
minded, or reject science. IMO, to stop searching for truth and the
existence of a God, or life after death, or life out there is just
giving up on the possibility that there's more to life than we know.

[Busboy Jefe]

On Jun 1, 4:05 pm, AJ <misfitskiss...@aol.com> wrote:

> Atheist think God is going to swoop down like Superman and save us
> all.

Why would an atheist think this *when they don't believe in Sky
Daddy*? Fuckin' dummy.

> It doesn't work like that.  IMO, people are awarded or punished
> in the afterlife.

It doesn't work like that...in your opinion. Do you even read the
stupid shit you post, Professor? You're in here lecturing everyone
about "how it is", yet you don't have the balls to say it that
way....you have to qualify it with "IMO". LOL!

El Jefe

[Busboy Jefe]

On Jun 1, 4:22 pm, "83LowRider" <83lowri...@nywilldo.com> wrote:

> God didn't put them there... man did.
> Man also punished and killed many of
> those responsible, as an example to others
> as well as for the punishment it deserved.

So an all knowing, omnipotent "god"...stood (floated?) idly by and let
it happen. "Hey, those are my creations being put in ovens, there, ah,
I'll let it slide."

The problem is that none of you believers can agree on just what "god"
is and what "he" is telling you. You can play the angry, fag-hating
god card or the benevolent, he loves us all card when you see fit.
Thou shalt not "murder" a zygote, but if he tells your president to go
start wars in the ME in which many innocent and *viable* human beings
perish, it's OK. Convenient.

The you is general, by the way.

El Jefe

[Busboy Jefe]

On Jun 1, 4:31 pm, AJ <misfitskiss...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Jun 1, 4:10 pm, steveh99 <steve...@roadrunner.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article <dd0dcdd5-e196-4fea-8a3e-
> > 3d190d119...@b2g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>, misfitskiss...@aol.com
> > says...
>
> > > On Jun 1, 1:41 pm, Tattoo Vampire <sitt...@this.computer> wrote:

> > > > AJ <misfitskiss...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > > > 2 words atheists can never understand, "free will."
>

> > > > So explain everything to us, Pastor AJ. Why does God let the righteous
> > > > suffer? I thought Sky Daddy Junior let himself be hung from a telephone pole
> > > > to wash away everyone's sins and heal the world.

>
> > > Atheist think God is going to swoop down like Superman and save us

> > > all.  It doesn't work like that.  IMO, people are awarded or punished
> > > in the afterlife.
>
> > Shouldnt mankind punish this so called "god" for allowing more than
> > 6,000,000 jews to suffer in dumb anguish and die horrible deaths in WWI?
>
> What part of "free will" don't you understand?   How do you know those
> 6,000,000 Jews aren't rejoicing in heaven right now while the Nazis
> are burning in Hell?    IMO, a human's body is just a shell and there
> is a soul.

Wow, great thinking! So let's just excuse that away because all those
burned/gassed/shot people MIGHT be rejoicing in Magical Fantasy Land
in the Clouds!

And if people being punished in the afterlife is how it works....why
go after terrorists? Sky Daddy will wash their mouths out with soap
when it's all over! Just leave it all up to him!

There's no bottom to your stupidity.

El Jefe

[Busboy Jefe]

On Jun 1, 8:28 pm, steveh99 <steve...@roadrunner.com> wrote:
> In article <XnsA1D2BCFE52C87tattoovamp...@178.63.61.145>,
> sitt...@this.computer says...

>
>
>
> > steveh99 <steve...@roadrunner.com> wrote:
>
> > > hHe is a ypocrite you mean?
>
> > Somewhat... he's talked about banging women other than his wife and dealing
> > in pirated copies of copyrighted materials. Those aren't very Christian
> > things to do. ;-)
>

> Neither is threatening to knock peoples teeth out, or blowing some poor
> bloke away that happens to walk through his yard by mistake

Besides, in the end, Sky Daddy will punish people like me for typing
words that hurt pious souls like AJ.

El Jefe

[Busboy Jefe]

On Jun 2, 5:17 am, "83LowRider" <83lowri...@nywilldo.com> wrote:

> Nope... your primary concept is flawed. Reality never
> changes.... only perception. Our national reality is that
> our country is broke. Perception will dictate the seriousness

> of that matter, but the reality is the same.

Are we unable to meet our financial obligations? Are we NOT paying our
bills?

Because conservatives have been bitching about being "broke" even
since -- oh, I'd say 1/20/2009 -- yet oddly enough, we continue
onwards. This makes me think that for certain types, "reality" is
often little more than an attempt at fearmongering...or a poor attempt
at a talking point.

El Jefe

[Busboy Jefe]

On Jun 2, 5:29 am, "83LowRider" <83lowri...@nywilldo.com> wrote:

> Or are you a man void of fairy tales?

Fixed! =)

El Jefe

[Busboy Jefe]

On Jun 2, 7:56 am, mss <em...@invalid.foo> wrote:

> > More superflous banter. Man has an innate desire and
> > need to learn. That isn't an option, it's a given. No different
> > than the apes.... as they TOO have learned and progessed
> > over time. They were the first species we found to use a
> > tool. Even apes adapt and learn. I see the religious inference
> > you're attempting to make... that if we just followed that
> > 'stupid-old religious shit', that we'd still all be neanderthals.
> > And that ain't the case. Many or most of the greatest minds
> > this world has seen have been very religious men. To
> > imply that one can't exist without the other is pure nonsense.
> > What Thomas Edison believed <religiously> has no bearing
> > on his natural curiosity and his desire to better mankind.

>
> To imply belief is stop learning, ie - to say 'x' is solved & one need
> not ever again think abut it again, open your eyes. Religion requires
> just such belief & what if knowledge comes in to play that utterly
> disproves what one believes? What then?

When I look upon christianity or islam, just as a few examples, I see
belief systems that demand you shun science. Christianity wins out
over islam in that it has at least adapted -- to an extent -- to the
realities of science. Of course, it HAD to in order to survive as we
progressed.

And yet we still have the religious nutjobs trying to equate
"intelligent design" with science. Or claiming that destructive
weather is a punishment from god because of men fucking other men, or
some other ridiculous bullshit.

So we have a ways to go...

El Jefe

[Busboy Jefe]

On Jun 2, 11:02 am, steveh99 <steve...@roadrunner.com> wrote:

> I am still trying to understand why he is so interested in my religious
> beliefs

It's an attempt to make you look like a liar/hypocrite. Nothing more.

El Jefe

[Busboy Jefe]

On Jun 3, 8:58 am, mss <em...@invalid.foo> wrote:

> > Oh no, no, no. It isn't a failure to not get a reply. Not at all.
> > While I'll answer virtually any question --> it says VOLUMES
> > about someone when they won't do the same.
>
> I see your point, but that's not always the case 83, its not
> that cut & dried 100% of the time. Lack of an anwser does not
> mean any preformed ideas on your part are true, that's like
> saying because someone did'nt call me at 8:am they left the
> country...

One question you'll never get 83 to answer is: do you think AJ is
politically savvy?

I have asked many times, yet am always greeted with a dance.. "I think
he expresses himself as he sees fit", or some other similar dodge.

I find this funny, because if 83 takes such a dim view of Steve's
posts, there's no way he can't feel the same way about The Professor.

El Jefe

[Busboy Jefe]

Negative proof. You lose.

El Jefe

[Busboy Jefe]

How do you know a "who" created infinity to begin with?

El Jefe

[Busboy Jefe]

On Jun 3, 11:13 am, AJ <misfitskiss...@aol.com> wrote:

> Keep an open mind indeed.  Don't presume that all believers are closed
> minded, or reject science.  IMO, to stop searching for truth and the
> existence of a God, or life after death, or life out there is just
> giving up on the possibility that there's more to life than we know.

Perhaps, Professor, some of us HAVE been on that search and have
simply come to the rational conclusion that there's no more proof of
god than there is Santa Claus...and that it's a waste of time to
continue down that road.

If you wish to continue, have at it. But as a self-professed sinner,
you should keep your hypocritical lectures about morality to yourself.

El Jefe

[Tattoo Vampire]

AJ <misfits...@aol.com> wrote:

> AND I've always said I'm a sinner.

So stop talking about being a Christian. Sinning is one thing, serial sinning
is another. ;-)

[steveh99]

In article <c4809d2b-b6da-4049-8518-c2665af102c1@
20g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>, busbo...@gmail.com says...

I have a 35mm pic I got a long time ago called "The Einstadt Kids"
which were a group of normal girls, boys from 3 to 7 years of age.
They had just gotten off the train at Auschwitz. The photographer was
allowed to take a photo of these kids minutes before each of them were
tossed into a burning furnace..
I cant explain in words how sick I felt the first time I saw this pic.
People go spewing garbage of freewill, freedom to choose,their God not
being responsible for this.
I was also told that this was routine for polish/jewish kids sent to
Auschwitz. Hitler told the german officials at the death camp that they
needed to cut down on the amount of poison they used for gassing people,
and the number of bullets. So they resorted to tossing kids into the
furnaces alive..
I ask people what loving god would allow babes to be cast into crematory
furnaces alive..
All had excuses like we dont know what Gods purpose was, or God isnt the
one that did it, man did, or God promised not to interfere with mans
everyday tyrany, murdering and whatever else he did/does.. Which to me
is a big bunch of steaming shit!
I had a priest once tell me.. and I quote.. If there is a god and I am
sure there is, the murders of innocent children happen everyday as they
have always. But im sure God didnt mean for it to be so..
I was like he/she certaintly did nothing to stop it

[steveh99]

In article <d1f06c93-e402-4a88-af41-66dd363295a4
@b4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>, busbo...@gmail.com says...

I never came in here throwing a Bible at anyone..
Im not the embecile that comes in here using religion when its
convenient only to turn around and talk about my mistresses, and killing
liberals

[steveh99]

In article <6fc08e19-f936-4786-9175-45a8f1484709
@b2g2000yqe.googlegroups.com>, busbo...@gmail.com says...

Ive never seen any of his posts where he had a cross word about AJ

[steveh99]

In article <51e577ad-b271-405a-8f41-772f0cb87846
@w8g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>, busbo...@gmail.com says...

>
> On Jun 3, 11:13ï¿œam, AJ <misfitskiss...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
> If you wish to continue, have at it. But as a self-professed sinner,
> you should keep your hypocritical lectures about morality to yourself.
>
> El Jefe

I couldn't agree more
Well said

[mss]

Busboy Jefe spoke unto us saying:

> When I look upon christianity or islam, just as a few examples, I see
> belief systems that demand you shun science. Christianity wins out
> over islam in that it has at least adapted -- to an extent -- to the
> realities of science. Of course, it HAD to in order to survive as we
> progressed.
>
> And yet we still have the religious nutjobs trying to equate
> "intelligent design" with science. Or claiming that destructive
> weather is a punishment from god because of men fucking other men, or
> some other ridiculous bullshit.
>
> So we have a ways to go...
>
> El Jefe

Well said Jefe.

--
Later on,
Mike

[mss]

steveh99 spoke unto us saying:

> I have a 35mm pic I got a long time ago called "The Einstadt Kids"
> which were a group of normal girls, boys from 3 to 7 years of age.
> They had just gotten off the train at Auschwitz. The photographer was
> allowed to take a photo of these kids minutes before each of them were
> tossed into a burning furnace..
> I cant explain in words how sick I felt the first time I saw this pic.
> People go spewing garbage of freewill, freedom to choose,their God not
> being responsible for this.
> I was also told that this was routine for polish/jewish kids sent to
> Auschwitz. Hitler told the german officials at the death camp that they
> needed to cut down on the amount of poison they used for gassing people,
> and the number of bullets. So they resorted to tossing kids into the
> furnaces alive..
> I ask people what loving god would allow babes to be cast into crematory
> furnaces alive..
> All had excuses like we dont know what Gods purpose was, or God isnt the
> one that did it, man did, or God promised not to interfere with mans
> everyday tyrany, murdering and whatever else he did/does.. Which to me
> is a big bunch of steaming shit!
> I had a priest once tell me.. and I quote.. If there is a god and I am
> sure there is, the murders of innocent children happen everyday as they
> have always. But im sure God didnt mean for it to be so..
> I was like he/she certaintly did nothing to stop it

Spot on! And this can not be stressed enough steve.
To say someone could kill scores <or more> of people & then
simply say: 'oops - sorry about that but god forgives me'
is ludicrous. I tell you what it is, its a way to get out
of taking responsibility for one's actions, I mean after all
just let Jesus pay for it instead of the guilty party, &
that's pure rubbish.

--
Later on,
Mike

[mss]

AJ spoke unto us saying:

> Keep an open mind indeed. Don't presume that all believers are closed
> minded, or reject science. IMO, to stop searching for truth and the
> existence of a God, or life after death, or life out there is just
> giving up on the possibility that there's more to life than we know.

Nor could I disagree. <speaking only for myself> I don't have a
problem with the idea of god per-say, its all the nasty little
rules that I cant deal with like rape...

**

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 [KJV]

28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed,
and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father
fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath
humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.

**

I see allot wrong with this in my eyes <not trying to draw anyone
in & no response is necessary> but just thinking aloud...

- Rape is fine if one pays fifty shekels? wtf?

- Its only rape *if* you caught in the act? What if a women wanted
to report it instead? Apparently that's not a part of the law...

- They have to get married too? What women would want to marry her rapist?

--
Later on,
Mike

[AJ]

I disagree.

[AJ]

I think it's common sense that most living people want to prolong
their lives as much as they can and sometimes have to take certain
measures to protect themselves from other idiots that want to kill
them.......WOW! I had to actually had to explain the will to live to
a liberal.

[AJ]

On Jun 3, 5:10 pm, Tattoo Vampire <sitt...@this.computer> wrote:

Follow the thread. I was personally asked my opinions. Even you
asked.

[AJ]

I'm not lecturing anyone. You guys asked for my opinion.

[AJ]

On Jun 3, 4:33 pm, Busboy Jefe <busboyj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 3, 11:13 am, AJ <misfitskiss...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Keep an open mind indeed.  Don't presume that all believers are closed
> > minded, or reject science.  IMO, to stop searching for truth and the
> > existence of a God, or life after death, or life out there is just
> > giving up on the possibility that there's more to life than we know.
>
> Perhaps, Professor, some of us HAVE been on that search and have
> simply come to the rational conclusion that there's no more proof of
> god than there is Santa Claus...and that it's a waste of time to
> continue down that road.

IMO, that's no different than a high school dropout. One has given up
on furthering their education and understanding of all things and the
possibilities. Do you what want, but as me, I'll always seek truth.

> If you wish to continue, have at it. But as a self-professed sinner,
> you should keep your hypocritical lectures about morality to yourself.
>
> El Jefe

Then don't ask for my opinions. It's not hypocritical because I never
claimed to live as a Christian, but I do believe in the Christian
philosophy.

[AJ]

Things change Mike. Life then is not as it is today. I would wager
you would have a hard time finding any Christian today practicing or
even believing those two scriptures.

[AJ]

How do know it wasn't? Neither you nor I know for sure. That's why
it's called faith. You believe or you don't. In the end, one of us
will be right and know.

[Busboy Jefe]

On Jun 4, 12:44 pm, AJ <misfitskiss...@aol.com> wrote:

> IMO, that's no different than a high school dropout.  One has given up
> on furthering their education and understanding of all things and the
> possibilities. Do you what want, but as me, I'll always seek truth.

Poor example. A high school dropout knows with certainty there's more
education to be had. This is not the same thing as exploring a
religious path and discovering that it holds/means nothing for you.

Put another way: one can prove that education beyond a high school
level exists. One cannot do the same re: "god".

And why are you so certain that the idea no god exists *isn't* the
truth? I've tried the christian thing. Have you actually tried atheism
on for a bit? If you're truly about exploring all possibilities,
perhaps you should.

> Then don't ask for my opinions.  It's not hypocritical because I never
> claimed to live as a Christian, but I do believe in the Christian
> philosophy.

I never did ask for your opinions.You chose to express them either in
an attempt to seem morally superior, or because you were expressing
butthurt over my poking fun at religion/god.

And it IS hypocritical because you're judging people on the very
morals you fail to live up to.

El Jefe

[Busboy Jefe]

On Jun 4, 12:50 pm, AJ <misfitskiss...@aol.com> wrote:

> How do know it wasn't?   Neither you nor I know for sure.

This is true. And given as such, I choose not to waste time and energy
on it. It was interesting to contemplate with good friends and potent
strains of weed back in the day, but at some I think you have to
realize that it does little good to dwell on it.

>That's why
> it's called faith.  You believe or you don't.  In the end, one of us
> will be right and know.

Faith can be a negative thing, taken too far. I find people who have
faith that they'll go on to a better life after this one..frightening.
Especially when they hold positions of power.

The idea that this is all we get, with no guarantees of anything
beyond this moment, is something I find to be very life confirming.
Mortality defines us.

El Jefe

[mss]

AJ spoke unto us saying:

> Things change Mike. Life then is not as it is today. I would wager
> you would have a hard time finding any Christian today practicing or
> even believing those two scriptures.

True enough AJ, true enough a blanket statment that all thought
that way would be foolish on my part. Man I live in Texas, &
there's some real hard-ass Christians around here that can't
handle a non-biblical POV.

--
Later on,
Mike

[mss]

Busboy Jefe spoke unto us saying:

> Mortality defines us.

Yeppers. You've said more in three words than you realize Jefe...

Does mortality define god as well? I think God must be crazy,
because guys... even Hilter, Stalin, Pol Pot, those sorts of
loonies, none of them inflicted more than finite pain on their
victims, whereas God condemns sinners to roast infinitely,
forever without end. c'mon man, that's a sick mind, I'm sure
we'd all agree.

--
Later on,
Mike

[83LowRider]

Busboy Jefe wrote:

>> God didn't put them there... man did.
>> Man also punished and killed many of
>> those responsible, as an example to others
>> as well as for the punishment it deserved.
>
> So an all knowing, omnipotent "god"...stood (floated?) idly by and let
> it happen. "Hey, those are my creations being put in ovens, there, ah,
> I'll let it slide."

Life is not created equal nor fair.
Many men turn to greed, murder, corruption.
Many sacrifice their time, money or life, in an
effort to save others.
Life allows us to go down any path we desire. What
happens on earth is the work of man... good OR bad.
What we do in these few earthly years will be what
we are judged on. IMO.

God allows us those free choices. What would you have
Him do, short of changing the entire existance of mankind?

> The problem is that none of you believers can agree on just what "god"
> is and what "he" is telling you. You can play the angry, fag-hating
> god card or the benevolent, he loves us all card when you see fit.
> Thou shalt not "murder" a zygote, but if he tells your president to go
> start wars in the ME in which many innocent and *viable* human beings
> perish, it's OK. Convenient.

I don't know if Bush claimed to have heard 'the voice of God'
or not. Anyone claiming to have done so is usually a psycho
in my experiences.

[83LowRider]

Busboy Jefe wrote:
> On Jun 2, 5:17 am, "83LowRider" <83lowri...@nywilldo.com> wrote:
>
>> Nope... your primary concept is flawed. Reality never
>> changes.... only perception. Our national reality is that
>> our country is broke. Perception will dictate the seriousness
>> of that matter, but the reality is the same.
>
> Are we unable to meet our financial obligations? Are we NOT paying our
> bills?

Uhhhh.... NO.

If you are having to borrow FOUR BILLION DOLLARS A DAY,
then you are NOT meeting obligations. When cities around the
country are facing/declaring bankruptcy, then NO, you're not
meeting your obligations. When you print endless dollars every
single day, devaluating the worth of my wallet and my savings,
then NO, we're not meeting our obligations.

http://www.politifact.com/rhode-island/statements/2011/may/04/national-republican-congressional-committee/gop-congressional-committee-says-us-borrows-4-bill/


> Because conservatives have been bitching about being "broke" even
> since -- oh, I'd say 1/20/2009 -- yet oddly enough, we continue
> onwards. This makes me think that for certain types, "reality" is
> often little more than an attempt at fearmongering...or a poor attempt
> at a talking point.

In the grand total of about 240 years, this country amassed a
debt of about 8 trillion dollars. When Obama leaves office
he will have almost tripled that amount.

[83LowRider]

Busboy Jefe wrote:

> When I look upon christianity or islam, just as a few examples, I see
> belief systems that demand you shun science. Christianity wins out
> over islam in that it has at least adapted -- to an extent -- to the
> realities of science. Of course, it HAD to in order to survive as we
> progressed.

I don't know a single christian that doesn't believe in
science, evolution, or that the world is only 6000 years old.
The evolution part is not to say they believe we came from
an ape... but that man and the animals have indeed adapted
according to their environment.

> And yet we still have the religious nutjobs trying to equate
> "intelligent design" with science. Or claiming that destructive
> weather is a punishment from god because of men fucking other men, or
> some other ridiculous bullshit.

Some even claim that destructive weather is a result of
my truck!

[83LowRider]

Busboy Jefe wrote:

>> I am still trying to understand why he is so interested in my
>> religious beliefs
>
> It's an attempt to make you look like a liar/hypocrite. Nothing more.

Wrong. I'm not 'interested' from any standpoint whatsoever
other than to know where he's 'coming from'. It doesn't
matter in any way what he believes in <or not>. You know
good and well it is a fair and simple question. Everyone in
this 'group' has offered up their opinion on the 'God
question' other than maybe FVH... and I don't give a damn
what he believes either. No one asked if TV, Mike, you,
lab, sliced or (I believe) Incubus were atheists... it was
volunteered. After all these years, it's a fairly casual issue.

[83LowRider]

Busboy Jefe wrote:

> One question you'll never get 83 to answer is: do you think AJ is
> politically savvy?
>
> I have asked many times, yet am always greeted with a dance.. "I think
> he expresses himself as he sees fit", or some other similar dodge.

AJ obviously follows politics. That alone should give him
'savvy' credit. You may blast him on posting from a source
you don't like, or because you feel he should have investigated
deeper. You often blast him because he gets irate and his posts
are more 'hotheaded' than mine. And it's one thing to understand
an issue is going on/exists.... and another thing to put your
own feelings into words. Most people don't bother to get into
these discussions at all... even tho they may have strong
feelings over the issues, simply because they don't feel
capable of expressing their feelings without putting up with
ridicule from others. I've admitted to doing that very thing
to steve... but NOT because I don't like his point of view,
but rather his lack of content. AJ provides plenty of 'content',
even if you choose to debate his sources/views. That's
the same reason I don't see FVH posts... no content at all.

> I find this funny, because if 83 takes such a dim view of Steve's
> posts, there's no way he can't feel the same way about The Professor.

No comparison whatsoever.

[83LowRider]

mss wrote:

> Spot on! And this can not be stressed enough steve.
> To say someone could kill scores <or more> of people & then
> simply say: 'oops - sorry about that but god forgives me'
> is ludicrous. I tell you what it is, its a way to get out
> of taking responsibility for one's actions, I mean after all
> just let Jesus pay for it instead of the guilty party, &
> that's pure rubbish.

If God exists in the sense that He is all-knowing and
all-seeing... then He will certainly know who has
truly repented and who has not. One of the greatest
hopes of any christian is that we can be forgiven if
we truly regret/repent from what we've done. And
who knows, maybe there is a price we pay even if
we ARE forgiven?! Maybe God has an appointed
ruffian to hand out an ass-whoopin' before you can
get thru the gates. "That's enough! Let him up, he can
go in now." Maybe they let you thru the gates, but
your street is only dirt, rather than paved in gold?
Maybe He lets you in, but you're forced to listen to
Bjork for eternity.

[83LowRider]

mss wrote:

> Does mortality define god as well? I think God must be crazy,
> because guys... even Hilter, Stalin, Pol Pot, those sorts of
> loonies, none of them inflicted more than finite pain on their
> victims, whereas God condemns sinners to roast infinitely,
> forever without end. c'mon man, that's a sick mind, I'm sure
> we'd all agree.

Many religions don't believe in Hell or vary on what 'it' is.
http://www.religionfacts.com/big_religion_chart.htm

[AJ]

Plus, don't forget that I said many times that you have more patience
with the liberals here. Plus, time after time when I've posted
current news, many of them have no idea what I'm talking about or
haven't even heard about it yet. Then there's times you just beat me
to the punch and reply before I get a chance to and by then you've
usually corrected them and they have changed the subject. I usually
agree with 99.9% of your posts and no one here wants to read hundreds
of posts from me saying, "I agree 83."

[AJ]

On Jun 5, 8:11 am, "83LowRider" <83lowri...@nywilldo.com> wrote:
> Some even claim that destructive weather is a result of
> my truck!

LOL! Funniest line of the week.

[mss]

83LowRider spoke unto us saying:

> If God exists in the sense that He is all-knowing and
> all-seeing... then He will certainly know who has
> truly repented and who has not. One of the greatest
> hopes of any christian is that we can be forgiven if
> we truly regret/repent from what we've done. And
> who knows, maybe there is a price we pay even if
> we ARE forgiven?! Maybe God has an appointed
> ruffian to hand out an ass-whoopin' before you can
> get thru the gates. "That's enough! Let him up, he can
> go in now." Maybe they let you thru the gates, but
> your street is only dirt, rather than paved in gold?

Dante's Inferno tackles that very subject 83 <just deserts>.

> Maybe He lets you in, but you're forced to listen to
> Bjork for eternity.

Heh-heh now that's harsh punishment.

--
Later on,
Mike

[mss]

83LowRider spoke unto us saying:

> Many religions don't believe in Hell or vary on what 'it' is.
> http://www.religionfacts.com/big_religion_chart.htm

Look at all those belief systems, I wonder how many
folks in America are even aware of anything outside of
monotheism... Ugh - I've become obsessed with this shit!

coffee...

--
Later on,
Mike

[AJ]

On Jun 4, 9:18 pm, Busboy Jefe <busboyj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> And why are you so certain that the idea no god exists *isn't* the
> truth? I've tried the christian thing. Have you actually tried atheism
> on for a bit? If you're truly about exploring all possibilities,
> perhaps you should.

When I was younger I was skeptical about any after life. I studied
other religions, the occult, witchcraft, magic, Satanism, and so on.
It wasn't until I saw a ghost one night (with two witnesses with me
who saw the same thing,) that's when I changed my view on the
afterlife.

[AJ]

On Jun 4, 9:31 pm, Busboy Jefe <busboyj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 4, 12:50 pm, AJ <misfitskiss...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > How do know it wasn't?   Neither you nor I know for sure.
>
> This is true. And given as such, I choose not to waste time and energy
> on it. It was interesting to contemplate with good friends and potent
> strains of weed back in the day, but at some I think you have to
> realize that it does little good to dwell on it.
>
> >That's why
> > it's called faith.  You believe or you don't.  In the end, one of us
> > will be right and know.
>
> Faith can be a negative thing, taken too far. I find people who have
> faith that they'll go on to a better life after this one..frightening.
> Especially when they hold positions of power.

In many cases I agree.

> The idea that this is all we get, with no guarantees of anything
> beyond this moment, is something I find to be very life confirming.
> Mortality defines us.
>
> El Jefe

I find it comforting of the possibilities that there's more out there
that we haven't seen or really understand.