BroilJAB RAN From God 100 Times

Budikka666

unread,

Nov 17, 2012, 7:46:16 AM11/17/12

to

BraoilJAN aka Jabriol, LiarBoi, Loirbaj, BrtailJOB, etc., is a
Christian who is so filled with hatred, racism, misogynism, and
cowardice that he pretty much typiifes organized religion. Like a limp
Peter at the passion he has denied Christ thrice. Here's a partial
list of the times he has been challenged on his disgusting stances and
in *every* *single* *case* he has openly admitted there is no
omnipotent god by running like diarrhea.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #1
When asked what his academic qualifications were to set himself up as
judge and jury of the Theory of Evolution, Fled the Thread, thereby
proving himself a hypocrite.
http://tinyurl.com/3rf72jl

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #2
Challenged on his 'missing links' LIE. Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3um7gc4

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #3
Asked what positive scientific evidence he had which demonstrates that
the entire surface of the Earth was completely under water only about
4,300 years old as the Bible chronology in Luke indicates. Fled the
Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/44c3q94

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #4
Asked if he had any positive scientific evidence which demonstrates
that the Earth and indeed the universe are only about 6,000 years old
as the Bible chronology in Luke indicates. Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3d38lwe

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #5
Asked what professionally published positive scientific evidence there
is for a creator or for a creation. Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3sya4pn

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #6
Asked what independent objective evidence there is for a creator or
for a creation, posted around the same time as the above. Fled the
Thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #7
Asked what intelligent rationale he could offer for a creator or for a
creation, posted around the same time as the above. Fled the Thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #8
LIED that he posted 180 failures of evolution when he posted only a
handful, all of which were easily refuted. Didn't even *pretend* he
could support his claim! Instead, he Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3ueca9g

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #9
LIED that humans and apes do not have a common ancestry and when asked
for evidence and invited to debate it, he Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3doxezm

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #10
Invited to go toe-to-toe on the existence of this god of his. Fled
the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3s6wwaf

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #11
Invited to discuss unsupported claims he made about the coelacanth.
Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/44kxjxf

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #12
Taken to task over LIES about Richard Dawkins. Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3md8lbg

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #13
Called out on his LIE about evolution and invited to discuss it. Fled
the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3q5g5v8

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #14
Called out on his LIE about Jack Kevorkian's whereabouts. Hell? Fled
the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3tw8pja

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #15
Called out on his LIE about convicted criminal Garcia's whereabouts.
Hell? Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/69z2wex

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #16
Called out on his LIE about the Peppered moth, Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3j9cy7b

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #17
Invited to discuss his knowledge of the Bible. Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3pfrg53

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #18
Invited to discuss his LIE about the odds of abiogenesis and
evolution. Fled the thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3v5x4or

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #19
Offered a discussion of his shameful LIE about anti-semitism. Fled
the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3shfato

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #20
LIES about Charles Darwin's purported racism were exposed. Fled the
Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3c8mele

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #21
Invited you to define 'Evolution' so that we could discuss it
intelligently. Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3grr2tm

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #22
Made several statements on the reliability of the Bible and when
challenged to support them Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3vc4v8o

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #23
LIED about what Charles Darwin said about the evolution of the eye and
when taken to task on this, Fled the Thread:
http://tinyurl.com/3mp9fbs

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #24
We set LiarBoi BrailJOB straight on abiogenesis after he accused us of
making the claims that Joseki (whom he's directly and repeatedly
supported) was making, he FLED THE THREAD:
http://tinyurl.com/3mhzezl

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #25
Challenged on his 'billions of fossils' LIE. Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3ce9g8j

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #26
Challenged on Jesus Christ. Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/6kck7b5

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #27
Washed out in the Noahic flood. Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/4xo7k7v

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #28
Challenged on his Rick Perry LIES. Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3w2rkhu

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #29
Big Bang Scares LiarBoi BrailJOB! Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/4xy9hhj

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #30
LiarBoi's Junk Shrivels Away! Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3mb6xts

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #31
Selfish Genes are More Generous Than Skinflint LiarBoi! Fled the
Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/4yh4nyh

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #32
Why species 'A' doesn't become extinct automatically after giving rise
to species 'B'. Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3t2l3qf

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #33
The Definition of Speciation. Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3f7m488

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #34
LIED that there was a "mountain of evidence" disproving evolution.
Fled the Thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3k2jtqg

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #35
Didn't dare set foot in a thread which pointed out what a fraud he was
when he talks about Stephen Jay Gould and the visibility of genes to
evolution
http://tinyurl.com/3k8upef

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #36
Ran from his virus lie.
http://tinyurl.com/3om8ps5

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #37
When his lie about scientists skeptical of Evolution was exposed,
LiarBoi BrailJOB Fled the Thread!
http://tinyurl.com/3c6kufl

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #38
Radiometric dating. Fled the thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3gwzkhy

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #39
After having been bitten by Charles Darwin's finches, he flew the
coop!
http://tinyurl.com/6b7sm9o

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #40
Offered a debate on the evidence for evolution, LiarBoi BrailJOB
performed the amazing feat of running up the white flag.
http://tinyurl.com/3lgbdo3

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #41
Talk about fruit and watch LiarBoi fly!
http://tinyurl.com/3gvhqq4

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #42
Offered the chance to discuss transitional fossils, LiarBoi BrailJOB
transitioned into a chicken
http://tinyurl.com/3fq8omp

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #43
Asked to support his claim that a god made men and women, LiarBoi
BrailJOB Ran Away!
http://tinyurl.com/43m6exa

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #44
Challenged to offer his evidence for a god creating the universe.
LiarBoi proves his head is move of a vacuum than space is!
http://tinyurl.com/3twjs48

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #45
Challenged on his admission that he lied about Adam & Eve and a young-
Earth, LiarBoi ran away!
http://tinyurl.com/3pabgsu

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #46
LiarBoi unintelligently designed a lie and then ran away
http://tinyurl.com/3p75lhd

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #47
LiarBoi says one thing in one message, contradicts himself in another,
the runs away when challenged.
http://tinyurl.com/3bflqkr

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #48
Given a chance to discuss design, LiarBoi creatively exited the
thread.
http://tinyurl.com/3oplwuw

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #49
Offered a chance to discuss his lack of guts, spine, and original
thought, and why he has a pipe stuck up his ass, LiarBoi slithered
away.
http://tinyurl.com/3mszdd6

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #50
Offered a chance to discuss the "concilience [sic] of science, math,
and physics: a Creating Intelligent God" LiarBoi Fled the Thread
http://tinyurl.com/3boy8ae

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #51
http://tinyurl.com/3hwywdl
Flood debate was a washout - LiarBoi BrailJOB the Loonbag Fled the
Thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #52
http://tinyurl.com/7yyx83c
Challenged to debate atheist knowledge v. theist knowledge, LiarBoi
BrailJOB the Loonbag admitted he knows nothing and Fled the Thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #53
http://tinyurl.com/8yobgg4
Challenged on his lies about Richard Dawkins, LiarBoi BrailJOB the
Loonbag Fled the Thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #54
http://tinyurl.com/6wk79as
Challenged on his gullible claims that I'd posted a clearly spoofed
insult to gays, LiarBoi BrailJOB the Loonbag Fled the Thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #55
http://tinyurl.com/7d2s93z
Offered a second chance to debate Jesus, LiarBoi the Loonbag Fled the
Thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #56
http://tinyurl.com/7az9uw6
Offered the chance to debate the efficacy of prayer, LiarBoi the
Loonbag Fled the Thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #57
http://tinyurl.com/6v6dhy6
Offered the chance to defend his claims that there's a heaven, LiarBoi
the Loonbag Fled the Thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #58
http://tinyurl.com/6wyp6se
Offered a third chance to debate Jesus, LiarBoi the Loonbag Fled the
Thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #59
http://tinyurl.com/c47efyr
LiarBoi BrailJOB used his Flee Will! lol!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #60
http://tinyurl.com/7oq9q7d
Challenged to support his evil characterization of atheists, LiarBoi
the Loonbag openly admitted he had no cv to qualify him to make such a
judgment and then Fled the Thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #61
http://tinyurl.com/87rrvtf
Challenged to debate the true meaning of Winter Solstice, LiarBoi the
Loonbag froze!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #62
http://tinyurl.com/7mxogt6
Challenged on intelligent design, LiarBoi BrailJOB the Loonbag
intelligently Designed an exit from the thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #63
http://tinyurl.com/7axbzsu
Challenged to discuss evolution, Loonbag the Loinbra evolved into a
chicken!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #64
http://tinyurl.com/7j47ofs
Budikka offered no challenge whatsoever, but cowardly BrailJOB
preemptively ran away! This is the best one ever!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #65
http://tinyurl.com/7xld5j7
Challenged on his lie about what Charles Darwin said about bears and
whales, LiarBoi BrailJOB got all bearish and Fled the Thread!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #66
http://tinyurl.com/77s8om8
Challenged to discuss intercessory prayer failure, LiarBoi the Loonbag
failed to show!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #67
http://tinyurl.com/78p8cl7
Challenged on his cowardly lies about the Shroud of Turin, LiarBoi
left so fast that only his ghostly image remained!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #68
http://tinyurl.com/7grerk9
Challenged to support another random claim about another random
celebrity, LiarBoi went incognito in his predictable way.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #69
http://tinyurl.com/7pr6p3r
Challenged to support yet another of his endless lies about Charles
Darwin, LiarBoi Fled the Thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #70
http://tinyurl.com/83av5dz
Challenged *again* (see #18) to discuss his LIE about the odds of
abiogenesis and evolution. LiarBoi figured his odds of survival were
better elsewhere and evolved rapidly into a monumental chicken!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #71
http://tinyurl.com/7k6wrtv
Challenged to support his claims about atheists, LiarBoi admitted
there was no god to help him by showing great faith in running and
hiding.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #72
http://tinyurl.com/735e7mu
Challenged to support his rabid claims about a Republican never-been,
LiarBoi Fled the Thread

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #73
http://tinyurl.com/84svchk
Challenged to support his homophobic claim that a "homosexualist"
kidnapped an ape, BrailJOB thought he'd have a gay old time, but was
kicked in the ass!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #74
http://tinyurl.com/7ozbqr7
Challenged to present evidence for this fake god he wants us to
praise, LiarBoi the Loonbag Fled the Thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #75
http://tinyurl.com/74nvphd
Challenged *again* (See #65) on his lie about what Charles Darwin said
about bears and whales, LiarBoi BrailJOB started wailing and Fled the
Thread!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #76
http://tinyurl.com/86vc75j
Challenged to support his claim that ID is advancing, LiarBoi
intelligently designed his exit from the thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #77
http://tinyurl.com/7xmmaha
Challenged yet again on his lies that Charles Darwin indulged in
racism, LiarBoi races for the exit!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #78
http://tinyurl.com/784skba
Challenged on yet another gay slur and mindless diatribe about birth
control, Loonbag aborted the thread!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #79
http://tinyurl.com/7u9exn5
Challenged to support his lie about Charles Darwin's supposed deathbed
conversion, LiarBoi converted to a sprinter and Fled the Thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #80
http://tinyurl.com/84k2pp4
Challenged to justify bearing yet more false witness against Charles
Darwin, BrailJOB the LiarBoi bore himself swiftly from the thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #81
http://tinyurl.com/7y3fmpf
In which LiarBadge proves a moron about Mormons.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #82
http://tinyurl.com/8xd4mho
In which LiarBadge proves he lacks a catholic education about
Catholics saving lives.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #83
http://tinyurl.com/8467uwy
Challenged to match non-existent science for the Noahic flood with
solid scientific evidence refuting it, LiarBoi the Loonbag found he
was all washed up!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #84
http://tinyurl.com/7eowjm2
Challenged to support *any* claim he's posted, LiarBoi Fled the
Thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #85
http://tinyurl.com/7ggtp9z
Challenged for the third time to support his assertion that there's a
Hell, LiarBoi ran like Hell!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #86
http://tinyurl.com/7abg3xl
Challenged to support his knee-jerk claim that there's a religious
resurgence in the USA, LiarBoi shrunk away.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #87
http://tinyurl.com/6m8868a
Challenged on his obsession with mutilating Charles Darwin's corpse,
Loonbag the BrailJOB Cut & Ran.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #88
http://tinyurl.com/723pbso
Challenged to support his lie that ID is growing, LiarBoi
intelligently Fled the Thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #89
http://tinyurl.com/7tkz7e5
Challenged on the fact that the cowardice of creationists refutes the
very lies they spew, LiarBoi the Loonbag beat a retreat.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #90
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/48a9b0a2028f3393#
Challenged on the afct that the literal thousands of Christian sects
refutes monotheism, LiarBoi split.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #91
http://tinyurl.com/7s3kjat
Challenged to support his claims about the Black Book Holy Bible,
LiarBoi did a Jonah!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #92
http://tinyurl.com/83dk5md
Challenged again on his LIE about the odds of abiogenesis and
evolution, LiarBoi became odd and even Fled the thread.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #93
http://tinyurl.com/8xvag5e
Challenged to post evidence for his god, Liarboi admitted he has none.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #94
http://tinyurl.com/77b6u8f
Challenged to back up his lies about Charles Darwin with Evidence,
Liarboi ran like a Beagle!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #95
http://tinyurl.com/85zhcbd
Challenged to support his odds lie (again) Liarboi Fled the Thread
(again).

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #96
http://tinyurl.com/86p9h8b
Challenged on his T-Rex red blood cells claim, LiarBoi Fled the Thread

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #97
http://tinyurl.com/6s5cfhy
Challenged to post some scientifically supported alternatives to the
Theory of Evolution, LiarBoi Fled the Thread!

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #98
http://tinyurl.com/83xnyrm
Challenged on his fraudulent Kent Hovind-Style "challenge" bullshit,
LiarBoi quietly misled himself away.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #99
http://tinyurl.com/7ml2fhx
LiarBoi Fled the Thread when challenged on his Pascal's wager idiocy.
I'll wager he won't be back.

LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #100
http://tinyurl.com/86tko3z
LiarBoi ran when challenged to discuss the apatosaurus, thereby
proving he's a dinosaur.

Budikka

Zerkon

unread,

Nov 17, 2012, 9:09:09 AM11/17/12

to

On Sat, 17 Nov 2012 04:46:16 -0800, Budikka666 wrote:

> is a Christian who is so filled with hatred

Does not compute.. either he is not a christian, that is to say one who
follows the teachings of JC, or not filled with hatred. One can not be
both.

Since his posts are indeed filled with hatred the conclusion is he is not
a christian.

"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the
kingdom of heaven......"

Immortalist

unread,

Nov 17, 2012, 10:36:05 AM11/17/12

to

On Nov 17, 6:09 am, Zerkon <Zer...@Z.Zorg> wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Nov 2012 04:46:16 -0800, Budikka666 wrote:
> > is a Christian who is so filled with hatred
>
> Does not compute.. either he is not a christian, that is to say one who
> follows the teachings of JC, or not filled with hatred. One can not be
> both.
>

More like he is an opportunist and a flamer pro but he doesnt realize
that everyone has took usenet fire and migrated to other and shallower
social media.

Budikka666

unread,

Nov 17, 2012, 11:28:32 AM11/17/12

to

On Nov 17, 8:09 am, Zerkon <Zer...@Z.Zorg> wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Nov 2012 04:46:16 -0800, Budikka666 wrote:
> > is a Christian who is so filled with hatred
>
> Does not compute.. either he is not a christian, that is to say one who
> follows the teachings of JC

Are you talking about the same JC who stated (according to NT
mythology) that if you don't hate your own parents, you're not with
him? Are you talking about that same JC who said he had not come to
bring peace but a sword? He did indeed bring a sword. Are you
talking about the same JC who said he came only for the Judaists, not
for anyone else? You're quite evidently delusional.

> or not filled with hatred. One can not be both.

Then you are utterly blind. Christians started the crusades.
Christians instigated the inquisition. Christians burned "heretics".
Because the Bible declares that you shall not suffer a witch to live,
witches were hung by the thousands. Because the Bible declares that
homosexuals should be stoned to death, Christians hate homosexuals.

Christians were fighting against each other for years in Northern
Ireland. Christians declared war on Iraq for no reason whatsoever
other than a lust for oil. Christians instituted the death penalty in
the USA. White Christians lynched blacks in the USA. Christians shot
doctors and blew up abortion clinics in the USA.

The USA is comprised of people, 90% of whom believe in yoru god. 80%
of them blindly believe that Jesus Christ was not a sick joke. Yet
the USA has violence far worse than any other country.

Christianity is evil to the core.

> Since his posts are indeed filled with hatred the conclusion is he is not
> a christian.

He may well not be, but he promotes and aids your PoV and not a single
Christian on Usenet speaks out against him. Why is that? But
regardless of what that scum is or isn't, other Christians on Usenet
are filled with the same hatred he is. We see their messages posted
daily espousing racism, homophobia, and misogyny, and spewing lies
galore.

There can be no doubt, when we see how Christians behave both on
Usenet and irl, that Christianity, like Islam, is a religion of
intolerance, hatred, and violence. These are the facts, and the fact
that you're in denial about the evil with which Christianity had
imbued the world lends me no faith whatsoever that it's going to end
any time soon, or that it's going to end well

Congratulations.

Budikka

Besque

unread,

Nov 17, 2012, 6:29:12 PM11/17/12

to

On 11/17/2012 11:28 AM, Budikka666 wrote:
> On Nov 17, 8:09 am, Zerkon <Zer...@Z.Zorg> wrote:
>> On Sat, 17 Nov 2012 04:46:16 -0800, Budikka666 wrote:
>>> is a Christian who is so filled with hatred
>>
>> Does not compute.. either he is not a christian, that is to say one who
>> follows the teachings of JC
>
> Are you talking about the same JC who stated (according to NT
> mythology) that if you don't hate your own parents, you're not with
> him? Are you talking about that same JC who said he had not come to
> bring peace but a sword? He did indeed bring a sword. Are you
> talking about the same JC who said he came only for the Judaists, not
> for anyone else? You're quite evidently delusional.
>
>> or not filled with hatred. One can not be both.
>
> Then you are utterly blind. Christians started the crusades.
>

This is false, the Moslems had invaded the Bibical lands in the MIddle
East and started an invasion Europe. The crusades were a response to
the Moors (Moslems) invasion of Spain and Portigal, they were stopped by
the European Christians at the French border and pushed back across half
of Spain.
The Moslems have always engaged in wars of conquest and the Crusades
were the Europrean way of fighting back.

>
> Christians instigated the inquisition. Christians burned "heretics".
> Because the Bible declares that you shall not suffer a witch to live,
> witches were hung by the thousands. Because the Bible declares that
> homosexuals should be stoned to death, Christians hate homosexuals.
>
> Christians were fighting against each other for years in Northern
> Ireland.
>

This was a political war. The protestants wanted to remain loyal to
the British the Catholics wanted separation from England. That is
the cause of the war. It wasn't over religion, it just fell along
religious lines.

>
Christians declared war on Iraq for no reason whatsoever
> other than a lust for oil. Christians instituted the death penalty in
> the USA. White Christians lynched blacks in the USA.
>

It was always democrats who lynched blacks, but only when blacks raped
white women.

Christians shot
> doctors and blew up abortion clinics in the USA.
<

You paint with a extremely broad brush which is based upon an extremist
misconception and unjustified bias against all Christians.

>
> The USA is comprised of people, 90% of whom believe in yoru god. 80%
> of them blindly believe that Jesus Christ was not a sick joke. Yet
> the USA has violence far worse than any other country.
>

The highest crime rate in the US is carried out by minorities, mainly
against other minorities of the same group. This group makes up
the highest percent by race of the prison population. This same group
has the highest rate of illegitimate births. Are they Christian?
This is not Christian the morality Christianity teaches.

>
> Christianity is evil to the core.
>

Actually, from this slanderous attack, I would say you are!

>
>> Since his posts are indeed filled with hatred the conclusion is he is not
>> a christian.
>
> He may well not be, but he promotes and aids your PoV and not a single
> Christian on Usenet speaks out against him. Why is that? But
> regardless of what that scum is or isn't, other Christians on Usenet
> are filled with the same hatred he is. We see their messages posted
> daily espousing racism, homophobia, and misogyny, and spewing lies
> galore.
>
> There can be no doubt, when we see how Christians behave both on
> Usenet and irl, that Christianity, like Islam, is a religion of
> intolerance, hatred, and violence.
>

You don't see Christians flying planes into buildings and blowing
themselves up. Or killing innocent people for their religion.
Christianity preaches peace, love and good-will towards out fellow man
and doing good to those who hat you. You cannot honestly claim this for
Moslems.

These are the facts, and the fact
> that you're in denial about the evil with which Christianity had
> imbued the world lends me no faith whatsoever that it's going to end
> any time soon, or that it's going to end well
>

Christianity has been a great benefit to the world, even to those who
hate it such as yourself. Based upon your post you are a hideous
monster, a spawn of hell!
>
> Congratulations.
>
> Budikka
>

Yap

unread,

Nov 17, 2012, 11:02:38 PM11/17/12

to

There is no lord, no jesus of any sort for Liarbag.......
His delusional insanity does not allow him to be a normal human.

Caranx latus

unread,

Nov 17, 2012, 11:26:00 PM11/17/12

to

On 11/17/2012 6:29 PM, Besque wrote:
> On 11/17/2012 11:28 AM, Budikka666 wrote:
>> On Nov 17, 8:09 am, Zerkon <Zer...@Z.Zorg> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 17 Nov 2012 04:46:16 -0800, Budikka666 wrote:
>>>> is a Christian who is so filled with hatred
>>>
>>> Does not compute.. either he is not a christian, that is to say one who
>>> follows the teachings of JC
>>
>> Are you talking about the same JC who stated (according to NT
>> mythology) that if you don't hate your own parents, you're not with
>> him? Are you talking about that same JC who said he had not come to
>> bring peace but a sword? He did indeed bring a sword. Are you
>> talking about the same JC who said he came only for the Judaists, not
>> for anyone else? You're quite evidently delusional.
>>
>>> or not filled with hatred. One can not be both.
>>
>> Then you are utterly blind. Christians started the crusades.
> >
> This is false, the Moslems had invaded the Bibical lands in the MIddle
> East and started an invasion Europe. The crusades were a response to
> the Moors (Moslems) invasion of Spain and Portigal, they were stopped by
> the European Christians at the French border and pushed back across half
> of Spain.
> The Moslems have always engaged in wars of conquest and the Crusades
> were the Europrean way of fighting back.

Have you any idea how many crusades were fought against non-Muslims? I
don't think you do.

>> Christians instigated the inquisition. Christians burned "heretics".
>> Because the Bible declares that you shall not suffer a witch to live,
>> witches were hung by the thousands. Because the Bible declares that
>> homosexuals should be stoned to death, Christians hate homosexuals.
>>
>> Christians were fighting against each other for years in Northern
>> Ireland.
> >
> This was a political war. The protestants wanted to remain loyal to
> the British the Catholics wanted separation from England. That is
> the cause of the war. It wasn't over religion, it just fell along
> religious lines.
> >
> Christians declared war on Iraq for no reason whatsoever
>> other than a lust for oil. Christians instituted the death penalty in
>> the USA. White Christians lynched blacks in the USA.
> >
> It was always democrats who lynched blacks, but only when blacks raped
> white women.
>
> Christians shot
>> doctors and blew up abortion clinics in the USA.
> <
> You paint with a extremely broad brush which is based upon an extremist
> misconception and unjustified bias against all Christians.

The media paints this this picture and it does so easily. After all, bad
news sells. Perhaps if Christians would clean up their own house, this
isn't how they'd be portrayed.

>> The USA is comprised of people, 90% of whom believe in yoru god. 80%
>> of them blindly believe that Jesus Christ was not a sick joke. Yet
>> the USA has violence far worse than any other country.
> >
> The highest crime rate in the US is carried out by minorities, mainly
> against other minorities of the same group. This group makes up
> the highest percent by race of the prison population. This same group
> has the highest rate of illegitimate births. Are they Christian?
> This is not Christian the morality Christianity teaches.
>>
>> Christianity is evil to the core.
> >
> Actually, from this slanderous attack, I would say you are!
>>
>>> Since his posts are indeed filled with hatred the conclusion is he is
>>> not
>>> a christian.
>>
>> He may well not be, but he promotes and aids your PoV and not a single
>> Christian on Usenet speaks out against him. Why is that? But
>> regardless of what that scum is or isn't, other Christians on Usenet
>> are filled with the same hatred he is. We see their messages posted
>> daily espousing racism, homophobia, and misogyny, and spewing lies
>> galore.
> >
>> There can be no doubt, when we see how Christians behave both on
>> Usenet and irl, that Christianity, like Islam, is a religion of
>> intolerance, hatred, and violence.
> >
> You don't see Christians flying planes into buildings and blowing
> themselves up. Or killing innocent people for their religion.

They certainly used to in the good old days. Islam is now were
Christianity was about 800 years ago.

> Christianity preaches peace, love and good-will towards out fellow man

> and doing good to those who hate you.

Why then do so many Christians not behave in this way? I mean, look at
your own words above where you accused Budikka666 of being evil to the
core, and below where you referred to him/her as a "a hideous monster, a
spawn of hell". Is this love or good-will? No, it is not. So for all
your lofty ideals, you're no better than anyone else and in some ways worse.

> You cannot honestly claim this for
> Moslems.
>
> These are the facts, and the fact
>> that you're in denial about the evil with which Christianity had
>> imbued the world lends me no faith whatsoever that it's going to end
>> any time soon, or that it's going to end well
> >
> Christianity has been a great benefit to the world,

Please explain further. It isn't difficult to see the harm it has done.

Yap

unread,

Nov 17, 2012, 11:25:18 PM11/17/12

to

On Nov 18, 7:29 am, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/17/2012 11:28 AM, Budikka666 wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 17, 8:09 am, Zerkon <Zer...@Z.Zorg> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 17 Nov 2012 04:46:16 -0800, Budikka666 wrote:
> >>> is a Christian who is so filled with hatred
>
> >> Does not compute.. either he is not a christian, that is to say one who
> >> follows the teachings of JC
>
> > Are you talking about the same JC who stated (according to NT
> > mythology) that if you don't hate your own parents, you're not with
> > him? Are you talking about that same JC who said he had not come to
> > bring peace but a sword? He did indeed bring a sword. Are you
> > talking about the same JC who said he came only for the Judaists, not
> > for anyone else? You're quite evidently delusional.
>
> >> or not filled with hatred. One can not be both.
>
> > Then you are utterly blind. Christians started the crusades.
>
> >
> This is false, the Moslems had invaded the Bibical lands in the MIddle
> East and started an invasion Europe. The crusades were a response to
> the Moors (Moslems) invasion of Spain and Portigal, they were stopped by
> the European Christians at the French border and pushed back across half
> of Spain.
> The Moslems have always engaged in wars of conquest and the Crusades
> were the Europrean way of fighting back.

Regardless of which side started the war, it is apparent that religion
started it.
The savage killing of innocent human was not reflected by the leaders
and the followers...they were led into bloody wars, like animals.

>
> >> Christians instigated the inquisition. Christians burned "heretics".
> > Because the Bible declares that you shall not suffer a witch to live,
> > witches were hung by the thousands. Because the Bible declares that
> > homosexuals should be stoned to death, Christians hate homosexuals.
>
> > Christians were fighting against each other for years in Northern
> > Ireland.
>
> >
> This was a political war. The protestants wanted to remain loyal to
> the British the Catholics wanted separation from England. That is
> the cause of the war. It wasn't over religion, it just fell along
> religious lines.

If it was political, you would not see two factions of the religion in
different path.

> >
> Christians declared war on Iraq for no reason whatsoever> other than a lust for oil. Christians instituted the death penalty in
> > the USA. White Christians lynched blacks in the USA.
>
> >
> It was always democrats who lynched blacks, but only when blacks raped
> white women.

White Christians were the ones who enslaved the blacks, right?
Raping happened every where by all races.

>
> Christians shot> doctors and blew up abortion clinics in the USA.
>
> <
> You paint with a extremely broad brush which is based upon an extremist
> misconception and unjustified bias against all Christians.

Christians are the ones who are following their religious guidance to
deny abortion.

>
> > The USA is comprised of people, 90% of whom believe in yoru god. 80%
> > of them blindly believe that Jesus Christ was not a sick joke. Yet
> > the USA has violence far worse than any other country.
>
> >
> The highest crime rate in the US is carried out by minorities, mainly
> against other minorities of the same group. This group makes up
> the highest percent by race of the prison population. This same group
> has the highest rate of illegitimate births. Are they Christian?
> This is not Christian the morality Christianity teaches.

But they are also the minority that is not economically equated.
The whites deny the minority equal chances in all spheres of the
society.

>
> > Christianity is evil to the core.
>
> >
> Actually, from this slanderous attack, I would say you are!

So, you did not read your bible?
It told fabricated stories and demand loyalty from the followers which
were being milked daily to enhance the control of the organization.

>
> >> Since his posts are indeed filled with hatred the conclusion is he is not
> >> a christian.
>
> > He may well not be, but he promotes and aids your PoV and not a single
> > Christian on Usenet speaks out against him. Why is that? But
> > regardless of what that scum is or isn't, other Christians on Usenet
> > are filled with the same hatred he is. We see their messages posted
> > daily espousing racism, homophobia, and misogyny, and spewing lies
> > galore.
>
> > There can be no doubt, when we see how Christians behave both on
> > Usenet and irl, that Christianity, like Islam, is a religion of
> > intolerance, hatred, and violence.
>
> >
> You don't see Christians flying planes into buildings and blowing
> themselves up. Or killing innocent people for their religion.
> Christianity preaches peace, love and good-will towards out fellow man
> and doing good to those who hat you. You cannot honestly claim this for
> Moslems.

Can you tell us why did the Muslims fly the planes to blow up the twin
tower?
They did not flew the planes into Shanghai telecom tower, right?

Christians were the most aggressive human on earth.....the Jews, the
Germans, the British and certainly the Americans were (and are) the
aggressors in this world. You can't dispute history.

>
> These are the facts, and the fact> that you're in denial about the evil with which Christianity had
> > imbued the world lends me no faith whatsoever that it's going to end
> > any time soon, or that it's going to end well
>
> >
> Christianity has been a great benefit to the world, even to those who
> hate it such as yourself. Based upon your post you are a hideous
> monster, a spawn of hell!

What has Christianity benefited this world, apart from wanting the
average stupid human to be a long term sucker.
Without the tithers, there won't be any churches all over EU and US.
But declining economies of EU/US now could not look into the sky and
ask for help, can they?

The Muslims have been praying for 5 times each day without fail, yet
Afghan and Iraq was bombed non-stop....

This shows this world is not under the control of a deity or any
deity.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Congratulations.
>
> > Budikka

Besque

unread,

Nov 18, 2012, 1:20:20 AM11/18/12

to

What were the Europeans supposed to do: just let the Moslems march
across Europe as they did the middle east? If the muslems landed
in your city, on a mission of conquest. Would you set idly by?

>
> The savage killing of innocent human was not reflected by the leaders
> and the followers...they were led into bloody wars, like animals.
>

All wars are bloody, it's the nature of wars.

>>
>> >> Christians instigated the inquisition. Christians burned "heretics".
>>> Because the Bible declares that you shall not suffer a witch to live,
>>> witches were hung by the thousands. Because the Bible declares that
>>> homosexuals should be stoned to death, Christians hate homosexuals.
>>
>>> Christians were fighting against each other for years in Northern
>>> Ireland.
>>
>> >
>> This was a political war. The protestants wanted to remain loyal to
>> the British the Catholics wanted separation from England. That is
>> the cause of the war. It wasn't over religion, it just fell along
>> religious lines.
>
> If it was political, you would not see two factions of the religion in
> different path.
>

Sure you would the Protestants were loyal to Great Britan and wanted to
remain within the United Kingdom. The Catholics did not.

>> >
>> Christians declared war on Iraq for no reason whatsoever> other than a lust for oil. Christians instituted the death penalty in
>>> the USA. White Christians lynched blacks in the USA.
>>
>> >
>> It was always democrats who lynched blacks, but only when blacks raped
>> white women.
>
> White Christians were the ones who enslaved the blacks, right?
> Raping happened every where by all races.
>

This is true in many cases, but not all. Slavery has always existed and
still exist in certain Middle East Nations.

>>
>> Christians shot> doctors and blew up abortion clinics in the USA.
>>
>> <
>> You paint with a extremely broad brush which is based upon an extremist
>> misconception and unjustified bias against all Christians.
>
> Christians are the ones who are following their religious guidance to
> deny abortion.
>

Christians think abortion, especially late term abortion is infanticide
(murder of unborn babies).

>>
>>> The USA is comprised of people, 90% of whom believe in yoru god. 80%
>>> of them blindly believe that Jesus Christ was not a sick joke. Yet
>>> the USA has violence far worse than any other country.
>>
>> >
>> The highest crime rate in the US is carried out by minorities, mainly
>> against other minorities of the same group. This group makes up
>> the highest percent by race of the prison population. This same group
>> has the highest rate of illegitimate births. Are they Christian?
>> This is not Christian the morality Christianity teaches.
>
> But they are also the minority that is not economically equated.
> The whites deny the minority equal chances in all spheres of the
> society.
>

When in the largest minority 73% of all births are to single women,
there is no possible way for a one parent family, even when she works,
to have the income or financial resources of a two parent family with
both parents working.

>>
>>> Christianity is evil to the core.
>>
>> >
>> Actually, from this slanderous attack, I would say you are!
>
> So, you did not read your bible?
> It told fabricated stories and demand loyalty from the followers which
> were being milked daily to enhance the control of the organization.
>

Where in the New Testament, the Christian scripture, is there such
a proposal?

>>
>>>> Since his posts are indeed filled with hatred the conclusion is he is not
>>>> a christian.
>>
>>> He may well not be, but he promotes and aids your PoV and not a single
>>> Christian on Usenet speaks out against him. Why is that? But
>>> regardless of what that scum is or isn't, other Christians on Usenet
>>> are filled with the same hatred he is. We see their messages posted
>>> daily espousing racism, homophobia, and misogyny, and spewing lies
>>> galore.
>>
>>> There can be no doubt, when we see how Christians behave both on
>>> Usenet and irl, that Christianity, like Islam, is a religion of
>>> intolerance, hatred, and violence.
>>
>> >
>> You don't see Christians flying planes into buildings and blowing
>> themselves up. Or killing innocent people for their religion.
>> Christianity preaches peace, love and good-will towards out fellow man

>> and doing good to those who hate you. You cannot honestly claim this for

>> Moslems.
>
> Can you tell us why did the Muslims fly the planes to blow up the twin
> tower?
>

Yes, they were promised 73 virgins as their reward for their sacrifice
in the next life.

>
> They did not flew the planes into Shanghai telecom tower, right?
>

Who knows, they might yet. But they hate both Jews and Americans,
including you and me, that is, if you are an American.

>
> Christians were the most aggressive human on earth.....the Jews, the
> Germans, the British and certainly the Americans were (and are) the
> aggressors in this world. You can't dispute history.
>

The Muslims have always been warlike and aggressive. So, I would say
they deserve that title.

>
>>
>> These are the facts, and the fact> that you're in denial about the evil with which Christianity had
>>> imbued the world lends me no faith whatsoever that it's going to end
>>> any time soon, or that it's going to end well
>>
>> >
>> Christianity has been a great benefit to the world, even to those who
>> hate it such as yourself. Based upon your post you are a hideous
>> monster, a spawn of hell!
>
> What has Christianity benefited this world, apart from wanting the
> average stupid human to be a long term sucker.
>

Look at the west, where Christanity, namely the Protestant version
thrived compaired to the rest of the world.

>
> Without the tithers, there won't be any churches all over EU and US.
> But declining economies of EU/US now could not look into the sky and
> ask for help, can they?
>

Christians believe God helps those who help themselves. Looking to the
sky and nothing else offers no benefits.

>
> The Muslims have been praying for 5 times each day without fail, yet
> Afghan and Iraq was bombed non-stop....
>

They were praying for the death and destruction of the Jews, American,
and Western Europe.

>
> This shows this world is not under the control of a deity or any
> deity.
>

Have you considered the possibility that God has turned his back
on man, because of man's inhumanity to man; his cruelty to others;
his hatred of God and man and his selfish ambitions. According to
the Bible this is true.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Congratulations.
>>
>>> Budikka
>

Besque

unread,

Nov 18, 2012, 1:34:01 AM11/18/12

to

Islam has always been a warlike people who invaded other peoples.
Catholicism did undergo a major falling away, but this form of
Christanity did ungo a reformation of its own after the Protestant
reformation.

>
>> Christianity preaches peace, love and good-will towards out fellow man
>> and doing good to those who hate you.
>
> Why then do so many Christians not behave in this way? I mean, look at
> your own words above where you accused Budikka666 of being evil to the
> core, and below where you referred to him/her as a "a hideous monster, a
> spawn of hell". Is this love or good-will? No, it is not. So for all
> your lofty ideals, you're no better than anyone else and in some ways
> worse.
>

I've read her stuff for years, this is an assessment based on a long
period of observation. She, unfortunately, bring into focus this
conclusion. I would be happy to apologize if I were shown where I am
mistaken.

>
>> You cannot honestly claim this for
>> Moslems.
>>
>> These are the facts, and the fact
>>> that you're in denial about the evil with which Christianity had
>>> imbued the world lends me no faith whatsoever that it's going to end
>>> any time soon, or that it's going to end well
>> >
>> Christianity has been a great benefit to the world,
>
> Please explain further. It isn't difficult to see the harm it has done.
>

Christianity, especially Protestant Christanity has been the molding
force behind the West. Compare the US and Western Europe against the
rest of the world. Where ever Protestants went, they brought a high
standard of morality, a work ethic and invention which in turn brought
about a high standard of living.

Devils Advocaat

unread,

Nov 18, 2012, 2:39:24 AM11/18/12

to

With all due respect it's not the religion that is the problem, but
what people say, think and do in the name of their religion.

Caranx latus

unread,

Nov 18, 2012, 8:08:42 AM11/18/12

to

Which doesn't alter what I said. Islam is several centuries behind
Christianity. It will have its own reformation but that may be centuries
from now.

>>> Christianity preaches peace, love and good-will towards out fellow man
>>> and doing good to those who hate you.
>>
>> Why then do so many Christians not behave in this way? I mean, look at
>> your own words above where you accused Budikka666 of being evil to the
>> core, and below where you referred to him/her as a "a hideous monster, a
>> spawn of hell". Is this love or good-will? No, it is not. So for all
>> your lofty ideals, you're no better than anyone else and in some ways
>> worse.
> >
> I've read her stuff for years, this is an assessment based on a long
> period of observation. She, unfortunately, bring into focus this
> conclusion. I would be happy to apologize if I were shown where I am
> mistaken.

You are mistaken in thinking that calling other people derogatory names
is anywhere close to being an example of "peace, love and good-will".
With behavior like that, you can't claim a "high standard of morality"
as you do below when you don't live up to it. The best you can claim is
a high *ideal* of morality which, by the way, isn't true either.

>>> You cannot honestly claim this for
>>> Moslems.
>>>
>>> These are the facts, and the fact
>>>> that you're in denial about the evil with which Christianity had
>>>> imbued the world lends me no faith whatsoever that it's going to end
>>>> any time soon, or that it's going to end well
>>> >
>>> Christianity has been a great benefit to the world,
>>
>> Please explain further. It isn't difficult to see the harm it has done.
> >
> Christianity, especially Protestant Christanity has been the molding
> force behind the West. Compare the US and Western Europe against the
> rest of the world. Where ever Protestants went, they brought a high
> standard of morality, a work ethic and invention which in turn brought
> about a high standard of living.

Protestantism has only existed for the last 500 years but the roots of
Western society go much further back. As for the remainder of your
point, Protestants aren't any more ethical than non-Protestants.

Besque

unread,

Nov 18, 2012, 11:24:21 AM11/18/12

to

At no time are Christians supposed to allow being kicked around,
sumitting to character assassination, personal slander and not become
defensive and fight back in self defense. Where would it stop? Just
ask Jews about that?

unread,

Nov 18, 2012, 5:34:03 PM11/18/12

to

On 11/18/2012 2:08 PM, Fred^44 wrote:
> Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 11/17/2012 11:28 AM, Budikka666 wrote:
>>> Then you are utterly blind. Christians started the crusades.
>> This is false, the Moslems had invaded the Bibical lands in the MIddle
>> East and started an invasion Europe. The crusades were a response to
>> the Moors (Moslems) invasion of Spain and Portigal, they were stopped by
>> the European Christians at the French border and pushed back across half
>> of Spain.
>> The Moslems have always engaged in wars of conquest and the Crusades
>> were the Europrean way of fighting back.
>
> Heh, I have to laugh at how cult savages try to rework history so that
> they can all pretend that they're the victims and so that they can try
> to justify their cult's atrocities.
>

Really, So, you didn't know that Muslims)marched across the middle east,
beginning mid 7/th century, they conquered north Africa, the middle
east, invaded Spain and were stopped by the Europeans at the French
border. And you pretend to know history. The Crusades did
not start until around 1050 AD when the Eastern Church begged the
Roman Church to come to it's rescue since the Muslims were invading
their territory.

>
> Fact is reality is way more complicated than that, Christanic savages
> committed Crusades against Islamics at the same time that Islamic savages
> were committing Jihad against Christanic savages.
>

Wrong the the crusades began much later than the Muslim began their
attacks. The Muslims are still engaged in conquest when and where they can.

The two hate cults are
> utterly indistinguishable, utterly in lock step with each other, equal
> in every way.
>

Wrong, only the fact is that your hatred of these two religions is
indistinguishable one from the other. In this respect, they are equal
and the same _only_ in your own eyes.
>

Budikka666

unread,

Nov 18, 2012, 5:56:11 PM11/18/12

to

On Nov 17, 5:29 pm, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/17/2012 11:28 AM, Budikka666 wrote:
> > Then you are utterly blind. Christians started the crusades.
>
> This is false, the Moslems had invaded the Bibical lands in the MIddle
> East and started an invasion Europe.

Evidently you haven't read your own Bible. Go ahead and tell us all
how many times the Hebrews invaded land and slaughtered thousands upon
thousands of men, women, and children, if the Bible is to be
believed. If it's true, then your god is the god of slaughter and
terror. If it's not true, then the Bible is a bunch of lies. Which
is it?

> The crusades were a response to
> the Moors (Moslems) invasion of Spain and Portigal,

Really? Then why did the crusades take place in the Middle East
instead of in Spain and Portugal? Go read some history.

> they were stopped by
> the European Christians at the French border and pushed back across half
> of Spain.

Really?

> The Moslems have always engaged in wars of conquest and the Crusades
> were the Europrean way of fighting back.

But the Muslims (not moslems) worship your god don't they? So was
what their-god/your-god telling *them* the truth, or was what your-god/
their-god telling the Christians the truth? How can you tell?

See how utterly screwed up we are already because of the insanity of
your religion?

Thanks for making my point for me (and for proving how hopelessly
brainwashed you theists are).

> >> Christians instigated the inquisition. Christians burned "heretics".
> > Because the Bible declares that you shall not suffer a witch to live,
> > witches were hung by the thousands. Because the Bible declares that
> > homosexuals should be stoned to death, Christians hate homosexuals.
>
> > Christians were fighting against each other for years in Northern
> > Ireland.
>
> This was a political war.

It was a religious war: Catholics versus Protestants. Get that
straight.

> The protestants wanted to remain loyal to
> the British

Why did they not want to remain loyal to their god?

> the Catholics wanted separation from England.

Why did they not heed the "thou shalt not kill" clause of the ten
commandments?

> That is
> the cause of the war. It wasn't over religion, it just fell along
> religious lines.

How convenient. Do you actually read what you write before you click
on "Post"?

> Christians declared war on Iraq for no reason whatsoever> other than a lust for oil. Christians instituted the death penalty in
> > the USA. White Christians lynched blacks in the USA.
>
> >
> It was always democrats who lynched blacks, but only when blacks raped
> white women.

You lying piece of Christian filth. That ends this conversation right
here. You are utterly brainwashed and full of hatred yourself. I am
not wasting any mroe time trying to edcuate a mindless and fascist
godbot like you. But please rest assured that I will not falter in my
campaign to completely expose your blind faith dogma and the
intolerance, hatred, and hypocrisy which goes hand-in-hand with it.
In that regard, thanks so much for making my case for me with your
brain-dead response.

Budikka

Budikka666

unread,

Nov 18, 2012, 6:00:03 PM11/18/12

to

On Nov 18, 10:24 am, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> At no time are Christians supposed to allow being kicked around

So the fictional Jesus Christ, according to your own NT, never advised
turning the other cheek?

I should encourage you to keep posting your horseshit, You're doing a
far better job than I am of discrediting your own inane blind faith.

Budikka

Wm. Esque

unread,

Nov 18, 2012, 7:14:10 PM11/18/12

to

On 11/18/2012 6:00 PM, Budikka666 wrote:
> On Nov 18, 10:24 am, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> At no time are Christians supposed to allow being kicked around
>
> So the fictional Jesus Christ, according to your own NT, never advised
> turning the other cheek?
>

Yes. Once!

>
> I should encourage you to keep posting your horseshit, You're doing a
> far better job than I am of discrediting your own inane blind faith.
>

How so?
>
> Budikka
>

Besque

unread,

Nov 18, 2012, 8:01:30 PM11/18/12

to

On 11/18/2012 5:56 PM, Budikka666 wrote:
> On Nov 17, 5:29 pm, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 11/17/2012 11:28 AM, Budikka666 wrote:
>>> Then you are utterly blind. Christians started the crusades.
>>
>> This is false, the Moslems had invaded the Bibical lands in the MIddle
>> East and started an invasion Europe.
>
> Evidently you haven't read your own Bible. Go ahead and tell us all
> how many times the Hebrews invaded land and slaughtered thousands upon
> thousands of men, women, and children, if the Bible is to be
> believed. If it's true, then your god is the god of slaughter and
> terror. If it's not true, then the Bible is a bunch of lies. Which
> is it?
>
>> The crusades were a response to
>> the Moors (Moslems) invasion of Spain and Portigal,
>
> Really? Then why did the crusades take place in the Middle East
> instead of in Spain and Portugal? Go read some history
>

This is history. The Muslims from the about 650 AD began their invasion
of North Africa, the middle east and they were stopped at the border of
France and pushed back half way across Spain. The Crusades began
centuries later, about 1050 when the Eastern Church sent an envoy to
Rome asking for help from Rome in defending their territory against the
Muslim invasion. Look it up.

>
>> they were stopped by
>> the European Christians at the French border and pushed back across half
>> of Spain.
>
> Really?
>
>> The Moslems have always engaged in wars of conquest and the Crusades
>> were the Europrean way of fighting back.
>
> But the Muslims (not moslems) worship your god don't they? So was
> what their-god/your-god telling *them* the truth, or was what your-god/
> their-god telling the Christians the truth? How can you tell?
>

Actually I don't think so. They reject Jesus Christ.

>
> See how utterly screwed up we are already because of the insanity of
> your religion?
>
> Thanks for making my point for me (and for proving how hopelessly
> brainwashed you theists are).
>

You are a fine one to talk about being brainwashed.

>
>> >> Christians instigated the inquisition. Christians burned "heretics".
>>> Because the Bible declares that you shall not suffer a witch to live,
>>> witches were hung by the thousands. Because the Bible declares that
>>> homosexuals should be stoned to death, Christians hate homosexuals.
>>
>>> Christians were fighting against each other for years in Northern
>>> Ireland.
>>
>> This was a political war.
>
> It was a religious war: Catholics versus Protestants. Get that
> straight.
>
>> The protestants wanted to remain loyal to
>> the British
>
> Why did they not want to remain loyal to their god?
>
>> the Catholics wanted separation from England.
>
> Why did they not heed the "thou shalt not kill" clause of the ten
> commandments?
>

People at war don't take adhere to religious ideals.

>
>> That is
>> the cause of the war. It wasn't over religion, it just fell along
>> religious lines.
>
> How convenient. Do you actually read what you write before you click
> on "Post"?
>

If it was over religion, why then isn't Protestants and Catholics at war
throughout the world?
Your bias and hatred towards religious people drives your views and
actions towards innocent people.

>
>> Christians declared war on Iraq for no reason whatsoever> other than a lust for oil. Christians instituted the death penalty in
>>> the USA. White Christians lynched blacks in the USA.
>>
>> >
>> It was always democrats who lynched blacks, but only when blacks raped
>> white women.
>
> You lying piece of Christian filth. That ends this conversation right
> here. You are utterly brainwashed and full of hatred yourself. I am
> not wasting any mroe time trying to edcuate a mindless and fascist
> godbot like you. But please rest assured that I will not falter in my
> campaign to completely expose your blind faith dogma and the
> intolerance, hatred, and hypocrisy which goes hand-in-hand with it.
> In that regard, thanks so much for making my case for me with your
> brain-dead response.
>

Projection. I've read your horshshit for years. Your bias and hatred of
religion has driven you utterly insane. You accuse everyone of running
away, but you can't take it when someone call you out on your goddamn
lies and prevarications.
>
> Budikka
>

Besque

unread,

Nov 18, 2012, 8:16:28 PM11/18/12

to

Oh I forgot to add: in addition to a fucking liar, you are a goddamn
coward as well!
>>
>> Budikka
>>
>

Budikka666

unread,

Nov 18, 2012, 9:33:41 PM11/18/12

to

On Nov 17, 5:29 pm, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is history. The Muslims from the about 650 AD began their invasion
> of North Africa, the middle east and they were stopped at the border of
> France and pushed back half way across Spain. The Crusades began
> centuries later

So you admit you outright LIED in your response to my mention of the
crusades. Thanks for your honesty.

> > But the Muslims (not moslems) worship your god don't they? So was
> > what their-god/your-god telling *them* the truth, or was what your-god/
> > their-god telling the Christians the truth? How can you tell?
>
> >
> Actually I don't think so. They reject Jesus Christ.

They worship the same god you do. Why do you LIE about this?

I put the question again: was your god telling the Muslims the truth
or was your god telling the christians the truth? Because he sure as
hell was lying to one side or the other, or to both, or he had nothing
to do with it and it was exactly what I said it was: religious
extremism on both sides. Got it now dimwit?

> You are a fine one to talk about being brainwashed.

I'm not the one tying myself into embarrassing knots trying to explain
the utterly screwed-up world of religious belief.

> People at war don't take adhere to religious ideals.

Religious people are the ones fighting the wars numbnuts. Why are
Christians fighting instead of turning the other cheek? Why do very
nearly *all* Christians, hypocrites that they are, reject Jesus's
teachings when it comes to wars?

> If it was over religion, why then isn't Protestants and Catholics at war
> throughout the world?

Religious people *are* at war all over the world dumbass. The USA is
full of religious people, and it is one of the most crime-ridden and
violent countries on the planet. Religious US soldiers right now are
fighting other religious soldiers in Afghanistan. Religious US
soldiers were fighting other religious soldiers in Iraq until
recently. Religious US soldiers were fighting religious Vietnamese
soldiers before that. Religious US soldiers were fighting religious
German and Japanese soldiers before that. Religious German soldiers
were trying to wipe out the Judaists during that time. Why didn't
religion prevent those wars? Why didn't a god prevent those wars?

Why did so very few of those religious US soldiers turn the other
cheek? Why did every one of them who went to battle reject Jesus's
demand?

> Your bias and hatred towards religious people drives your views and
> actions towards innocent people.

I don't care about what you deluded theists believe. You can worship
whatever bullshit gods you want. You do *not*, however, have the
right to force others to accept your inane horseshit, nor do you have
the right to lie to children in the science classrooms, nor do you
have a right *not* to be exposed for the delusional hypocrites you
are.

> Projection. I've read your horshshit for years. Your bias and hatred of
> religion has driven you utterly insane.

I'm not the one fighting and killing people for my views; you and your
ilk are, and you've been doing it for CENTURIES.

> You accuse everyone of running
> away, but you can't take it when someone call you out on your goddamn
> lies and prevarications.

Then let's test that hypothesis shall we? Why don't you and I go toe-
to-toe right here in this thread on your evidence for this creator god
of yours?

Post your BEST FIVE objective independent and/or scientific evidences
for a creator god, and let's see who runs first shall we?

Go ahead, I'll wait.

Budikka

Yap

unread,

Nov 18, 2012, 10:57:37 PM11/18/12

to

The conquest and killing were done in the name of religion.
We are talking about the evilness of religion.

There were wars on politics, on territory, on idealism, on tribal/
cultural differences......must we add in another factor, such as
religion which is galvanizing more brutality in the name of pixie.

The aim of those ancient war was to convert people into their own
religion.....which in effect had shown there were no pixies in
control. In allowing blood to flow freely, the victims would have more
courage to defend and in return pursue in their revenge.

>
> >> The savage killing of innocent human was not reflected by the leaders
> > and the followers...they were led into bloody wars, like animals.
>
> All wars are bloody, it's the nature of wars.

True, but to fight over a non-existent pixie????

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> >> Christians instigated the inquisition. Christians burned "heretics".
> >>> Because the Bible declares that you shall not suffer a witch to live,
> >>> witches were hung by the thousands. Because the Bible declares that
> >>> homosexuals should be stoned to death, Christians hate homosexuals.
>
> >>> Christians were fighting against each other for years in Northern
> >>> Ireland.
>
> >> This was a political war. The protestants wanted to remain loyal to
> >> the British the Catholics wanted separation from England. That is
> >> the cause of the war. It wasn't over religion, it just fell along
> >> religious lines.
>
> > If it was political, you would not see two factions of the religion in
> > different path.
>
> Sure you would the Protestants were loyal to Great Britan and wanted to
> remain within the United Kingdom. The Catholics did not.

Why would the different sects had different ideas about a nation?
Surely, loyalty to a nation is the obligation of its citizens,
regardless of their religion or background.\

>
> >> Christians declared war on Iraq for no reason whatsoever> other than a lust for oil. Christians instituted the death penalty in
> >>> the USA. White Christians lynched blacks in the USA.
>
> >> It was always democrats who lynched blacks, but only when blacks raped
> >> white women.
>
> > White Christians were the ones who enslaved the blacks, right?
> > Raping happened every where by all races.
>
> This is true in many cases, but not all. Slavery has always existed and
> still exist in certain Middle East Nations.

Lets not talk about Middle-eastern people...they are barbarians.
I am talking about the Christians who are supposedly god-fearing
animals, but were led into slavery?
Where was the justice of this stupid god?

>
> >> Christians shot> doctors and blew up abortion clinics in the USA.
>
> >> <
> >> You paint with a extremely broad brush which is based upon an extremist
> >> misconception and unjustified bias against all Christians.
>
> > Christians are the ones who are following their religious guidance to
> > deny abortion.
>
> Christians think abortion, especially late term abortion is infanticide
> (murder of unborn babies).

No body talks about late term abortion. We are all advocating the
conceiving period.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> The USA is comprised of people, 90% of whom believe in yoru god. 80%
> >>> of them blindly believe that Jesus Christ was not a sick joke. Yet
> >>> the USA has violence far worse than any other country.
>
> >> The highest crime rate in the US is carried out by minorities, mainly
> >> against other minorities of the same group. This group makes up
> >> the highest percent by race of the prison population. This same group
> >> has the highest rate of illegitimate births. Are they Christian?
> >> This is not Christian the morality Christianity teaches.
>
> > But they are also the minority that is not economically equated.
> > The whites deny the minority equal chances in all spheres of the
> > society.
>
> When in the largest minority 73% of all births are to single women,
> there is no possible way for a one parent family, even when she works,
> to have the income or financial resources of a two parent family with
> both parents working.
>
> >>> Christianity is evil to the core.
>
> >> Actually, from this slanderous attack, I would say you are!
>
> > So, you did not read your bible?
> > It told fabricated stories and demand loyalty from the followers which
> > were being milked daily to enhance the control of the organization.
>
> Where in the New Testament, the Christian scripture, is there such
> a proposal?

How would you think Christian churches can spring up every where when
this resources can be of much better use?
Early cons are leaving a legacy in their scheme for the followers to
be dumb-asses/sheep who are deprived of their reasoning ability to
revolt.

Current breed in the EU has seen church going declining day by day. In
50 years, my bet is that superstition will be wiped off in Europe and
to a great extend else where.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>> Since his posts are indeed filled with hatred the conclusion is he is not
> >>>> a christian.
>
> >>> He may well not be, but he promotes and aids your PoV and not a single
> >>> Christian on Usenet speaks out against him. Why is that? But
> >>> regardless of what that scum is or isn't, other Christians on Usenet
> >>> are filled with the same hatred he is. We see their messages posted
> >>> daily espousing racism, homophobia, and misogyny, and spewing lies
> >>> galore.
>
> >>> There can be no doubt, when we see how Christians behave both on
> >>> Usenet and irl, that Christianity, like Islam, is a religion of
> >>> intolerance, hatred, and violence.
>
> >> You don't see Christians flying planes into buildings and blowing
> >> themselves up. Or killing innocent people for their religion.
> >> Christianity preaches peace, love and good-will towards out fellow man
> >> and doing good to those who hate you. You cannot honestly claim this for
> >> Moslems.
>
> > Can you tell us why did the Muslims fly the planes to blow up the twin
> > tower?
>
> >
> Yes, they were promised 73 virgins as their reward for their sacrifice
> in the next life.

No, they acted more in line with their loyalty to their believe. the
reward of virgins is just some extra incentives.
But, the basic reason they committed such suicide is really the
Palestine issue where US is backing Israel regardless of truth.

> >> They did not flew the planes into Shanghai telecom tower, right?
>
> >
> Who knows, they might yet. But they hate both Jews and Americans,
> including you and me, that is, if you are an American.

Chinese does not interfere into the affairs of other nation. There is
no cause for attack.

>
> > Christians were the most aggressive human on earth.....the Jews, the
> > Germans, the British and certainly the Americans were (and are) the
> > aggressors in this world. You can't dispute history.
>
> The Muslims have always been warlike and aggressive. So, I would say
> they deserve that title.

Your wish to twist the fact is hereby denied !

>
> >> These are the facts, and the fact> that you're in denial about the evil with which Christianity had
> >>> imbued the world lends me no faith whatsoever that it's going to end
> >>> any time soon, or that it's going to end well
>
> >> Christianity has been a great benefit to the world, even to those who
> >> hate it such as yourself. Based upon your post you are a hideous
> >> monster, a spawn of hell!
>
> > What has Christianity benefited this world, apart from wanting the
> > average stupid human to be a long term sucker.
>
> >
> Look at the west, where Christanity, namely the Protestant version
> thrived compaired to the rest of the world.

The west had early industrial revolution....but it was not because of
Christianity, right?
It was purely due to human intelligence and effort.

> >> Without the tithers, there won't be any churches all over EU and US.
> > But declining economies of EU/US now could not look into the sky and
> > ask for help, can they?
>
> >
> Christians believe God helps those who help themselves. Looking to the
> sky and nothing else offers no benefits.

Silly verse.....if one can help himself, what is the need for a pixie?
If the pixie is there for you to help, the twin tower wouldn't have
collapsed, you fool.

>
> > The Muslims have been praying for 5 times each day without fail, yet
> > Afghan and Iraq was bombed non-stop....
>
> >
> They were praying for the death and destruction of the Jews, American,
> and Western Europe.

Then why did the bombs not being flown into Jewish land or America?
Surely, the flick of a finger by their great allah could divert and
carry all the massive bombs into the lands of those deserved.

>
> > This shows this world is not under the control of a deity or any
> > deity.
>
> Have you considered the possibility that God has turned his back
> on man, because of man's inhumanity to man; his cruelty to others;
> his hatred of God and man and his selfish ambitions. According to
> the Bible this is true.

A brainless one will always wish to invoke the con verses in the
scripture.
Human have their born traits and no deity can seek to change that.
Yet, we see in you your weak character which requires some form of
protection, up from the sky .......lol, lol, lol, lol
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>> Congratulations.
>
> >>> Budikka

Besque

unread,

Nov 19, 2012, 12:05:58 AM11/19/12

to

On 11/18/2012 9:33 PM, Budikka666 wrote:
> On Nov 17, 5:29 pm, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This is history. The Muslims from the about 650 AD began their invasion
>> of North Africa, the middle east and they were stopped at the border of
>> France and pushed back half way across Spain. The Crusades began
>> centuries later
>
> So you admit you outright LIED in your response to my mention of the
> crusades. Thanks for your honesty.
>

What you are overlooking or are ignorant of is the fact that the Muslims
were at war constantly during the interim.

>
>>> But the Muslims (not moslems) worship your god don't they? So was
>>> what their-god/your-god telling *them* the truth, or was what your-god/
>>> their-god telling the Christians the truth? How can you tell?
>>
>> >
>> Actually I don't think so. They reject Jesus Christ.
>
> They worship the same god you do. Why do you LIE about this?
>

They worship Allah. If it's the same God they have a totally different
concept of God.

>
> I put the question again: was your god telling the Muslims the truth
> or was your god telling the christians the truth?
>

They have a living spokesman who supposedly is in constant communication
with god, Christians do not and don't claim to
have living prophets. So, that a major difference.

Because he sure as
> hell was lying to one side or the other, or to both, or he had nothing
> to do with it and it was exactly what I said it was: religious
> extremism on both sides. Got it now dimwit?
>

God doesn't speak to anyone now. IOW there are no living prophets today
and no one in communication with God.

>
>> You are a fine one to talk about being brainwashed.
>
> I'm not the one tying myself into embarrassing knots trying to explain
> the utterly screwed-up world of religious belief.
>

The fact you cannot understand is not my problem. It's due to your
extreme bias and your senseless spewing hatred on the NGs

>
>> People at war don't take adhere to religious ideals.
>
> Religious people are the ones fighting the wars numbnuts. Why are
> Christians fighting instead of turning the other cheek? Why do very
> nearly *all* Christians, hypocrites that they are, reject Jesus's
> teachings when it comes to wars?
>

So, you think Christians should allow Muslims to bomb our cities and
kill people without defending the homeland. That's what wars today
are about.

>
>> If it was over religion, why then isn't Protestants and Catholics at war
>> throughout the world?
>
> Religious people *are* at war all over the world dumbass.
>

Of the dozens of wars today, Asia, Africa, the Middle East, it is the
Muslims who initiated these wars.

The USA is
> full of religious people, and it is one of the most crime-ridden and
> violent countries on the planet.
>

It isn't Christians that are involved in crime, statistics show that the
highest percentage of crime is black on black crime. This is one result
of failure to get an education. The highest percentage of high school
drop ours are the major contributors to crime. This group also has the
highest illegitimate birth rate some 70+% are born into single parent
households, most with no father in the household.

Religious US soldiers right now are
> fighting other religious soldiers in Afghanistan. Religious US
> soldiers were fighting other religious soldiers in Iraq until
> recently. Religious US soldiers were fighting religious Vietnamese
> soldiers before that. Religious US soldiers were fighting religious
> German and Japanese soldiers before that. Religious German soldiers
> were trying to wipe out the Judaists during that time. Why didn't
> religion prevent those wars? Why didn't a god prevent those wars?
>

We have _free_will_, and it an inviolate rule that I believe God stands
by. Otherwise we would be like puppets on a string. I do not believe
that God looks with approvial at the atrocities we humans play on each
other, or man's inhumanity to man. I think we humans turned our back on
God, so now he has left us to our own devices.

>
> Why did so very few of those religious US soldiers turn the other
> cheek? Why did every one of them who went to battle reject Jesus's
> demand?
>

In case of war the soldier who waited and turned the other cheek is a
dead solder.

>
>> Your bias and hatred towards religious people drives your views and
>> actions towards innocent people.
>
> I don't care about what you deluded theists believe. You can worship
> whatever bullshit gods you want. You do *not*, however, have the
> right to force others to accept your inane horseshit, nor do you have
> the right to lie to children in the science classrooms, nor do you
> have a right *not* to be exposed for the delusional hypocrites you
> are.
>

Please stop projecting. You are trying to push your hatred and biases
as truth on others. I've seen this over the years on this NG.

>
>> Projection. I've read your horshshit for years. Your bias and hatred of
>> religion has driven you utterly insane.
>
> I'm not the one fighting and killing people for my views; you and your
> ilk are, and you've been doing it for CENTURIES.
>

This is utter nonsense! Historically wars are fought over land
resources, and power. Other wars are defensive wars, reactions to
attacks or perceived attacks.
No US solder is fighting and killing people over religious views.
This is not in reference to Muslims who are fighting to impose their
religion on the world, as they have for 1500 years. Their rallying
cry down the centuries was: "Mohamed or the sword"

>
>> You accuse everyone of running
>> away, but you can't take it when someone call you out on your goddamn
>> lies and prevarications.
>
> Then let's test that hypothesis shall we? Why don't you and I go toe-
> to-toe right here in this thread on your evidence for this creator god
> of yours?
>
> Post your BEST FIVE objective independent and/or scientific evidences
> for a creator god, and let's see who runs first shall we?
>
>

1) The Big Bang something from nothing - Only a God could create the
universe from nothing. This _was_ the _beginning_. The beginning of
time, space, matter and the laws of science, all began with the Big Bang.
2) The anthropic principle, the four fundamental cosmological constants
were "fine tuned" to an extremely high degree. Recently on Science
Channel, a scientist, Laura Danly. PhD and curator at Griffth
Observatory in California, explained that the rate of expansion of the
universe after the Big Bang was balanced on a razors edge.
If the expansion rate of the universe was either at a lessor rate or a
faster rate by a factor of 1 in a Quintilian, the universe would have
failed either by collapsing back on itself or expanding too fast for
stars, galaxies or planets to form. This fine tuning was by a chance of
1 in a Quintilian.
She explained if you took all the sand on the earth's beaches together
this would be about 1 Quintilian. What are the odds of the universes
existence? She took one grain of sand. That's how precisely the
expansion rate is balanced.

You asked for five, but these two should be a start. And remember
this is only one of the four fundamental cosmological constants.
Which I'll get back to. In addition to these four there are several
other constants which come into play such as the odds against the
formation of Carbon in the belly of stars.

>
> Budikka
>

Besque

unread,

Nov 19, 2012, 12:23:30 AM11/19/12

to

faster rate by a factor of 1 in a Quintillion, the universe would have

failed either by collapsing back on itself or expanding too fast for
stars, galaxies or planets to form. This fine tuning was by a chance of

1 in a Quintillion.

She explained if you took all the sand on the earth's beaches together

this would be about 1 Quintillion. What are the odds of the universes

Devils Advocaat

unread,

Nov 19, 2012, 12:33:29 AM11/19/12

to

Since I became aware of such a practice and how it seemed from the
evidence available the majority of those that pushed for it were
Christian it seems reasonable to assume the majority of those who
carry concealed weapons must be of the same category as those who
demanded it. The statistics that I've been able to uncover estimate at
least 8 million adults in the USA carry concealed weapons.

Olrik

unread,

Nov 19, 2012, 12:46:36 AM11/19/12

to

Le 2012-11-19 00:05, Besque a écrit :

> They worship Allah. If it's the same God they have a totally different
> concept of God.

All those imbeciles profess to worship a single god, and yet they're
still killing each other's over that definition.

Dakota

unread,

Nov 19, 2012, 6:36:28 AM11/19/12

to

Check out the active map at the link below to see how the concealed
carry laws have changed over the past 16 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rtc.gif

Budikka666

unread,

Nov 19, 2012, 9:27:38 AM11/19/12

to

On Nov 18, 11:05 pm, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/18/2012 9:33 PM, Budikka666 wrote:> On Nov 17, 5:29 pm, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> This is history. The Muslims from the about 650 AD began their invasion
> >> of North Africa, the middle east and they were stopped at the border of
> >> France and pushed back half way across Spain. The Crusades began
> >> centuries later
>
> > So you admit you outright LIED in your response to my mention of the
> > crusades. Thanks for your honesty.
>
> >
> What you are overlooking or are ignorant of is the fact that the Muslims
> were at war constantly during the interim.

And were the Muslims atheists, or were they religious?

I rest my case.

> >>> But the Muslims (not moslems) worship your god don't they? So was
> >>> what their-god/your-god telling *them* the truth, or was what your-god/
> >>> their-god telling the Christians the truth? How can you tell?
>
> >> Actually I don't think so. They reject Jesus Christ.
>
> > They worship the same god you do. Why do you LIE about this?
>
> >
> They worship Allah. If it's the same God they have a totally different
> concept of God.

Yet they worship the same god; they use the same Bible as far as the
OT is concerned; the only difference is that they add the Koran, you
add the NT. Clearly you are as clueless about religion as you are
about objective independent evidence (more on this later), but your
abysmal ignorance doesn't do a thing to change the *fact* that they
*are* religious; they are not atheist, and they are evil, so my
original accusation remains intact - an accusation which you've
consistently failed to address.

> > I put the question again: was your god telling the Muslims the truth
> > or was your god telling the christians the truth?
>
> >
> They have a living spokesman who supposedly is in constant communication
> with god, Christians do not and don't claim to
> have living prophets. So, that a major difference.

Living prophets? Does your god listen to your prayers or not? You're
doing a better job than I am of thoroughly discrediting your claims!
lol!

> Because he sure as> hell was lying to one side or the other, or to both, or he had nothing
> > to do with it and it was exactly what I said it was: religious
> > extremism on both sides. Got it now dimwit?
>
> >
> God doesn't speak to anyone now. IOW there are no living prophets today
> and no one in communication with God.

Really? A bunch of your fellow ilk would claim he does. So how do
*you* determine scientifically whether he is speaking to people or
not? How did you come by this knowledge? Did a god speak to you and
tell you? lol!

> >> You are a fine one to talk about being brainwashed.
>
> > I'm not the one tying myself into embarrassing knots trying to explain
> > the utterly screwed-up world of religious belief.
>
> >
> The fact you cannot understand is not my problem. It's due to your
> extreme bias and your senseless spewing hatred on the NGs

I understand it only too well. Organised religion is evil. it is
violent. It is hypocrtiical. It is intolerant. These are facts, not
a matter of interpretation.

> >> People at war don't take adhere to religious ideals.
>
> > Religious people are the ones fighting the wars numbnuts. Why are
> > Christians fighting instead of turning the other cheek? Why do very
> > nearly *all* Christians, hypocrites that they are, reject Jesus's
> > teachings when it comes to wars?
>
> >
> So, you think Christians should allow Muslims to bomb our cities and
> kill people without defending the homeland. That's what wars today
> are about.

Thanks for gainsaying yourself and finally admitting that wars are
about religion, exactly as I said they were.

But answer the question you sad little coward. Did Jesus Christ,
according to Bible fiction, say "turn the other cheek" or did he not?
YES OR NO?

> >> If it was over religion, why then isn't Protestants and Catholics at war
> >> throughout the world?
>
> > Religious people *are* at war all over the world dumbass.
>
> >
> Of the dozens of wars today, Asia, Africa, the Middle East, it is the
> Muslims who initiated these wars.

And are they atheist or are they religious? Answer the question,
coward.

Did the Muslims start the war in Iraq or was it started by a lying
Chrsitian claiming there were weapons of mass destruction which never
existed?

> The USA is full of religious people, and it is one of the most crime-ridden and
> > violent countries on the planet.
>
> >
> It isn't Christians that are involved in crime,

In a nation where 90% believe in a god and 80% accept that Jesus was
the son of that god, there are no Christians invovled in any crimes?
All of the prisoners who are in Jail who have declared that they're
Christians are lying atheists?

You truly are utterly delusional. Either that or you're a
pathological liar. I'm going with 'both' as my assessment of you so
far.

> statistics show that the
> highest percentage of crime is black on black crime.

And a racist, since this is entirely irrelevant to what we're
discussing. So are you now asserting that black people are all
atheists, including those who go to church every week? And those in
jail, regardless of what color they are, who have declared their
religion as Christian and who attend church services in jail are what,
exactly? Lying atheists? Muslims?

> This is one result
> of failure to get an education. The highest percentage of high school
> drop ours are the major contributors to crime.

And Christians have nothing nothing to do with running the schools?
The school boards are populated entirely by evil atheists? Is this
the lie you're promulagiting now in order to tar and feather black
people?

> This group also has the
> highest illegitimate birth rate some 70+% are born into single parent
> households, most with no father in the household.

More blatant racism. Did you not read the part of the Bible which
urges you to love your neighbor? I guess not. Either that or you're
yet another Christian who rejects Christianity, lol!

And there are no pastors preaching these people? They attend no
church? Why isn't your god helping them?

> Religious US soldiers right now are> fighting other religious soldiers in Afghanistan. Religious US
> > soldiers were fighting other religious soldiers in Iraq until
> > recently. Religious US soldiers were fighting religious Vietnamese
> > soldiers before that. Religious US soldiers were fighting religious
> > German and Japanese soldiers before that. Religious German soldiers
> > were trying to wipe out the Judaists during that time. Why didn't
> > religion prevent those wars? Why didn't a god prevent those wars?
>
> >
> We have _free_will_

No, we do not:
http://chronicle.com/article/Jerry-A-Coyne/131165/

>, and it an inviolate rule that I believe God stands
> by. Otherwise we would be like puppets on a string. I do not believe
> that God looks with approvial at the atrocities we humans play on each
> other, or man's inhumanity to man. I think we humans turned our back on
> God, so now he has left us to our own devices.

This is utterly irrelvant to whether or not evil is perpetrated by the
religious. Nice try at moving the goalposts, however. And to think
you said *I* prevaricate! lol!

> > Why did so very few of those religious US soldiers turn the other
> > cheek? Why did every one of them who went to battle reject Jesus's
> > demand?
>
> >
> In case of war the soldier who waited and turned the other cheek is a
> dead solder.

But he *would* then have done what Jesus told him to do would he not?
Yes or no? So you are now advocating ignoring Jesus, is that right?
So would you say that makes you a Christian or not?

> >> Your bias and hatred towards religious people drives your views and
> >> actions towards innocent people.
>
> > I don't care about what you deluded theists believe. You can worship
> > whatever bullshit gods you want. You do *not*, however, have the
> > right to force others to accept your inane horseshit, nor do you have
> > the right to lie to children in the science classrooms, nor do you
> > have a right *not* to be exposed for the delusional hypocrites you
> > are.
>
> >
> Please stop projecting. You are trying to push your hatred and biases
> as truth on others. I've seen this over the years on this NG.

As I said, I do not hate you, I hate the lies and hycpocriosy. Get
that straight because you're clearly having a huge problem getting a
heck of a lot of things straight in your rambling excuse for a
"response".

> >> Projection. I've read your horshshit for years. Your bias and hatred of
> >> religion has driven you utterly insane.
>
> > I'm not the one fighting and killing people for my views; you and your
> > ilk are, and you've been doing it for CENTURIES.
>
> >
> This is utter nonsense! Historically wars are fought over land
> resources, and power.

BY RELIGIOUS PEOPLE. By people who were purportedly ordered by their
god to turn the other cheek. Why is it that you cannot face that
simple fact?

BTW, did you not read what I wrote about your god god directly
ordering the Hebrews to viciously slaughter tens of thousands of men,
women, AND CHILDREN, and take their land in the Middle East?

Was that right? Was that moral? Was that the Christian thing to do?

> Other wars are defensive wars, reactions to
> attacks or perceived attacks.

Ddi you not read what I have repeatedly reminded you of: about Jesus's
supposed dictum to TURN THE OTHER CHEEK?

Was Jesus just joking when he said that do you think? Was it an
optional part of Christianity?

> No US solder is fighting and killing people over religious views.

Once again you take the cowardly tack of deliberately RUNNING from
what I said. It makes no difference what they thought they were
fighting for (and in many wars they precisely *have* been fighting
because of religion as I ahve pointed out). They are Christians, so
they claim, and they are ignoring what Jesus supposedly told them
about turning the other cheek.

Do you agree with this or not? It's a perfectly simple question.
Address what I am writing and quit running from it like diarrhea.

> This is not in reference to Muslims who are fighting to impose their
> religion on the world, as they have for 1500 years. Their rallying
> cry down the centuries was: "Mohamed or the sword"

What a criminally hypocritical coward for Christ you are. Did you not
read what I wrote about the crusades? Were the crusades not
Christians, FAILING to turn the other cheek, and imposing their will
on others by the sword?

Did you not read what I wrote about the burning of heretics? Was
that not Christians imposing their will with violence and terrorism?

Was the burning of witches not the imposition of will by violence? Go
ahead and cast your excuse for a mind back: was it the Muslims who
hung and burned hundreds, ir not thousands of innocent women as
witches, or was it Christians?

Was it the Muslims who conducted the inquisition, or Christians?

Was it the Christians who invaded the Americas and slaughtered
everyone they met, or was it the Muslims?

> >> You accuse everyone of running
> >> away, but you can't take it when someone call you out on your goddamn
> >> lies and prevarications.
>
> > Then let's test that hypothesis shall we? Why don't you and I go toe-
> > to-toe right here in this thread on your evidence for this creator god
> > of yours?
>
> > Post your BEST FIVE objective independent and/or scientific evidences
> > for a creator god, and let's see who runs first shall we?
>
> 1) The Big Bang something from nothing - Only a God could create the
> universe from nothing. This _was_ the _beginning_. The beginning of
> time, space, matter and the laws of science, all began with the Big Bang.

Which part of objective independent and/or scientific evidences did
you not understand? The Big Bang (so-called since it was neither big
nor did it bang) is merely the Big Bang. It offers no evidenc of any
gods, and it was not the first event. First (as far as we can tell)
there was a singularity, then inflation, *then* the Big Bang.

Something appears out of nothing all the time. Go read about quantum
fluctuations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_fluctuation

But answer me this: if there was, *quite literally* nothing, then
what was there to prevent quite literally anything from happening?
The answer to that is: quite literally nothing! If there are no laws
of physics (and those laws arose within the fabric of the embryonic
unvierse), there you cannot now cite the laws of physics against the
birth of the universe, because they did not apply *unitl* the universe
had been born.

But if there is an infinity of universes and this one budded off from
an earlier one, then it didn't come from nothing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_universes

The bottom line here is that your argument boils down to "Science
doesn't know where this universe came from therefore this ignorance is
knowledge - the knowledge that 'my god created it' ".

How sensible is it, exactly, to pretend that blind ignorance is
knowledge? I know you religious dimwits have been doing this for
centuries, but exactly how does that work, this ignorance = knowledge
thing? Do share.

But let's for the sake or argument grant you your appalling and
shameful scientific ignorance, and say yes, the universe came from
nothing. How does this prove your god? ***YOUR*** god? Maybe it's
an advanced alien race who did this. Maybe it's another god
entirely. Maybe Satan created this.

Your simple statement of the fact of the Big Bang does not in any way,
shape, or form make your case for your god for you. The fact that
you're evidently too dumb to grasp this doesn't imbue me with any
cofndience whatsoever in your religion or that you're up to this
exchange, or even that you have the first clue as to what you're
saying.

Besides, your Bible doesn't say anything about a big bang or a 14
billion year old universe. it clearly states that some six thousand
or so years ago, a god made the universe out of pre-existing chaos.
it states that he made everything, including Earth, the moon, the sun,
and all the stars, in only six 24-hour days. In short, you just
admitted that your Bible lies! Thnaks! And if it lied about that,
then why should I have *any* faith whatsoever that it hasn't lied
about everything else?

> 2) The anthropic principle, the four fundamental cosmological constants
> were "fine tuned" to an extremely high degree. Recently on Science
> Channel, a scientist, Laura Danly. PhD and curator at Griffth
> Observatory in California, explained that the rate of expansion of the
> universe after the Big Bang was balanced on a razors edge.
> If the expansion rate of the universe was either at a lessor rate or a
> faster rate by a factor of 1 in a Quintilian, the universe would have
> failed either by collapsing back on itself or expanding too fast for
> stars, galaxies or planets to form. This fine tuning was by a chance of
> 1 in a Quintilian.
> She explained if you took all the sand on the earth's beaches together
> this would be about 1 Quintilian. What are the odds of the universes
> existence? She took one grain of sand. That's how precisely the
> expansion rate is balanced.

Again, you have offered not a shred of scientific or objective evidece
for *your* god (or for any god for that matter). All you've offered
is an argument from incredulity. Do you *honestly* not grasp what my
challenge was? I'll be happy to dumb it down if you don't get it.

The *only* reason I am wasting time responding in detail to your
juvenile and asinine claims here is that there are lying scum out
there who call themselves Christians but who will nonetheless bear
false witness, as you ahve done, that I have run from your childish
bullshit if I do not directly address it. I have directly, and in
detail, refuted this nonsense many times before, but they dishonestly
ignroe that. So please note that whilst, *once* *again*, I am
directly addressing and refuting it right here, be advised that this
juvenile horseshit is beneath me and beneath anyone of even moderate
intelligence and intellect.

If there is an infinty of universes, it is a certainty that there will
be at least one which is suitable for us, but even if this is the
*only* universe, then the fact that it arose in such a state that it
eventually produced a lineage of beings who could ask where they came
from does not mean a damned thing. If this universe were not such a
one as to allow for life like ours, then we would not be here to ask
the question anyway. The fact that we are here asking these questions
does not in any way require a creator god to explain it. It implies
no gods, much less *your* god.

But ask yourself this: if your claim is right, then it means that your
supposedly loving god was willing to let billions of years go by, and
trillions upon trillions of organisms to live and die in *pain*,
*fear*, and *suffering* in order to get to 2012.

What price a god like that? There goes your moral god. There goes
you loving god. A god who was willing to let trillions suffer for a
supposed purpose which is *still* not in evidence 14 billion years
later is not a worthy god. I reject such a god. Thanks for helping
my case.

> You asked for five, but these two should be a start

No they are not a start, not even close. Is this the best you can
offer?

Go look up "objective, independent evidence", or "scientific
evidence", and try again.

Do yourself a favor, too, Go look up "argument from incredultiy" and
let's have no more of this adolescent time-wasting.

Budikka

Andrew

unread,

Nov 19, 2012, 4:15:21 PM11/19/12

to

"Budikka666" wrote in message news:616c0395-1623-4c38...@c17g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...

> Organised religion is evil. it is violent. It is hypocrtiical. It
> is intolerant. These are facts, not a matter of interpretation.

This is certainly true, at least at times.

Because all we have to do is look at how they (the religionists
of the time) treated our Lord Jesus Christ, and what they did to
Him.

In fact, positive evidence of the cruel violence that He received
from them has been provided to us recently by Budikka, in the
following link from her post below......

"Budikka666" wrote in message news:775af19a-f254-44cb...@z3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
> As revealed by Google scholar, professional peer reviewed science has
> many times confirmed that the fake shroud is at best a FRAUD:
> http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&q=Shroud+turin&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C44&as_sdtp=

The evidence is here folks, presented by Budikka, This is
evidence that the Shroud is the genuine image of a man
scourged and crucified as described in the four Gospels.

The blood stains on the Shroud are genuine; and the image
is not the result of an applied pigment by an artist. This is
all confirmed by evidence supplied by our friend Budikka.

Thanks Budikka, for bringing to us evidence of the great
sacrifice of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ for us, that
we may share the glories of eternity with Him forever and
ever. Amen, and amen.

From the above cite brought to us by our friend, Budikka:

"The visible image on the Shroud does not appear to be the
work of an artist in an eye/brain/hand coordination sense"
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/ao/abstract.cfm?id=27642

"it is concluded that the image is the result of some cellulose
oxidation-dehydration reaction rather than an applied pigment.
The application or transfer mechanism of the image onto the
cloth is still not known..Available data from the "blood" areas
are considered and the results show these to be blood stains.''
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003267001852636

"By spectroscopic and chemical tests (conversion of heme to a
porphyrin), we have identified the presence of blood in the alleged
blood areas of the Shroud of Turin."
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/ao/abstract.cfm?uri=ao-19-16-2742

"The chemistry of the various stains and images on the Shroud
of Turin is presented. The chemical conclusions were drawn
from all the data and observations, both physical and chemical,
collected by direct investigation of the Shroud in 1978. The
conclusions are that the body image is made up of yellowed
surface fibrils of the linen that are at more advanced stages of
degradation than the non-image linen. The chromophore is a
conjugated carbonyl. No evidence was found in the body image
of any added substances that could have contributed to the
yellow color of the fibrils that form the image. The blood
images on the cloth are made of blood. The data, taken together,
do not support the hypothesis that the images on the Shroud
are due to an artist."
http://www.bcin.ca/Interface/openbcin.cgi?submit=submit&Chinkey=77771

Andrew

Budikka666

unread,

Nov 19, 2012, 5:04:16 PM11/19/12

to

On Nov 19, 3:13 pm, "Andrew" <andrew.321re...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Budikka666" wrote in messagenews:616c0395-1623-4c38...@c17g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...

> > Organised religion is evil. it is violent. It is hypocrtiical. It
> > is intolerant. These are facts, not a matter of interpretation.
>
> This is certainly true, at least at times.

Once again you, the biggest coward for Christ on the entire Internet,
are hiding behind someone else who is carrying your load. Besque is
utterly delusional but at least he (or she) had the *guts* to get into
it with me, which is more than you have *ever* dared to do, you
worhtless piece of trash. I refuse to even read your cowardly
screed. instead, I write over it with a list of your cowardly de
facto admissions that you understand just as well as I do that there
is no omnipotent god to save you from me:

Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank's most recent denials of his creator
god:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/cbe97ddc53be5a00?scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/59b246e0c8e3e4f9?scoring=d&

Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from challenges in SIX THREADS
simultaneously:
http://tinyurl.com/8cpp6ru
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/e8da88e0f6b5a76b?hl=en&scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the
authenticity of the "Shroud of Turin", Creationist Coward-For-Christ™
Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not support his LIES by
turning tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby
proving that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god.
If there were an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had*
any faith, he would have trusted that god to support him and he would
have taken me up on my debate offer.

http://tinyurl.com/9rm86aj
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/245ef4c4f9f8933b?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the
existence of Jesus Christ, miracle-working son of a god, Creationist
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not
support his LIES by turning
tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving that
he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there were
an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith, he
would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me
up on my debate offer.

http://tinyurl.com/8o3wsmg
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/ec1a84272b3493f1?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate the
Noahic flood, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly
admitted that he could not support his LIES by turning tail and
running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving that he has
ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there were an
omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith, he
would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me
up on my debate offer.

http://tinyurl.com/9hpgy2v
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/db798efe8d1d0c97?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and present scientific
evidence in support of many wild claims he had made, Creationist
Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not
support his LIES by turning tail and running like the rank coward that
he is, thereby proving that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and
fictitious god. If there were an omnipotent creator god, and this
loser actually *had* any faith, he would have trusted that god to
support him and he would have taken me up on my debate offer.

http://tinyurl.com/986crjk
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/fb6771658c489b66?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate ENCODE's
latest data, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank openly
admitted that he could not support his LIES by turning tail and
running like the rank coward that he is, thereby proving that he has
ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god. If there were an
omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had* any faith, he
would have trusted that god to support him and he would have taken me
up on my debate offer.

http://tinyurl.com/ckeaadm
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/c786b453f00abb9a?scoring=d&
Given the chance to stand up for his god and formally debate his 8
unsupported claims about information, Creationist Coward-For-Christ™
Andrew-a-Blank openly admitted that he could not support his LIES by
turning tail and running like the rank coward that he is, thereby
proving that he has ZERO FAITH in his worthless and fictitious god.
If there were an omnipotent creator god, and this loser actually *had*
any faith, he would have trusted that god to support him and he would
have taken me up on my debate offer.
So now you know the truth about Andrew-a-Blank - even *he* does not
truly believe in this god he espouses!
End of story.

Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from a simple question in
*another* SIX THREADS simultaneously:
http://tinyurl.com/7zghp7o
http://tinyurl.com/76a8chm
http://tinyurl.com/6q3q498
http://tinyurl.com/6n2swsr
http://tinyurl.com/7rvtlyu
http://tinyurl.com/7x4m3fv

Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank Ran from a debate on DNA in *yet
another* TEN THREADS simultaneously:
http://tinyurl.com/7zcuwsb
http://tinyurl.com/7t47anq
http://tinyurl.com/7wvegqc
http://tinyurl.com/6rg67wc
http://tinyurl.com/8yqo8fw
http://tinyurl.com/77bopo8
http://tinyurl.com/86zwhj6
http://tinyurl.com/7zlzxtd
http://tinyurl.com/7eknx73
http://tinyurl.com/6lgcwpq

Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank denies Christ thrice:
http://tinyurl.com/7x9c5wn
http://tinyurl.com/74h455e
http://tinyurl.com/7kl4hc7

Coward-For-Christ™ Andrew-a-Blank ran from debate:
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/7dd8ed410470f4c2?hl=en
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/e8da88e0f6b5a76b?hl=en&scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/245ef4c4f9f8933b?scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/e9b89ac33e01ce5b?scoring=d&
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/836bea1f79468d9b?hl=en&scoring=d&
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/728ceae4eb1d55e3?scoring=d&
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/3a31410d460b908e?hl=en&scoring=d&

Budikka

Caranx latus

unread,

Nov 19, 2012, 7:57:51 AM11/19/12

to

On 11/18/2012 11:24 AM, Besque wrote:
> On 11/18/2012 8:08 AM, Caranx latus wrote:

<snip>

>>>>> Christianity preaches peace, love and good-will towards out fellow man
>>>>> and doing good to those who hate you.
>>>>
>>>> Why then do so many Christians not behave in this way? I mean, look at
>>>> your own words above where you accused Budikka666 of being evil to the
>>>> core, and below where you referred to him/her as a "a hideous
>>>> monster, a
>>>> spawn of hell". Is this love or good-will? No, it is not. So for all
>>>> your lofty ideals, you're no better than anyone else and in some ways
>>>> worse.
>>> >
>>> I've read her stuff for years, this is an assessment based on a long
>>> period of observation. She, unfortunately, bring into focus this
>>> conclusion. I would be happy to apologize if I were shown where I am
>>> mistaken.
>>
>> You are mistaken in thinking that calling other people derogatory names
>> is anywhere close to being an example of "peace, love and good-will".
>> With behavior like that, you can't claim a "high standard of morality"
>> as you do below when you don't live up to it. The best you can claim is
>> a high *ideal* of morality which, by the way, isn't true either.
> >
> At no time are Christians supposed to allow being kicked around,
> sumitting to character assassination, personal slander and not become
> defensive and fight back in self defense. Where would it stop? Just
> ask Jews about that?

"But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite
thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also." -- Matthew 5:39

You must be one of those Cafeteria Christians.

<snip>

>>> Christianity, especially Protestant Christanity has been the molding
>>> force behind the West. Compare the US and Western Europe against the
>>> rest of the world. Where ever Protestants went, they brought a high
>>> standard of morality, a work ethic and invention which in turn brought
>>> about a high standard of living.
>>
>> Protestantism has only existed for the last 500 years but the roots of
>> Western society go much further back. As for the remainder of your
>> point, Protestants aren't any more ethical than non-Protestants.

You appear to have ceded this point. That was smart of you.

Christopher A. Lee

unread,

Nov 19, 2012, 6:02:34 PM11/19/12

to

On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 07:57:51 -0500, Caranx latus <aug....@gmail.com>
wrote:

The liars pretend that responding to their inability to live and let
live, is "slapping them around".

When it's merely reaping what they sow.

><snip>
>
>>>> Christianity, especially Protestant Christanity has been the molding
>>>> force behind the West. Compare the US and Western Europe against the
>>>> rest of the world. Where ever Protestants went, they brought a high
>>>> standard of morality, a work ethic and invention which in turn brought
>>>> about a high standard of living.

Bullshit.

>>> Protestantism has only existed for the last 500 years but the roots of
>>> Western society go much further back. As for the remainder of your
>>> point, Protestants aren't any more ethical than non-Protestants.

As demonstrated by all the Protestants who infest the atheist
newsgroups.

>You appear to have ceded this point. That was smart of you.

He has no alternative.

Besque

unread,

Nov 20, 2012, 12:05:04 AM11/20/12

to

On 11/19/2012 9:27 AM, Budikka666 wrote:
> On Nov 18, 11:05 pm, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 11/18/2012 9:33 PM, Budikka666 wrote:> On Nov 17, 5:29 pm, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> This is history. The Muslims from the about 650 AD began their invasion
>>>> of North Africa, the middle east and they were stopped at the border of
>>>> France and pushed back half way across Spain. The Crusades began
>>>> centuries later
>>
>>> So you admit you outright LIED in your response to my mention of the
>>> crusades. Thanks for your honesty.
>>
>> >
>> What you are overlooking or are ignorant of is the fact that the Muslims
>> were at war constantly during the interim.
>
> And were the Muslims atheists, or were they religious?

.
My problem with you is, you put all religions in the same basket.

>
> I rest my case.
>
>>>>> But the Muslims (not moslems) worship your god don't they? So was
>>>>> what their-god/your-god telling *them* the truth, or was what your-god/
>>>>> their-god telling the Christians the truth? How can you tell?
>>
>>>> Actually I don't think so. They reject Jesus Christ.
>>
>>> They worship the same god you do. Why do you LIE about this?
>>
>> >
>> They worship Allah. If it's the same God they have a totally different
>> concept of God.
>
> Yet they worship the same god; they use the same Bible as far as the
> OT is concerned; the only difference is that they add the Koran, you
> add the NT. Clearly you are as clueless about religion as you are
> about objective independent evidence (more on this later), but your
> abysmal ignorance doesn't do a thing to change the *fact* that they
> *are* religious; they are not atheist, and they are evil, so my
> original accusation remains intact - an accusation which you've
> consistently failed to address.

.
Who says they are atheist?

>
>>> I put the question again: was your god telling the Muslims the truth
>>> or was your god telling the christians the truth?
>>
>> >
>> They have a living spokesman who supposedly is in constant communication
>> with god, Christians do not and don't claim to
>> have living prophets. So, that a major difference.
>
> Living prophets? Does your god listen to your prayers or not? You're
> doing a better job than I am of thoroughly discrediting your claims!
> lol!
>

I do not believe God micro manages human affairs,

<
>> Because he sure as> hell was lying to one side or the other, or to both, or he had nothing
>>> to do with it and it was exactly what I said it was: religious
>>> extremism on both sides. Got it now dimwit?
>>
>> >
>> God doesn't speak to anyone now. IOW there are no living prophets today
>> and no one in communication with God.
>
> Really? A bunch of your fellow ilk would claim he does. So how do
> *you* determine scientifically whether he is speaking to people or
> not? How did you come by this knowledge? Did a god speak to you and
> tell you? lol!
>

No, God doesn't speak to anyone,

>
>>>> You are a fine one to talk about being brainwashed.
>>
>>> I'm not the one tying myself into embarrassing knots trying to explain
>>> the utterly screwed-up world of religious belief.
>>
>> >
>> The fact you cannot understand is not my problem. It's due to your
>> extreme bias and your senseless spewing hatred on the NGs
>
> I understand it only too well. Organised religion is evil. it is
> violent. It is hypocrtiical. It is intolerant. These are facts, not
> a matter of interpretation.
>

I haven't found that to be the case. Nor do I believe you.
It's obvious that you try to uses religious values against them.
Yet, you reject these values for yourself.

>
>>>> People at war don't take adhere to religious ideals.
>>
>>> Religious people are the ones fighting the wars numbnuts. Why are
>>> Christians fighting instead of turning the other cheek? Why do very
>>> nearly *all* Christians, hypocrites that they are, reject Jesus's
>>> teachings when it comes to wars?
>>
>> >
>> So, you think Christians should allow Muslims to bomb our cities and
>> kill people without defending the homeland. That's what wars today
>> are about.
>
> Thanks for gainsaying yourself and finally admitting that wars are
> about religion, exactly as I said they were.
>

With Muslims that seems to be the case. I haven't disputed this point.

>
> But answer the question you sad little coward. Did Jesus Christ,
> according to Bible fiction, say "turn the other cheek" or did he not?
> YES OR NO?
>

There's quite a difference between being slapped and having one's life
threatened.
Turning the other cheek is one thing, that won't kill you, being
shot at is another. You can't see the difference! This is so typical of you.

>
>>>> If it was over religion, why then isn't Protestants and Catholics at war
>>>> throughout the world?
>>
>>> Religious people *are* at war all over the world dumbass.
>>
>> >
>> Of the dozens of wars today, Asia, Africa, the Middle East, it is the
>> Muslims who initiated these wars.
>
> And are they atheist or are they religious? Answer the question,
> coward.
>

Where do you get this issue. I've never pretended Muslims are atheist.
I know they are theist. Are you not confusing me with another person?

>
> Did the Muslims start the war in Iraq or was it started by a lying
> Chrsitian claiming there were weapons of mass destruction which never
> existed?
>

There is a convoy of some 50 - 18 wheel trucks leaving Iraq. An Iraq
General, one General Sada who defected, stated that Seddam Hussein
sent his weapons of mass destruction to Syria six weeks before the
invasion. Intelligence knew Hussein had WMDs, because he had used gas on
his own people.

>
>> The USA is full of religious people, and it is one of the most crime-ridden and
>>> violent countries on the planet.
>>
>> >
>> It isn't Christians that are involved in crime,
>
> In a nation where 90% believe in a god and 80% accept that Jesus was
> the son of that god, there are no Christians invovled in any crimes?
> All of the prisoners who are in Jail who have declared that they're
> Christians are lying atheists?
>

Here again you are introducing atheist into the discussion. While
there are people who are not really religious at all are not atheist,
the prisons are fertile grounds for conversions.

>
> You truly are utterly delusional. Either that or you're a
> pathological liar. I'm going with 'both' as my assessment of you so
> far.
>
>> statistics show that the
>> highest percentage of crime is black on black crime.
>
> And a racist, since this is entirely irrelevant to what we're
> discussing. So are you now asserting that black people are all
> atheists,
>

What is this obsession of yours about atheist? It isn't racist to
point out a fact that involves a group.

including those who go to church every week? And those in
> jail, regardless of what color they are, who have declared their
> religion as Christian and who attend church services in jail are what,
> exactly? Lying atheists? Muslims?
>

What I was doing was pointing out the affect education rather, the lack
of education has on crime. Educated people are much less likely to
commit crimes.

>
>> This is one result
>> of failure to get an education. The highest percentage of high school
>> drop ours are the major contributors to crime.
>
> And Christians have nothing nothing to do with running the schools?
> The school boards are populated entirely by evil atheists? Is this
> the lie you're promulagiting now in order to tar and feather black
> people?
>

It's just a fact that the highest percentage of crime is where there
is a lower educational standing.

>
>> This group also has the
>> highest illegitimate birth rate some 70+% are born into single parent
>> households, most with no father in the household.
>
> More blatant racism.
>

So, it's impossible to point our such facts without being called a racist.

>
Did you not read the part of the Bible which
> urges you to love your neighbor? I guess not. Either that or you're
> yet another Christian who rejects Christianity, lol!
>

I love my children dearly, but my youngest son continues to get
himself in trouble with the law. He got in with the wrong crowd
and nothing me or his mother could do or say that would change
him. Nevertheless I still love him, and want the best for him.
So, my point in telling you this, is to point out a fact doesn't
mean you harbor some deep seated bias or racist attitude: facts are facts.

>
> And there are no pastors preaching these people? They attend no
> church? Why isn't your god helping them?
>

As I said before I think God does not micro-manage the universe.

>
>> Religious US soldiers right now are> fighting other religious soldiers in Afghanistan. Religious US
>>> soldiers were fighting other religious soldiers in Iraq until
>>> recently. Religious US soldiers were fighting religious Vietnamese
>>> soldiers before that. Religious US soldiers were fighting religious
>>> German and Japanese soldiers before that. Religious German soldiers
>>> were trying to wipe out the Judaists during that time. Why didn't
>>> religion prevent those wars? Why didn't a god prevent those wars?
>>
>> >
>> We have _free_will_
>
> No, we do not:
> http://chronicle.com/article/Jerry-A-Coyne/131165/
>
>
>> , and it an inviolate rule that I believe God stands
>> by. Otherwise we would be like puppets on a string. I do not believe
>> that God looks with approvial at the atrocities we humans play on each
>> other, or man's inhumanity to man. I think we humans turned our back on
>> God, so now he has left us to our own devices.
>
> This is utterly irrelvant to whether or not evil is perpetrated by the
> religious. Nice try at moving the goalposts, however. And to think
> you said *I* prevaricate! lol!
>

I think you have a mental image of all religious people and when
one doesn't fit your paradigm he _must_ have moved the goal post.

>
>>> Why did so very few of those religious US soldiers turn the other
>>> cheek? Why did every one of them who went to battle reject Jesus's
>>> demand?
>>
>> >
>> In case of war the soldier who waited and turned the other cheek is a
>> dead solder.
>
> But he *would* then have done what Jesus told him to do would he not?
> Yes or no? So you are now advocating ignoring Jesus, is that right?
> So would you say that makes you a Christian or not?
>

I do not believe Jesus meant for a solder to willing allow himself to
be killed. This is paramount to committing suicide. A definite
unforgivable sin, that no dedicated Christian can justify.

>
>>>> Your bias and hatred towards religious people drives your views and
>>>> actions towards innocent people.
>>
>>> I don't care about what you deluded theists believe. You can worship
>>> whatever bullshit gods you want. You do *not*, however, have the
>>> right to force others to accept your inane horseshit, nor do you have
>>> the right to lie to children in the science classrooms, nor do you
>>> have a right *not* to be exposed for the delusional hypocrites you
>>> are.
>>
>> >
>> Please stop projecting. You are trying to push your hatred and biases
>> as truth on others. I've seen this over the years on this NG.
>
> As I said, I do not hate you, I hate the lies and hycpocriosy. Get
> that straight because you're clearly having a huge problem getting a
> heck of a lot of things straight in your rambling excuse for a
> "response".
>
>>>> Projection. I've read your horshshit for years. Your bias and hatred of
>>>> religion has driven you utterly insane.
>>
>>> I'm not the one fighting and killing people for my views; you and your
>>> ilk are, and you've been doing it for CENTURIES.
>>
>> >
>> This is utter nonsense! Historically wars are fought over land
>> resources, and power.
>
> BY RELIGIOUS PEOPLE. By people who were purportedly ordered by their
> god to turn the other cheek. Why is it that you cannot face that
> simple fact?
>

Do you believe that if we were to disarm and just let radical Muslims
have their way, this is biblical. Is this what you would have the US
do?

>
> BTW, did you not read what I wrote about your god god directly
> ordering the Hebrews to viciously slaughter tens of thousands of men,
> women, AND CHILDREN, and take their land in the Middle East?
>

This is Old Testament. Christianity is a New Testament Religion.

>
> Was that right? Was that moral? Was that the Christian thing to do?
>
>> Other wars are defensive wars, reactions to
>> attacks or perceived attacks.
>
> Ddi you not read what I have repeatedly reminded you of: about Jesus's
> supposed dictum to TURN THE OTHER CHEEK?
>

Your's is an extreme interpretation, which would very often result in
death.

>
> Was Jesus just joking when he said that do you think? Was it an
> optional part of Christianity?
>

You are not A Christian, so why are you so insistent in your demanding
that others follow your extreme interpretation of a biblical verse. Here
again you are attempting to judge Christians by your view of a christian
value.

>
>> No US solder is fighting and killing people over religious views.
>
> Once again you take the cowardly tack of deliberately RUNNING from
> what I said. It makes no difference what they thought they were
> fighting for (and in many wars they precisely *have* been fighting
> because of religion as I ahve pointed out). They are Christians, so
> they claim, and they are ignoring what Jesus supposedly told them
> about turning the other cheek.
>

Here again you a non-christian presuming to know Christianity and
insisting that Christians follow your overly strict interpretations.
And when one doesn't he is running away.

>
> Do you agree with this or not? It's a perfectly simple question.
> Address what I am writing and quit running from it like diarrhea.
>

No, I do not agree with your extreme interpretation.

>
>> This is not in reference to Muslims who are fighting to impose their
>> religion on the world, as they have for 1500 years. Their rallying
>> cry down the centuries was: "Mohamed or the sword"
>
> What a criminally hypocritical coward for Christ you are. Did you not
> read what I wrote about the crusades? Were the crusades not
> Christians, FAILING to turn the other cheek, and imposing their will
> on others by the sword?
>

Here again you are persisting on your extremist views of what _you_, a
non-Christian thinks Christian were/are suppose to do.

>
> Did you not read what I wrote about the burning of heretics? Was
> that not Christians imposing their will with violence and terrorism?
>

Why do you think non-catholics should defend catholic practices.

>
> Was the burning of witches not the imposition of will by violence? Go
> ahead and cast your excuse for a mind back: was it the Muslims who
> hung and burned hundreds, ir not thousands of innocent women as
> witches, or was it Christians?
>

Actually It wasn't. It was human inhumane ie mans inhumanity to man.

>
> Was it the Muslims who conducted the inquisition, or Christians?
>
> Was it the Christians who invaded the Americas and slaughtered
> everyone they met, or was it the Muslims?
>

Many were Christians and many were not: in any case deliberate killing
innocent people was not a Christian thing to do.

>
>>>> You accuse everyone of running
>>>> away, but you can't take it when someone call you out on your goddamn
>>>> lies and prevarications.
>>
>>> Then let's test that hypothesis shall we? Why don't you and I go toe-
>>> to-toe right here in this thread on your evidence for this creator god
>>> of yours?
>>
>>> Post your BEST FIVE objective independent and/or scientific evidences
>>> for a creator god, and let's see who runs first shall we?
>>
>> 1) The Big Bang something from nothing - Only a God could create the
>> universe from nothing. This _was_ the _beginning_. The beginning of
>> time, space, matter and the laws of science, all began with the Big Bang.
>
> Which part of objective independent and/or scientific evidences did
> you not understand? The Big Bang (so-called since it was neither big
> nor did it bang) is merely the Big Bang. It offers no evidenc of any
> gods, and it was not the first event. First (as far as we can tell)
> there was a singularity, then inflation, *then* the Big Bang.
>

No, first the Big Bang, _then_ inflation, followed by expansion.
I agree this singularily is not evidence of God. The word "singularity"
simply means that when scientist wound back the expansion of the
universe they arrived at a point where everything in the universe
(space,time,matter, laws of physics) must have emerged : A single point,
a singularity.

>
> Something appears out of nothing all the time. Go read about quantum
> fluctuations:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_fluctuation
>

There may be an element of truth here. Quantum physics predicts that
at any point in the universe pockets of energy may exist momentarily,
thus it's possible given Einstein's equation, (E=mc^2) that virtual
particles comprised of nothing can pop into a vacuum and disappear
intently. These virtual particles have no mass, but can be measured
and their effects observed. But what does this mean for the origin
of the universe? In a paper (Nature volume 396 pg. 396) this was
expanded to the proposition by Edward Tryon of City University NY, that
the entire universe may have popped into existence out of a vacuum by a
quantum fluctuation. But in the next issue, letters to the editor
another Physicist, Dr. Jordan stated that time is to short, and
if the entire universe could just pop into existence it should have
already disappeared (virtual particles are short lived). Another writer
said, "talk about making a mountain
out of a mole hill....."

>
> But answer me this: if there was, *quite literally* nothing, then
> what was there to prevent quite literally anything from happening?
> The answer to that is: quite literally nothing!
>

But it did.

If there are no laws
> of physics (and those laws arose within the fabric of the embryonic
> unvierse), there you cannot now cite the laws of physics against the
> birth of the universe, because they did not apply *unitl* the universe
> had been born.
>

There must be an opposite side of the same coin, if there was nothing
to prevent .... there must have been something that caused the universe
to come into existence. Remember, that the cause and effect law did not
come into play, until after the big bang, therefore something other than
the laws of physics must brought about the B.B. and the universe.

>
> But if there is an infinity of universes and this one budded off from
> an earlier one, then it didn't come from nothing:
>

I know about multiple, universes,mother/daughter universes, budding
off universes etc. But these are purely hypothetical, where the universe
we observe is reality.
.

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_universes
>
> The bottom line here is that your argument boils down to "Science
> doesn't know where this universe came from therefore this ignorance is
> knowledge - the knowledge that 'my god created it' ".
>
> How sensible is it, exactly, to pretend that blind ignorance is
> knowledge? I know you religious dimwits have been doing this for
> centuries, but exactly how does that work, this ignorance = knowledge
> thing? Do share.
>
> But let's for the sake or argument grant you your appalling and
> shameful scientific ignorance, and say yes, the universe came from
> nothing. How does this prove your god? ***YOUR*** god? Maybe it's
> an advanced alien race who did this. Maybe it's another god
> entirely. Maybe Satan created this.
>
> Your simple statement of the fact of the Big Bang does not in any way,
> shape, or form make your case for your god for you. The fact that
> you're evidently too dumb to grasp this doesn't imbue me with any
> cofndience whatsoever in your religion or that you're up to this
> exchange, or even that you have the first clue as to what you're
> saying.
>

I was under the impression you wanted a serious discussion, but this
doesn't bear this out. Why attack me, personally, instead of my arguments?

>
> Besides, your Bible doesn't say anything about a big bang or a 14
> billion year old universe. it clearly states that some six thousand
> or so years ago, a god made the universe out of pre-existing chaos.
> it states that he made everything, including Earth, the moon, the sun,
> and all the stars, in only six 24-hour days. In short, you just
> admitted that your Bible lies! Thnaks! And if it lied about that,
> then why should I have *any* faith whatsoever that it hasn't lied
> about everything else?
>

That's an interpretation. I'm not so literal as this. I don't accept
a six day creation, nor do I accept 24 hour days, the Noachin flood,
parting of the Red Sea, walking on water, turning four fishes into
hundreds. In fact I reject the Old Testament entirely. It's made
obsolete, for the Christian, by the New Covenant.

>
>> 2) The anthropic principle, the four fundamental cosmological constants
>> were "fine tuned" to an extremely high degree. Recently on Science
>> Channel, a scientist, Laura Danly. PhD and curator at Griffth
>> Observatory in California, explained that the rate of expansion of the
>> universe after the Big Bang was balanced on a razors edge.
>> If the expansion rate of the universe was either at a lessor rate or a
>> faster rate by a factor of 1 in a Quintilian, the universe would have
>> failed either by collapsing back on itself or expanding too fast for
>> stars, galaxies or planets to form. This fine tuning was by a chance of
>> 1 in a Quintilian.
>> She explained if you took all the sand on the earth's beaches together
>> this would be about 1 Quintilian. What are the odds of the universes
>> existence? She took one grain of sand. That's how precisely the
>> expansion rate is balanced.
>
> Again, you have offered not a shred of scientific or objective evidece
> for *your* god (or for any god for that matter). All you've offered
> is an argument from incredulity. Do you *honestly* not grasp what my
> challenge was? I'll be happy to dumb it down if you don't get it.
>

But I do understand, you are demanding scientific evidence independent
of any findings by scientist. I offered evidence which was presented by
Dr. Laura Danly where she gave the statistical probability of the
expansion of universe with the precise value required in order to be
successful: IE 1 chance in 4 quintilion

>
> The *only* reason I am wasting time responding in detail to your
> juvenile and asinine claims here is that there are lying scum out
> there who call themselves Christians but who will nonetheless bear
> false witness, as you ahve done, that I have run from your childish
> bullshit if I do not directly address it. I have directly, and in
> detail, refuted this nonsense many times before, but they dishonestly
> ignroe that. So please note that whilst, *once* *again*, I am
> directly addressing and refuting it right here, be advised that this
> juvenile horseshit is beneath me and beneath anyone of even moderate
> intelligence and intellect.
>

All you have done is engage in character assassination and personal
insults _rather_ than deal with my arguments which are based upon
scientific evidence. Such as the critical expansion of the Universe
which I discussed.
>
> If there is an infinity of universes,
>
This is merely a supposition without a shred of scientific evidence
supporting it. Even if it exist, there's no way to observe them,
detect them, determine anything about them. It's like looking to
Mickey mouse, for explanations for mysteries in the real world.

it is a certainty that there will
> be at least one which is suitable for us, but even if this is the
> *only* universe, then the fact that it arose in such a state that it
> eventually produced a lineage of beings who could ask where they came
> from does not mean a damned thing. If this universe were not such a
> one as to allow for life like ours, then we would not be here to ask
> the question anyway.
>

This is truism, but a very unsatisfactory one at that. The universe
_is_ a reality. The scenario given by Brandon Carter, exemplifies this.
You stand before a line of 100 rifle marksmen all pointing their guns at
you, you hear the gun fire, but you don't die. If you had died you would
not be here to ask what happened. But that answers nothing.

The fact that we are here asking these questions
> does not in any way require a creator god to explain it. It implies
> no gods, much less *your* god.
>

Well, that's your opinion and you are welcome to it! To me, 1 chance in
1 quintilion implies something other than unguided, random chance was
involved.
And this is only one of four fundamental cosmological Constants which
are extremely precise mathematical values.

Martin Rees points out, "...the required precision is astonishing: at
one second after the Big Bang the precise value (omega)cannot have
differed from unity by more than one part in a million billion in order
that the universe should not now, after 10 billion years be expanding
with a present value (omega) that has not departed widely from unity".
(Reference: Rees, 1999, pg. 97)

>
> But ask yourself this: if your claim is right, then it means that your
> supposedly loving god was willing to let billions of years go by, and
> trillions upon trillions of organisms to live and die in *pain*,
> *fear*, and *suffering* in order to get to 2012.
>

Here again, God does not micro-manage the universe.

>
> What price a god like that? There goes your moral god. There goes
> you loving god. A god who was willing to let trillions suffer for a
> supposed purpose which is *still* not in evidence 14 billion years
> later is not a worthy god. I reject such a god. Thanks for helping
> my case.
>
>> You asked for five, but these two should be a start
>
> No they are not a start, not even close. Is this the best you can
> offer?
>

You haven't falsified any of the scientific evidence I offered.
The mathematical values are fact.

>
> Go look up "objective, independent evidence", or "scientific
> evidence", and try again.
>

What do you call the Big Bang and the fine tuned expansion constants?
These make the point that something other than random chance had to be
involved.

>
> Do yourself a favor, too, Go look up "argument from incredultiy" and
> let's have no more of this adolescent time-wasting.
>

I presented facts, you are arguing from incredulity.

A third fundamental constant: the weak force. This force interacts
between subatomic particles, such as Quarks and Leotons. THe weak force
involves the exchange of intermediate vector bosoms, ie W AND Z. Since
the mass of these particles is on the order of 80GeV. The value of the
weak force is .007; it defines how firmly all the atams are held
together. This force controls the power of the sun and it allows the sun
and stars to transmute hydrogen into all the atoms in the periotic
table. If the value of the weak force varied by as much as .001
the universe could never have develop matter that makes up planets
and our bodies.
Thank You,
Ron
>
> Budikka
>

Budikka666

unread,

Nov 20, 2012, 9:07:24 AM11/20/12

to

On Nov 19, 11:05 pm, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/19/2012 9:27 AM, Budikka666 wrote:> On Nov 18, 11:05 pm, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yet they worship the same god; they use the same Bible as far as the
> > OT is concerned; the only difference is that they add the Koran, you
> > add the NT. Clearly you are as clueless about religion as you are
> > about objective independent evidence (more on this later), but your
> > abysmal ignorance doesn't do a thing to change the *fact* that they
> > *are* religious; they are not atheist, and they are evil, so my
> > original accusation remains intact - an accusation which you've
> > consistently failed to address.
>
> .
> Who says they are atheist?

No one. The "Yet they worship the same god" should have clued you in
to that. You know, if you would actually answer a question with a
straight answer instead of running like diarrhea, we wouldn't have to
tediously spell out everything for you would we?

But here we go again with the sad little theist pedant. No one is
saying they are atheist. There's this thing called a question mark.
Looks like this: ? When you see that after a set of words, it means
it's not a statement but a question that I'm asking you. Youre
expected to answer. Gort that straight now? Also, look up sarcasm.
I feel it willbenefit you greatly in this exchange.

> >>> I put the question again: was your god telling the Muslims the truth
> >>> or was your god telling the christians the truth?
>
> >> They have a living spokesman who supposedly is in constant communication
> >> with god, Christians do not and don't claim to
> >> have living prophets. So, that a major difference.
>
> > Living prophets? Does your god listen to your prayers or not? You're
> > doing a better job than I am of thoroughly discrediting your claims!
> > lol!
>
> I do not believe God micro manages human affairs,

Again that's a blind belief for which you can offer no supportive
evidence. Others who worship the same god you do believe he does
quite literally manage the universe. How would you go about disproving
their claim and proving your own?

And are you *ever* going to give a straight (and supported) answer to
*any* question I ask you?

> <>> Because he sure as> hell was lying to one side or the other, or to both, or he had nothing
> >>> to do with it and it was exactly what I said it was: religious
> >>> extremism on both sides. Got it now dimwit?
>
> >> God doesn't speak to anyone now. IOW there are no living prophets today
> >> and no one in communication with God.
>
> > Really? A bunch of your fellow ilk would claim he does. So how do
> > *you* determine scientifically whether he is speaking to people or
> > not? How did you come by this knowledge? Did a god speak to you and
> > tell you? lol!
>
> No, God doesn't speak to anyone,

How do you *know*? Perhaps he does speak to you. Are you saying you
yourself have godlike powers that you can state this as a fact? Isn't
that blaspemy?

But let's once agian try to simplify the sewage system you're building
here and take you at your word. If he speaks to no one, then why
would you believe he *ever* spoke to anyone? Why would you believe
the Bible isn't simply made up from fairy tales and offers no evidence
of any god whatsoever?

> >>>>> You are a fine one to talk about being brainwashed.
>
> >>> I'm not the one tying myself into embarrassing knots trying to explain
> >>> the utterly screwed-up world of religious belief.
>
> >> The fact you cannot understand is not my problem. It's due to your
> >> extreme bias and your senseless spewing hatred on the NGs
>
> > I understand it only too well. Organised religion is evil. it is
> > violent. It is hypocrtiical. It is intolerant. These are facts, not
> > a matter of interpretation.
>
> I haven't found that to be the case. Nor do I believe you.

I don't care what you believe, remember? The facts speak for
themselves, and the facts state quite unequivocally that most of the
world is religious and most of the world is fighting at some time or
other, if not in outright wars, then in crime and violence within any
given society. The question is: why does religion not stop the
fighting if it is so powerful an influence?

Here's one for you: If Christianity is the onlty true religion, how
come there is much less crime in Muslim societies than in the USA?
How come there is much less violence in Europe, where atheism is
storngly on the rise, than there is in the USA, where religion rules?

> It's obvious that you try to uses religious values against them.
> Yet, you reject these values for yourself.
> >>>>> People at war don't take adhere to religious ideals.
>
> >>> Religious people are the ones fighting the wars numbnuts. Why are
> >>> Christians fighting instead of turning the other cheek? Why do very
> >>> nearly *all* Christians, hypocrites that they are, reject Jesus's
> >>> teachings when it comes to wars?
>
> >> So, you think Christians should allow Muslims to bomb our cities and
> >> kill people without defending the homeland. That's what wars today
> >> are about.
>
> > Thanks for gainsaying yourself and finally admitting that wars are
> > about religion, exactly as I said they were.
>
> With Muslims that seems to be the case. I haven't disputed this point.

But you have quickly fled the *fact* that Christians have done and
continue to do exactly the same things that you accuse Muslims of
doing.

> >> But answer the question you sad little coward. Did Jesus Christ,
> > according to Bible fiction, say "turn the other cheek" or did he not?
> > YES OR NO?
>
> There's quite a difference between being slapped and having one's life
> threatened.

Do you think the ficitonal Jesus menat that quite literally?
Seriously? If you take the Bibel q

Devils Advocaat

unread,

Nov 20, 2012, 9:25:03 AM11/20/12

to

Fascinating, pity it doesn't show the numbers of Christians who carry
concealed.

Budikka666

unread,

Nov 20, 2012, 10:54:41 AM11/20/12

to

> On 11/19/2012 9:27 AM, Budikka666 wrote:> On Nov 18, 11:05 pm, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yet they worship the same god; they use the same Bible as far as the
> > OT is concerned; the only difference is that they add the Koran, you
> > add the NT. Clearly you are as clueless about religion as you are
> > about objective independent evidence (more on this later), but your
> > abysmal ignorance doesn't do a thing to change the *fact* that they
> > *are* religious; they are not atheist, and they are evil, so my
> > original accusation remains intact - an accusation which you've
> > consistently failed to address.

> Who says they are atheist?

No one. The "Yet they worship the same god" should have clued you in
to that. You know, if you would actually answer a question with a
straight answer instead of running like diarrhea, we wouldn't have to
tediously spell out everything for you would we?

But here we go again with the sad little theist pedant. No one is
saying they are atheist. There's this thing called a question mark.
Looks like this: ? When you see that after a set of words, it means

it's not a statement but a question that is being asked of you.
You're expected to answer the question. You're expected to answer the
question as put, and directly, and to support your answer. Simply
stating your belief is irrelevant because every one of you theists
believes something different from every other one. Got that now?
Also, look up sarcasm. We feel it will benefit you greatly in this
exchange.

> I do not believe God micro manages human affairs,

Again that's a blind belief for which you can offer no supportive

evidence. Others who worship the same god you do believe that he does

quite literally manage the universe. How would you go about disproving
their claim and proving your own?

And are you *ever* going to give a straight (and supported) answer to
*any* question I ask you?

> No, God doesn't speak to anyone,

How do you *know*? Perhaps he simply does speak to *you* (especially
since you reject the Bible teachings or interpret them conveniently
for you). Are you saying that you yourself have godlike powers that

you can state this as a fact? Isn't that blaspemy?

But let's once again try to simplify the sewage system you're building

here and take you at your word. If he speaks to no one, then why
would you believe he *ever* spoke to anyone? Why would you believe
the Bible isn't simply made up from fairy tales and offers no evidence

of any god whatsoever? What changes and what evidence and *supported*
explanation do you have for this change?

> > I understand it only too well. Organised religion is evil. it is
> > violent. It is hypocrtiical. It is intolerant. These are facts, not
> > a matter of interpretation.

> I haven't found that to be the case. Nor do I believe you.

We don't care what you believe, remember? The facts speak for

themselves, and the facts state quite unequivocally that most of the
world is religious and most of the world is fighting at some time or
other, if not in outright wars, then in crime and violence within any
given society. The question is: why does religion not stop the

fighting if it is so powerful an influence for good?

Here's one for you: If Christianity is the only true religion, how

come there is much less crime in Muslim societies than in the USA?
How come there is much less violence in Europe, where atheism is

strongly on the rise, than there is in the USA, where religion rules?

And how come you have failed to address the problem we raised with the
OT which outright specifies cruel and unusual punishments for people
who commit "crimes". Do you try to claim the OT *doesn't* specifiy
such things? And how come you are ignoring those Biblical imperatives
to punish so-called 'wrong-doers"? if you claim you follow that
religion? If you accept tha the OT *does* proclaim medieval
punishments for these offences, then how do you square those brutal
punishments with a loving god?

> > Thanks for gainsaying yourself and finally admitting that wars are
> > about religion, exactly as I said they were.
> With Muslims that seems to be the case. I haven't disputed this point.

Yes you have disputed it, but you have also quickly fled the *fact*

that Christians have done and continue to do exactly the same things
that you accuse Muslims of
doing.

> >> But answer the question you sad little coward. Did Jesus Christ,
> > according to Bible fiction, say "turn the other cheek" or did he not?
> > YES OR NO?

> There's quite a difference between being slapped and having one's life
> threatened.

Do you think the fictional Jesus meant that statement quite
literally? Seriously? If you take the Bible quite literally, then
how come you're not out stoning homosexuals? That's what you were
told to do. Is *that* what you think a loving god wants?

> Where do you get this issue. I've never pretended Muslims are atheist.
> I know they are theist. Are you not confusing me with another person?

You really are not the sharpest knife in the box, are you? See if you
can understand this:

WE DO NOT THINK THEISTS ARE ATHEISTS. WE DO NOT THINK THAT YOU THINK
THEISTS ARE ATHEISTS. WE ARE NOT CONFUSING YOU WITH ANYONE ELSE. GO
LOOK UP SARCASM.

That clarify things for you? Did you actually go and look up what
sarcasm is so you know and we won't have to go through this again?

We hope so because you are absolutely the most tedious person we've
ever had to deal with other than Andrew-a-Blank. Even if you were
making a good case for your position (and you're failing there) you
would *still* have turned us away from it because of your tediously
pedantic behavior and your provincial lack of education. You really
are the worst witness for your religion (other than Andrew-a-Blank)
that we've ever encountered. But that works for us because it means
you wil turn more people away from your cause that we ever will.

Here let's travel to pendant place once more and spell every little
tedious detail out for you because you;re really not up to this
exchange, are you? You're clearly so lacking that you cannot have a
normal conversation. The question was sarcastic. We all know that
they are not atheists, but your argument is that religion doesn't
promote evil and violence, and now we've given you example after
example after example of religiious people perpetrating violence in
the name of religion - violence which is both sanctioned and
*specified* by that religion.

Do you now understand and accept this?

> There is a convoy of some 50 - 18 wheel trucks leaving Iraq. An Iraq
> General, one General Sada who defected, stated that Seddam Hussein
> sent his weapons of mass destruction to Syria six weeks before the
> invasion. Intelligence knew Hussein had WMDs, because he had used gas on
> his own people.

You can believe that lie all you want but it remains a lie. There
were no weapons of mass destruction, but whether there were or not is
***irrelevant*** because what is relevant here is that a Christian
leader *did* *not* *turn* *the* *other* *cheek*. He was a hypocrite.
He had no faith in his god to protect him so instead, he sent soldiers
in and those Christians did not turn the other cheek either, not a
single one of them. Instead, they slaughtered literally thousands of
Muslims, and the Muslims slaughtered literally thousands of
Chrsitians. Their religion did *nothing* to prevent the violence, and
no god appeared for either side to help or to prevent the violence.

Religion failed dismally. God was absent. Faith was absent.

[snip]

> It's just a fact that the highest percentage of crime is where there
> is a lower educational standing.

The issue here is not education, it is religion. Virtually every one
of these people believed in a god. In the USA, the overwhelming
majority of them believe in and worship the same god you do. Yet this
belief ***FAILED*** to prevent these crimes. It ***FAILED*** to make
them turn the other cheek. It ***FAILED*** to make them go the extra
mile. It ***FAILED*** to have them offer their coat. It ***FAILED to
encourage them to cross the street to help their neighbor. Religion
failed. Your god failed.

Crimes are committed all over the world under every religion at every
educational and social level. But religion pervades all of these
societies and levels, and religion failed. And in many cases,
religion excouraged these crimes.

> Did you not read the part of the Bible which> urges you to love your neighbor? I guess not. Either that or you're
> > yet another Christian who rejects Christianity, lol!

> I love my children dearly, but my youngest son continues to get
> himself in trouble with the law.

Your god failed. Your religion failed.

> He got in with the wrong crowd
> and nothing me or his mother could do or say that would change
> him.

Your god failed. Your religion failed.

> Nevertheless I still love him, and want the best for him.

Yet you seem unable to extend that love to your neighbor (particularly
black neighbors), as your god demanded you do if we believe the
mythology.

> So, my point in telling you this, is to point out a fact doesn't
> mean you harbor some deep seated bias or racist attitude: facts are facts.

The fact that you state these things does not make them facts. you
have failed to support a single thing you have said. You simply state
your belief and expect us to bow down to it and take it all on faith.
This is alt.atheism; our only faith is in objective, independent
evidence, not on some religius dogma or blind beleif or argument from
incredulity.

> As I said before I think God does not micro-manage the universe.

This is an unsupported personal belief which flies in the face of the
unsupported personal beliefs of others who worship the same god you
do.

> >> We have _free_will_

> > No, we do not:
> >http://chronicle.com/article/Jerry-A-Coyne/131165/

> I think you have a mental image of all religious people and when
> one doesn't fit your paradigm he _must_ have moved the goal post.

Again, we are not presenting our personal beliefs as you are; we are
showing you that you theists are hypocrites, that you do not turn the
other cheek, that you perpetrate evil and violence. You have failed
to refute that.

> I do not believe Jesus meant for a solder to willing allow himself to
> be killed. This is paramount to committing suicide. A definite
> unforgivable sin, that no dedicated Christian can justify.

Agian, you are offering nothing but a blind belief. You cannot
support your claim. There are other soldiers in history who have
refused to fight because of their religious beliefs. They were soing
*exactly* what Jesus demanded, and they were labeled as cowards for it
by other Christians making judgments they were forbidden to make by
their god.

The Bible does not make distinctions; it simply states that thou shalt
not kill. the fictional Jesus did not lay down any conditions on his
statement; he simply told you to turn the other cheek and to love yoru
neighbor. Clearly you, and literally thousands of other so-called
Christians are rejecting those things wholesale, and you have the
hypocrisy to claim that other people "are not really Christians"?

If you can't see the blind hypocrisy in your position, you are truly
delusional.

> Do you believe that if we were to disarm and just let radical Muslims
> have their way, this is biblical. Is this what you would have the US
> do?

It has nothing to do with us. THIS IS WHAT YOUR OWN BIBLE IS TELLING
YOU AND YOU ARE REJECTING IT.

And because people like you are rejecting it, they are killing and
thereby making religion even more evil than it was to begin with.

> This is Old Testament. Christianity is a New Testament Religion.

Seriously? You're playing that card? Seriously?

Tell me, does the NT have a different god from the OT? Was your Jesus
*not* the son of the OT god? Did your fictional Jesus say that he had
come to change not "one jot or tittle of the law" or not? Go look it
up. The law is the OT. Did your fictional Jesus reject the OT or did
he refer to it frequently?

Do you think Jesus was a Christian? Honestly? He was ***NOT*** He
was (had he been real) a Judaist, and so were his disciples. So was
Paul.

> > Was that right? Was that moral? Was that the Christian thing to do?

We notice that you failed to answer this question along with many
others.

> > Ddi you not read what I have repeatedly reminded you of: about Jesus's
> > supposed dictum to TURN THE OTHER CHEEK?

> Your's is an extreme interpretation, which would very often result in
> death.

Where in the Bible are the conditions which are placed on that
instruction? Where are the exceptions? Quote me the verses.

My position is atheist. My position is not based on the whims of a
barbaric fictional god.

*YOUR* position is supposed to be following Jesus, yet you reject his
teachings and make excuses for it all the time. YOU are the
hypocrite. You are the one saying you believe one thing and then
doing another thing entirely.

> > Was Jesus just joking when he said that do you think? Was it an
> > optional part of Christianity?

> You are not A Christian, so why are you so insistent in your demanding
> that others follow your extreme interpretation of a biblical verse. Here
> again you are attempting to judge Christians by your view of a christian
> value.

Go ahead and support your repeated claim that this direct
interpretation of exactly what the Bible says is "extremist". Go
ahead and support that. Go ahead. We'll wait. Show us where the
Bible says there are exceptions to what Jesus taught, and explain to
us all, supporting your position with Bible text, what those
exceptions are and who authorized them. Go ahead. SHOW US. Let's
see who is extremist and who is simply addressing exactly what the
Bible says, as you should be if you truly are a Christian.

> >> No US solder is fighting and killing people over religious views.

> Here again you a non-christian presuming to know Christianity and

Clearly we know it better than you do. You are not a Christian. You
are like all the other "Christians" in that you outright *reject* what
your Messiah said and instead embrace what Paul supposedly said. You
are not a Christian, you are a Paulian

> insisting that Christians follow your overly strict interpretations.

So anything you reject is overly strict? Then you reject Jesus.
Thanks for admitting it. Jesus *was* strict if the NT is to be
believed. He made no compomises. He made no excuses and you and your
ilk reject him for that.

> And when one doesn't he is running away.

> No, I do not agree with your extreme interpretation.

The extremist is the one who rejects what the NT clearly states and
makes up his own religion as you are doing. If you don't accept this
then start making your case and supporting your claims instead of
blindly stating beleifs which are at odds with what the NT clearly
says, and running like a coward every time I call you on your
hypocrisy, ignorance, and blindness.

> Here again you are persisting on your extremist views of what _you_, a
> non-Christian thinks Christian were/are suppose to do.

Is what I am saying in the NT or not? If it is not, then point out
exactly where we are wrong and support your argument instead of
stating childish and blind beliefs and then running. Why are you
running if you indeed have an omnipotent god behing you?

> > Did you not read what I wrote about the burning of heretics? Was
> > that not Christians imposing their will with violence and terrorism?

> Why do you think non-catholics should defend catholic practices.

They did what the Bible said they should so. They worship the same
god you do. You need to defend why *you* are rejecting what the Bible
insists you do. Why are you such a coward?

> > Was the burning of witches not the imposition of will by violence? Go
> > ahead and cast your excuse for a mind back: was it the Muslims who
> > hung and burned hundreds, ir not thousands of innocent women as
> > witches, or was it Christians?

> Actually It wasn't. It was human inhumane ie mans inhumanity to man.

Done at the insistence of the Bible. Does your Holy Bible say you
shall not suffer a witch to live or does it not? It's a simple
quesiton. There is no extremist interpretation here. The Bible
either says that or it doesn't. Which is it?

The Bible either says you should stone homosexuals or it doesn't.
Which is it?

According to NT ficiton, Jesus either said he came to uphold these OT
laws or he didn't. Which is it?

> > Was it the Muslims who conducted the inquisition, or Christians?

> Many were Christians and many were not: in any case deliberate killing
> innocent people was not a Christian thing to do.

Yet your Bible insists that you do it and Jesus did not *ever* reject
the OT, so it is indeed a Christian thing to do.

> No, first the Big Bang, _then_ inflation, followed by expansion.

LIE.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

> I agree this singularily is not evidence of God. The word "singularity"
> simply means that when scientist wound back the expansion of the
> universe they arrived at a point where everything in the universe
> (space,time,matter, laws of physics) must have emerged : A single point,
> a singularity.

Thanks for admitting that your first "evidence" was no such thing at
all. We still await your five supported objective indepdent evidences
for the existence of a creator because if you cannot support the
existence of a creator then the entire Bible is fiction.

> > But answer me this: if there was, *quite literally* nothing, then
> > what was there to prevent quite literally anything from happening?
> > The answer to that is: quite literally nothing!

> But it did.

Thnas for once again admitting that you cannot intelligently address a
point we have made.

> There must be an opposite side of the same coin, if there was nothing
> to prevent .... there must have been something that caused the universe
> to come into existence.

There is no other side: iif there was nothing, then there were
literally no laws, so literally anything could happen.

> I know about multiple, universes,mother/daughter universes, budding
> off universes etc. But these are purely hypothetical, where the universe
> we observe is reality.
> .>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_universes

They come out of the same math which explains the universe. Unlike
the Bible, they are not fiction; they are not inventions.

> I was under the impression you wanted a serious discussion, but this
> doesn't bear this out. Why attack me, personally, instead of my arguments?

Because your "arguments" are not arguments; they are unsupported
statements of your blind belief. You're effectively telling lies and
I will not allow that.

> That's an interpretation.

No, it isn't interpretation: it's *exactly* what the Bible states.
Six 24 hour days, each of which had an *evening* and a *morning*.
These were not "epochs"; they were not "1,000 years"; they were not
"unspecified time periods". They were literal 24 hour days and some
40% of the US adult population including some (so-called) scientists
and religious leaders accept this as true.

If you choose to dispute the creation story, then *YOU* are
interpreting what was written, not us. You are making up fairy tales
to try and overcome the fact that the creation story was written by
scientifically ignorant people who clearly did not have any god
guiding them - unless that god was the most stupid god ever. And if
the Bible writers could be so far wrong with the creation and the
Noahic flood, then they could quite easily have been just as far wrong
on anything else.

> I'm not so literal as this. I don't accept

Since you reject what Jesus clearly stated (if we believe NT fiction)
then it's no surprise that you make up your own stories about the OT.
You, like so many other so-called Christians, are making up your own
religion because you., like us, do not like and do not accept the
religion as it is dictated by the Bible. Rest assured that you are
most certainly *not* adhering to Bible teachings, nor to the teachigns
presented as those of Jesus in the NT.

> a six day creation, nor do I accept 24 hour days, the Noachin flood,
> parting of the Red Sea, walking on water, turning four fishes into
> hundreds. In fact I reject the Old Testament entirely. It's made
> obsolete, for the Christian, by the New Covenant.

So you admit that the OT is full of lies? The same OT that your Jesus
said he came to uphold? Have you forgotten that your Jesus believed
the Noahic flood story?

> But I do understand, you are demanding scientific evidence independent
> of any findings by scientist.

Wrong. I accept *only* supported evidence.

> I offered evidence which was presented by

No, you offered an argument from incredulity which does not address
all the facts.

> Dr. Laura Danly where she gave the statistical probability of the
> expansion of universe with the precise value required in order to be
> successful: IE 1 chance in 4 quintilion

Statistics have nothing to do with it. Statistics are nothing but an
argument from incredulity as made by the young-Earth creationists.
You have failed to even accept that this may not be the only
universe. instead, you are, without a shred of scientific support,
claiming that this *is* the only universe and that it is so unlikely
(again without a shred of scientific support) that our ignorance of
how it arose is not ignorance but proof of a creator god.

How, exactly, does ignorance translate into proof?

> All you have done is engage in character assassination and personal
> insults _rather_ than deal with my arguments which are based upon
> scientific evidence.

Where have you made *any* supported argument? You have done nothing
but state your blind religious beliefs and offered argument from
incredulity. I have no respect for that.

> This is merely a supposition without a shred of scientific evidence
> supporting it

LIE. it comes directly out of the math which underlies this universe.

> Even if it exist, there's no way to observe them,
> detect them, determine anything about them. It's like looking to
> Mickey mouse, for explanations for mysteries in the real world.

Even if that's true (and it isn't), then we're in *exactly* the same
position as you are with your god. Yet you believe that unsupported
god and reject the supported science.

> This is truism, but a very unsatisfactory one at that. The universe
> _is_ a reality. The scenario given by Brandon Carter, exemplifies this.
> You stand before a line of 100 rifle marksmen all pointing their guns at
> you, you hear the gun fire, but you don't die. If you had died you would
> not be here to ask what happened. But that answers nothing.

Poor example that it is, it still overturns your unsupported
objection.

> Well, that's your opinion and you are welcome to it! To me, 1 chance in
> 1 quintilion implies something other than unguided, random chance was
> involved.
> And this is only one of four fundamental cosmological Constants which
> are extremely precise mathematical values.

Again, an unsupported argument from incredulity - a blind belief.

> Here again, God does not micro-manage the universe.

Again, an unsupported argument from incredulity - a blind belief with
which others who worship your god disagree.

> What do you call the Big Bang and the fine tuned expansion constants?
> These make the point that something other than random chance had to be
> involved.

No, they do not. Again, an unsupported argument from incredulity - a
blind belief.

> I presented facts, you are arguing from incredulity.

You are clearly deluded.

Budikka

Besque

unread,

Nov 20, 2012, 11:03:28 AM11/20/12

to

On 11/20/2012 9:07 AM, Budikka666 wrote:
> On Nov 19, 11:05 pm, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 11/19/2012 9:27 AM, Budikka666 wrote:> On Nov 18, 11:05 pm, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Yet they worship the same god; they use the same Bible as far as the
>>> OT is concerned; the only difference is that they add the Koran, you
>>> add the NT. Clearly you are as clueless about religion as you are
>>> about objective independent evidence (more on this later), but your
>>> abysmal ignorance doesn't do a thing to change the *fact* that they
>>> *are* religious; they are not atheist, and they are evil, so my
>>> original accusation remains intact - an accusation which you've
>>> consistently failed to address.
>>
>> .
>> Who says they are atheist?
>
> No one. The "Yet they worship the same god" should have clued you in
> to that. You know, if you would actually answer a question with a
> straight answer instead of running like diarrhea, we wouldn't have to
> tediously spell out everything for you would we?
>
> But here we go again with the sad little theist pedant. No one is
> saying they are atheist. There's this thing called a question mark.
> Looks like this: ? When you see that after a set of words, it means
> it's not a statement but a question that I'm asking you. Youre
> expected to answer. Gort that straight now? Also, look up sarcasm.
> I feel it willbenefit you greatly in this exchange.
>

Yes, I asked the question, I used a question mark (?).

>
>>>>> I put the question again: was your god telling the Muslims the truth
>>>>> or was your god telling the christians the truth?
>>
>>>> They have a living spokesman who supposedly is in constant communication
>>>> with god, Christians do not and don't claim to
>>>> have living prophets. So, that a major difference.
>>
>>> Living prophets? Does your god listen to your prayers or not? You're
>>> doing a better job than I am of thoroughly discrediting your claims!
>>> lol!
>>
>> I do not believe God micro manages human affairs,
>
> Again that's a blind belief for which you can offer no supportive
> evidence.
>

My "blind" faith doesn't come close to being so intrinched as the
_brainwashed_ views planted in you and parroted in alt talk creationism
as your own.

Others who worship the same god you do believe he does
> quite literally manage the universe. How would you go about disproving
> their claim and proving your own?
>

So, they worship Jesus Christ as the son of God. No they do not!

>
> And are you *ever* going to give a straight (and supported) answer to
> *any* question I ask you?
>

Religion is a matter of faith, and not subject to empirical evidence.

>
>> <>> Because he sure as> hell was lying to one side or the other, or to both, or he had nothing
>>>>> to do with it and it was exactly what I said it was: religious
>>>>> extremism on both sides. Got it now dimwit?
>>
>>>> God doesn't speak to anyone now. IOW there are no living prophets today
>>>> and no one in communication with God.
>>
>>> Really? A bunch of your fellow ilk would claim he does. So how do
>>> *you* determine scientifically whether he is speaking to people or
>>> not? How did you come by this knowledge? Did a god speak to you and
>>> tell you? lol!
>>
>> No, God doesn't speak to anyone,
>
> How do you *know*? Perhaps he does speak to you. Are you saying you
> yourself have godlike powers that you can state this as a fact? Isn't
> that blaspemy?
>

After the book of Revelations, no further revelation is needed.

>
> But let's once agian try to simplify the sewage system you're building
> here and take you at your word. If he speaks to no one, then why
> would you believe he *ever* spoke to anyone? Why would you believe
> the Bible isn't simply made up from fairy tales and offers no evidence
> of any god whatsoever?
>

There is nothing more needed to fulfill human spiritual needs.

>
>> >>>>> You are a fine one to talk about being brainwashed.
>>
>>>>> I'm not the one tying myself into embarrassing knots trying to explain
>>>>> the utterly screwed-up world of religious belief.
>>
>>>> The fact you cannot understand is not my problem. It's due to your
>>>> extreme bias and your senseless spewing hatred on the NGs
>>
>>> I understand it only too well. Organised religion is evil. it is
>>> violent. It is hypocrtiical. It is intolerant. These are facts, not
>>> a matter of interpretation.
>>
>> I haven't found that to be the case. Nor do I believe you.
>
> I don't care what you believe, remember? The facts speak for
> themselves, and the facts state quite unequivocally that most of the
> world is religious and most of the world is fighting at some time or
> other, if not in outright wars, then in crime and violence within any
> given society. The question is: why does religion not stop the
> fighting if it is so powerful an influence?
>

Here again you are lumping all religions in your muddled head.

>
> Here's one for you: If Christianity is the onlty true religion, how
> come there is much less crime in Muslim societies than in the USA?
> How come there is much less violence in Europe, where atheism is
> storngly on the rise, than there is in the USA, where religion rules?
>

As Christianity becomes less and less a force and less influential in
the US the more crime and evil takes its place.

>
>> It's obvious that you try to uses religious values against them.
>> Yet, you reject these values for yourself.
>> >>>>> People at war don't take adhere to religious ideals.
>>
>>>>> Religious people are the ones fighting the wars numbnuts. Why are
>>>>> Christians fighting instead of turning the other cheek? Why do very
>>>>> nearly *all* Christians, hypocrites that they are, reject Jesus's
>>>>> teachings when it comes to wars?
>>
>>>> So, you think Christians should allow Muslims to bomb our cities and
>>>> kill people without defending the homeland. That's what wars today
>>>> are about.
>>
>>> Thanks for gainsaying yourself and finally admitting that wars are
>>> about religion, exactly as I said they were.
>>
>> With Muslims that seems to be the case. I haven't disputed this point.
>
> But you have quickly fled the *fact* that Christians have done and
> continue to do exactly the same things that you accuse Muslims of
> doing.
>

Where are Christians blowing themselves up, killing scores of innocent
people, flying planes into buildings, destroying the embassy and
murdering representatives of other nations within their own embassy?

>
>> >> But answer the question you sad little coward. Did Jesus Christ,
>>> according to Bible fiction, say "turn the other cheek" or did he not?
>>> YES OR NO?
>>
>> There's quite a difference between being slapped and having one's life
>> threatened.
>
> Do you think the ficitonal Jesus menat that quite literally?
> Seriously? If you take the Bibel q
>

Jesus could never have had the overwhelming effect on western culture
and formation of institutions as he did IF he did not exist.

>> Since the mass of these particles is on the order of 80GeV the range
>> predicted by the >> uncertainity principle and can vary within
>> a range of about .01% . The value of the weak force is .007; it
>> defines how firmly all the atoms are held together.

>> This force controls the power of the sun and it allows the sun

>> and stars to transmute hydrogen into all the atoms in the periodic

Budikka666

unread,

Nov 20, 2012, 8:21:02 PM11/20/12

to

On Nov 20, 10:03 am, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Again that's a blind belief for which you can offer no supportive
> > evidence.
>
> >
> My "blind" faith doesn't come close to being so intrinched as the

That would be "entrenched" you ignoramus.

> _brainwashed_ views planted in you and parroted in alt talk creationism
> as your own.

You whine about our supposed insults to you and then you continue to
insult us as you have done from day one? Thanks for showing the
entire world what a poster-boy for Christian hypocrisy you are by
completely abandoning *every* *single* *principle* in the NT.

We've tried to be polite and put up with your incessant insults about
how brainwashed we supposedly are, all the time asking that you
support your claims, and here you do nothing but throw out *yet*
*another* "brainwash" insult whilst ***RUNNING*** like the stinking
diarrhea you are from the assertions we've made (and supported) about
what Christians have done and about what your Bible quite clearly
states.

Take this as due warning that we are done playing with you. The kid
gloves are well and truly off.

For eveything you've posted below for which you *once* *again* offer
no supportive evidence, expect to be insulted. You think you've been
insulted so far? Wake up and smell the coffee.

> Others who worship the same god you do believe he does> quite literally manage the universe. How would you go about disproving
> > their claim and proving your own?
>
> >
> So, they worship Jesus Christ as the son of God. No they do not!

What kind of brain-dead answer is that? Are you now trying to
promulgate the absurd LIE that the Judaists, the Islamists and the
Christians do *not* worship the same god? What is your evidence for
that inane claim? Each of those three religions has its roots
inextricably entwined in the Old Testament - yes, that OT: the one
that's right there in your own Bible. The one which discusses in
salivating detail how many thousands of men, women and children your
god slaughtered, sanctioend the slaughter of, or demanded the
slaughter of.

> > And are you *ever* going to give a straight (and supported) answer to
> > *any* question I ask you?
>
> >
> Religion is a matter of faith, and not subject to empirical evidence.

Another cowardly evasive bullshit non-answer.

> > How do you *know*? Perhaps he does speak to you. Are you saying you
> > yourself have godlike powers that you can state this as a fact? Isn't
> > that blaspemy?
>
> >
> After the book of Revelations, no further revelation is needed.

In your brain-dead, childishly insular opinion maybe. Once again you
post your "response" and you expect us all to take it on faith. Well
you can shove your opinion up your dumb godbot ass. Either support
your claims, asshole, or be labeled the asshole-for-Christ that you
are. Got that now? We reject everything you post that has no support
for it, and most of all we outright reject your beliefs and opinions
because every opinion you've posted so far has been the most stench-
ridden theist hosrseshit imaginable.

> Here again you are lumping all religions in your muddled head.

So you now accept that no gods, regardless of which religion they were
invented for, ever stop violence and your own god has encouraged it?
Thanks for the admission.

> > Here's one for you: If Christianity is the onlty true religion, how
> > come there is much less crime in Muslim societies than in the USA?
> > How come there is much less violence in Europe, where atheism is
> > storngly on the rise, than there is in the USA, where religion rules?
>
> >
> As Christianity becomes less and less a force and less influential in
> the US the more crime and evil takes its place.

Which part of "90% of the US population believes in god and 80%
accepts Jesus Christ" do you think you can lie about now and get away
with you lowlife peice of lie-soaked Christian trash? Do you
seriously believe you can simply deny reality and be allowed to get
away with it in alt.atheism? Bullshit and lies may be the norm in
your usual brain-dead theist moron groups, but they don't fly here.

> Where are Christians blowing themselves up, killing scores of innocent
> people, flying planes into buildings, destroying the embassy and
> murdering representatives of other nations within their own embassy?

Once again,filthy, dishonest Chrsitian scum that you are, you pretend
that Christianity has no history of committing the worst crimes
against humanity imaginable.

It was only when Christians ***ABANDONED*** following Bible dictates
to stone homosexuals, and to kill witches, etc., etc., that life
improved for everyone. But you're a Christian: why is your complete
denial of reality not a surprise, dirtbag?

> > Do you think the ficitonal Jesus menat that quite literally?
> > Seriously? If you take the Bibel q
>
> >
> Jesus could never have had the overwhelming effect on western culture
> and formation of institutions as he did IF he did not exist.

Everyone had noted that you've once again, worthless cowardly
Christian SCUM that you are, avoided a direct question. Now try and
tell us that your god is omnipotent and is backing you up. you tragic,
cowardly pile of shit.

[snipped huge swathe of text where you quite literally ran away from
every challenge, every question, and every demand that you support
your lowlife lies.]

Everyone has also noted how much of this exchange you have fled,
thereby admitting that your own god is worthless, and that you have
ZERO faith in his ability to back you up. That's exactly my point.
Since you're in open denail about evenr ality itself, I consider this
excuse for an exchange closed.

Budikka

Besque

unread,

Nov 20, 2012, 11:18:27 PM11/20/12

to

On 11/20/2012 8:21 PM, Budikka666 wrote:
> On Nov 20, 10:03 am, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Again that's a blind belief for which you can offer no supportive
>>> evidence.
>>

>> as your own.
<
<snip>

>
> You whine about our supposed insults to you and then you continue to
> insult us as you have done from day one? Thanks for showing the
> entire world what a poster-boy for Christian hypocrisy you are by
> completely abandoning *every* *single* *principle* in the NT.
>
> We've tried to be polite and put up with your incessant insults about
> how brainwashed we supposedly are, all the time asking that you
> support your claims, and here you do nothing but throw out *yet*
> *another* "brainwash" insult whilst ***RUNNING*** like the stinking
> diarrhea you are from the assertions we've made (and supported) about
> what Christians have done and about what your Bible quite clearly
> states.
>

Something you can never comprehend, is the fact that you can never win
an argument by attacking the man rather than his argument. And this
totally describes your "debating" strategy.

>
> Take this as due warning that we are done playing with you. The kid
> gloves are well and truly off.
>
> For eveything you've posted below for which you *once* *again* offer
> no supportive evidence, expect to be insulted. You think you've been
> insulted so far? Wake up and smell the coffee.
>

I've answered you, your problem is that I do not give the answers you
want, therefore, in your twisted mind I don't answer your questions.

>
>> Others who worship the same god you do believe he does> quite literally manage the universe. How would you go about disproving
>>> their claim and proving your own?
>>
>> >
>> So, they worship Jesus Christ as the son of God. No they do not!
>
> What kind of brain-dead answer is that? Are you now trying to
> promulgate the absurd LIE that the Judaists, the Islamists and the
> Christians do *not* worship the same god? What is your evidence for
> that inane claim? Each of those three religions has its roots
> inextricably entwined in the Old Testament - yes, that OT: the one
> that's right there in your own Bible. The one which discusses in
> salivating detail how many thousands of men, women and children your
> god slaughtered, sanctioend the slaughter of, or demanded the
> slaughter of.
>
>>> And are you *ever* going to give a straight (and supported) answer to
>>> *any* question I ask you?
>>
>> >
>> Religion is a matter of faith, and not subject to empirical evidence.
>
> Another cowardly evasive bullshit non-answer.
>

If it isn't the answer you want, in your screwed up head it isn't an
answer. I began to answer you with my initial dissertation on three of
the four fundamental cosmological principle but _you_ sniped them
without so much as a notation. This is utter dishonesty and to the core.
You are totally corrupt, without a sense of decency, a single principle
or even one redeeming value!!

>
>
>> After the book of Revelations, no further revelation is needed.
>
> In your brain-dead, childishly insular opinion maybe.
>

Insults don't win arguments. It only serves to show your inability
to deal with straight answers.

Once again you
> post your "response" and you expect us all to take it on faith.
>

I expect nothing - absolutely nothing from you! You are incapable
of dealing with explanations you don't like.

Well
> you can shove your opinion up your dumb godbot ass. Either support
> your claims, asshole, or be labeled the asshole-for-Christ that you
> are. Got that now? We reject everything you post that has no support
> for it, and most of all we outright reject your beliefs and opinions
> because every opinion you've posted so far has been the most stench-
> ridden theist hosrseshit imaginable.
>

It doesn't compare to the utterly asinine questions you ask: that is
when you are not betraying your hatred of those harboring views that
are different from your own!

>
>> Here again you are lumping all religions in your muddled head.
>
> So you now accept that no gods, regardless of which religion they were
> invented for, ever stop violence and your own god has encouraged it?
> Thanks for the admission.
>

Obviously, you have a reading comprehension!

>
>>> Here's one for you: If Christianity is the onlty true religion, how
>>> come there is much less crime in Muslim societies than in the USA?
>>> How come there is much less violence in Europe, where atheism is
>>> storngly on the rise, than there is in the USA, where religion rules?
>>
>> >
>> As Christianity becomes less and less a force and less influential in
>> the US the more crime and evil takes its place.
>
> Which part of "90% of the US population believes in god and 80%
> accepts Jesus Christ" do you think you can lie about now and get away
> with you lowlife peice of lie-soaked Christian trash? Do you
> seriously believe you can simply deny reality and be allowed to get
> away with it in alt.atheism? Bullshit and lies may be the norm in
> your usual brain-dead theist moron groups, but they don't fly here.
>
>> Where are Christians blowing themselves up, killing scores of innocent
>> people, flying planes into buildings, destroying the embassy and
>> murdering representatives of other nations within their own embassy?
>
> Once again,filthy, dishonest Chrsitian scum that you are, you pretend
> that Christianity has no history of committing the worst crimes
> against humanity imaginable.
>

Here again you refuse to deal with the real answer I gave instead you
go back in history and pretend what may have happened then is
the same as now. You cannot comprehend the difference due to your
heritable mental disease which unfortunately you will pass on to your
descendents. I sincerely hope you don't have any offspring. It would be
a disaster for us all. You should volunteer to be sterilized.

>
> It was only when Christians ***ABANDONED*** following Bible dictates
> to stone homosexuals, and to kill witches, etc., etc., that life
> improved for everyone. But you're a Christian: why is your complete
> denial of reality not a surprise, dirtbag?
>
>>> Do you think the ficitonal Jesus menat that quite literally?
>>> Seriously? If you take the Bibel q
>>
>> >
>> Jesus could never have had the overwhelming effect on western culture
>> and formation of institutions as he did IF he did not exist.
>
> Everyone had noted that you've once again, worthless cowardly
> Christian SCUM that you are, avoided a direct question. Now try and
> tell us that your god is omnipotent and is backing you up. you tragic,
> cowardly pile of shit.
>

> [snipped huge swathe of text where you quite literally ran away from
> every challenge, every question, and every demand that you support
> your lowlife lies.]
>

I have tried, and failed. I've become aware that because you do not
have the mental capacity to understand so you just snip. I'm sorry about
your mental challenges. You do have my sympathy.

>
> Everyone has also noted how much of this exchange you have fled,
> thereby admitting that your own god is worthless, and that you have
> ZERO faith in his ability to back you up. That's exactly my point.
> Since you're in open denail about evenr ality itself, I consider this
> excuse for an exchange closed.
>

I offered three lines of evidence in support which you could not
understand so you snipped without any notations at all. I thought
it was simply dishonesty, but now I'm acutely aware it's not dishonesty
but rather it's because of your mental disorder, you didn't know better.
So, I must take back all the unfavorable comments I've said and thought
about you.
>
> Budikka
>

Besque

unread,

Nov 22, 2012, 9:59:11 PM11/22/12

to

On 11/18/2012 6:00 PM, Budikka666 wrote:

> On Nov 18, 10:24 am, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> At no time are Christians supposed to allow being kicked around
>
> So the fictional Jesus Christ, according to your own NT, never advised
> turning the other cheek?
>

Turning the other cheek, does _not_ mean deliberately allowing oneself
to be killed: two different things. Even you should understand this.

>
> I should encourage you to keep posting your horseshit, You're doing a
> far better job than I am of discrediting your own inane blind faith.
>

You ask such ill-informed questions. My 4 year old grandchild ask more
intelligent questions.

> Budikka
>

Caranx latus

unread,

Nov 23, 2012, 8:05:10 AM11/23/12

to

On 11/22/2012 9:59 PM, Besque wrote:
> On 11/18/2012 6:00 PM, Budikka666 wrote:
>> On Nov 18, 10:24 am, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> At no time are Christians supposed to allow being kicked around
>>
>> So the fictional Jesus Christ, according to your own NT, never advised
>> turning the other cheek?
> >
> Turning the other cheek, does _not_ mean deliberately allowing oneself
> to be killed: two different things. Even you should understand this.

Look at those goalposts move, folks! Mach 2 if I'm not much mistaken.

For your benefit, Pesque, I'll point out that "being kicked around" is
*not* the same as being "killed" no matter how much you might want it to be.

Besque

unread,

Nov 23, 2012, 10:38:55 AM11/23/12

to

On 11/23/2012 8:05 AM, Caranx latus wrote:
> On 11/22/2012 9:59 PM, Besque wrote:
>> On 11/18/2012 6:00 PM, Budikka666 wrote:
>>> On Nov 18, 10:24 am, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> At no time are Christians supposed to allow being kicked around
>>>
>>> So the fictional Jesus Christ, according to your own NT, never advised
>>> turning the other cheek?
>> >
>> Turning the other cheek, does _not_ mean deliberately allowing oneself
>> to be killed: two different things. Even you should understand this.
>
> Look at those goalposts move, folks! Mach 2 if I'm not much mistaken.
>
> For your benefit, Pesque, I'll point out that "being kicked around" is
> *not* the same as being "killed" no matter how much you might want it to
> be.
>

Ni one said anything about just being kicked around. Look at the middle
east, and what could happen in the US if there were no laws, given the
extreme anti-christian views of many people.

Budikka666

unread,

Nov 23, 2012, 12:17:56 PM11/23/12

to

I see that once again, like the pathetic coward-for-Christ that you are,
you have not one apology to offer for the decades of insults your ilk has
heaped into alt.atheism, and not a single word of censure for J Young's
persistent abuse of women and gays.

Nope, like the blind, self-serving, self-centered Christian trash that
you are, all you can do is whine about about how thin your skin is and
how utterly useless your god is at protecting you from reality. Why is
that *entirely* unsurprising?

Well deal with it asshole. Shake the dust off your feet as your master
ordered you to do, and FUCK OFF.

Got that straight now imbecile?

Budikka

Budikka666

unread,

Nov 23, 2012, 12:47:49 PM11/23/12

unread,

Nov 23, 2012, 6:57:58 PM11/23/12

to

On 11/23/2012 10:38 AM, Besque wrote:

> On 11/23/2012 8:05 AM, Caranx latus wrote:
>> On 11/22/2012 9:59 PM, Besque wrote:
>>> On 11/18/2012 6:00 PM, Budikka666 wrote:
>>>> On Nov 18, 10:24 am, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> At no time are Christians supposed to allow being kicked around
>>>>
>>>> So the fictional Jesus Christ, according to your own NT, never advised
>>>> turning the other cheek?
>>> >
>>> Turning the other cheek, does _not_ mean deliberately allowing oneself
>>> to be killed: two different things. Even you should understand this.
>>
>> Look at those goalposts move, folks! Mach 2 if I'm not much mistaken.
>>
>> For your benefit, Pesque, I'll point out that "being kicked around" is
>> *not* the same as being "killed" no matter how much you might want it to
>> be.
> >
> Ni one said anything about just being kicked around. Look at the
> middle east, and what could happen in the US if there were no laws,
> given the
> extreme anti-christian views of many people.

There is no shortage of laws in the Middle East. I think you will find
that the most extreme US terrorists are...........Christian fundamentalists!

Ralph

unread,

Nov 23, 2012, 7:05:24 PM11/23/12

to

Yeah, why don't you Christians quit committing these crimes.

Budikka666

unread,

Nov 23, 2012, 7:18:30 PM11/23/12

to

On Nov 23, 5:47 pm, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Given the gang violence, the murders in schools, workplaces, streets and
> homes, Society would be much better if everyone thought there would be
> serious consequences for whatever crime they commit at
> the time without having to pay any penalty: so long as they can
> do their deed in secret or escape the law. But unfortunately
> too many people, think they are free to do whatever without
> thought of the day they will have to give an account of their
> actions.

Thanks for showing what sad hypocrites your fellow Christians are.

90% of the US believes in god. 80% of the US accepts that Jesus
Christ is the clown prince son of this dead-beat absentee god, yet
here you are admitting that these profoundly religious people are
causing more crime than in any other nation!

Thanks for the admission.

Budikka

Caranx latus

unread,

Nov 23, 2012, 8:13:10 PM11/23/12

to

On 11/23/2012 6:47 PM, Besque wrote:

Teaching people that Big Daddy watches everything they do every second
of their life and will punish them for eternity if they do something
that It doesn't like, and then handing them a Get Out Of Eternal
Punishment Free card, doesn't accomplish that.

If you want to teach people to value their own freedoms and to respect
the freedoms of others, Christianity is *not* what you teach them.

> But unfortunately
> too many people, think they are free to do whatever without
> thought of the day they will have to give an account of their
> actions.

Christians are no exception. After all, they're the ones who think
they're holding the Get Out Of Eternal Punishment Free card.

Devils Advocaat

unread,

Nov 25, 2012, 4:35:06 AM11/25/12

to

On 17 Nov, 16:28, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
> On Nov 17, 8:09 am, Zerkon <Zer...@Z.Zorg> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 17 Nov 2012 04:46:16 -0800, Budikka666 wrote:
> > > is a Christian who is so filled with hatred
>
> > Does not compute.. either he is not a christian, that is to say one who
> > follows the teachings of JC
>
> Are you talking about the same JC who stated (according to NT
> mythology) that if you don't hate your own parents, you're not with
> him?

[snipped for brevity and focus]

Are you referring to Matthew 10:37 where it says (in the Douay-Rheims
translation):

"He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me;
and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me."

Where does it mention you must hate your parents?

Besque

unread,

Nov 25, 2012, 8:49:11 PM11/25/12

to

On 11/19/2012 12:46 AM, Olrik wrote:

> Le 2012-11-19 00:05, Besque a écrit :
>
>> They worship Allah. If it's the same God they have a totally different
>> concept of God.
>

> All those imbeciles profess to worship a single god, and yet they're
> still killing each other's over that definition.
>
Of all the wars in the last 2 or 3 decades, It's Islamist who are
engaged in each of them. Other people non-Islamist are forced on
the defensive against these "holy wars" this is in Europe, in the
Balkans, in Africa the middle east and in asia.
>
>

Immortalist

unread,

Nov 27, 2012, 10:17:24 AM11/27/12

to

On Nov 17, 4:46 am, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
> BraoilJAN aka Jabriol, LiarBoi, Loirbaj, BrtailJOB, etc., is a
> Christian who is so filled with hatred, racism, misogynism, and
> cowardice that he pretty much typiifes organized religion. Like a limp
> Peter at the passion he has denied Christ thrice. Here's a partial
> list of the times he has been challenged on his disgusting stances and
> in *every* *single* *case* he has openly admitted there is no
> omnipotent god by running like diarrhea.
>

I might give him an award of 4 squirrels but he don't rate a five
count by well established troll standards of etiquate. 4 squirrels is
pretty good though.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1XRa-s4d2E

> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #1
> When asked what his academic qualifications were to set himself up as
> judge and jury of the Theory of Evolution, Fled the Thread, thereby
> proving himself a hypocrite.http://tinyurl.com/3rf72jl
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #2
> Challenged on his 'missing links' LIE. Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3um7gc4
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #3
> Asked what positive scientific evidence he had which demonstrates that
> the entire surface of the Earth was completely under water only about
> 4,300 years old as the Bible chronology in Luke indicates. Fled the
> Thread.http://tinyurl.com/44c3q94
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #4
> Asked if he had any positive scientific evidence which demonstrates
> that the Earth and indeed the universe are only about 6,000 years old
> as the Bible chronology in Luke indicates. Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3d38lwe
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #5
> Asked what professionally published positive scientific evidence there
> is for a creator or for a creation. Fled the Thread.
> http://tinyurl.com/3sya4pn
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #6
> Asked what independent objective evidence there is for a creator or
> for a creation, posted around the same time as the above. Fled the
> Thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #7
> Asked what intelligent rationale he could offer for a creator or for a
> creation, posted around the same time as the above. Fled the Thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #8
> LIED that he posted 180 failures of evolution when he posted only a
> handful, all of which were easily refuted. Didn't even *pretend* he
> could support his claim! Instead, he Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3ueca9g
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #9
> LIED that humans and apes do not have a common ancestry and when asked
> for evidence and invited to debate it, he Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3doxezm
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #10
> Invited to go toe-to-toe on the existence of this god of his. Fled
> the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3s6wwaf
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #11
> Invited to discuss unsupported claims he made about the coelacanth.
> Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/44kxjxf
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #12
> Taken to task over LIES about Richard Dawkins. Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3md8lbg
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #13
> Called out on his LIE about evolution and invited to discuss it. Fled
> the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3q5g5v8
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #14
> Called out on his LIE about Jack Kevorkian's whereabouts. Hell? Fled
> the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3tw8pja
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #15
> Called out on his LIE about convicted criminal Garcia's whereabouts.
> Hell? Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/69z2wex
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #16
> Called out on his LIE about the Peppered moth, Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3j9cy7b
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #17
> Invited to discuss his knowledge of the Bible. Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3pfrg53
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #18
> Invited to discuss his LIE about the odds of abiogenesis and
> evolution. Fled the thread.http://tinyurl.com/3v5x4or
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #19
> Offered a discussion of his shameful LIE about anti-semitism. Fled
> the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3shfato
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #20
> LIES about Charles Darwin's purported racism were exposed. Fled the
> Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3c8mele
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #21
> Invited you to define 'Evolution' so that we could discuss it
> intelligently. Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3grr2tm
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #22
> Made several statements on the reliability of the Bible and when
> challenged to support them Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3vc4v8o
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #23
> LIED about what Charles Darwin said about the evolution of the eye and
> when taken to task on this, Fled the Thread:http://tinyurl.com/3mp9fbs
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #24
> We set LiarBoi BrailJOB straight on abiogenesis after he accused us of
> making the claims that Joseki (whom he's directly and repeatedly
> supported) was making, he FLED THE THREAD:http://tinyurl.com/3mhzezl
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #25
> Challenged on his 'billions of fossils' LIE. Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3ce9g8j
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #26
> Challenged on Jesus Christ. Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/6kck7b5
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #27
> Washed out in the Noahic flood. Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/4xo7k7v
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #28
> Challenged on his Rick Perry LIES. Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3w2rkhu
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #29
> Big Bang Scares LiarBoi BrailJOB! Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/4xy9hhj
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #30
> LiarBoi's Junk Shrivels Away! Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3mb6xts
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #31
> Selfish Genes are More Generous Than Skinflint LiarBoi! Fled the
> Thread.http://tinyurl.com/4yh4nyh
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #32
> Why species 'A' doesn't become extinct automatically after giving rise
> to species 'B'. Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3t2l3qf
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #33
> The Definition of Speciation. Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3f7m488
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #34
> LIED that there was a "mountain of evidence" disproving evolution.
> Fled the Thread.http://tinyurl.com/3k2jtqg
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #35
> Didn't dare set foot in a thread which pointed out what a fraud he was
> when he talks about Stephen Jay Gould and the visibility of genes to
> evolutionhttp://tinyurl.com/3k8upef
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #36
> Ran from his virus lie.http://tinyurl.com/3om8ps5
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #37
> When his lie about scientists skeptical of Evolution was exposed,
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Fled the Thread!http://tinyurl.com/3c6kufl
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #38
> Radiometric dating. Fled the thread.http://tinyurl.com/3gwzkhy
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #39
> After having been bitten by Charles Darwin's finches, he flew the
> coop!http://tinyurl.com/6b7sm9o
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #40
> Offered a debate on the evidence for evolution, LiarBoi BrailJOB
> performed the amazing feat of running up the white flag.http://tinyurl.com/3lgbdo3
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #41
> Talk about fruit and watch LiarBoi fly!http://tinyurl.com/3gvhqq4
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #42
> Offered the chance to discuss transitional fossils, LiarBoi BrailJOB
> transitioned into a chickenhttp://tinyurl.com/3fq8omp
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #43
> Asked to support his claim that a god made men and women, LiarBoi
> BrailJOB Ran Away!http://tinyurl.com/43m6exa
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #44
> Challenged to offer his evidence for a god creating the universe.
> LiarBoi proves his head is move of a vacuum than space is!http://tinyurl.com/3twjs48
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #45
> Challenged on his admission that he lied about Adam & Eve and a young-
> Earth, LiarBoi ran away!http://tinyurl.com/3pabgsu
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #46
> LiarBoi unintelligently designed a lie and then ran awayhttp://tinyurl.com/3p75lhd
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #47
> LiarBoi says one thing in one message, contradicts himself in another,
> the runs away when challenged.http://tinyurl.com/3bflqkr
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #48
> Given a chance to discuss design, LiarBoi creatively exited the
> thread.http://tinyurl.com/3oplwuw
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #49
> Offered a chance to discuss his lack of guts, spine, and original
> thought, and why he has a pipe stuck up his ass, LiarBoi slithered
> away.http://tinyurl.com/3mszdd6
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #50
> Offered a chance to discuss the "concilience [sic] of science, math,
> and physics: a Creating Intelligent God" LiarBoi Fled the Threadhttp://tinyurl.com/3boy8ae
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #51http://tinyurl.com/3hwywdl
> Flood debate was a washout - LiarBoi BrailJOB the Loonbag Fled the
> Thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #52http://tinyurl.com/7yyx83c
> Challenged to debate atheist knowledge v. theist knowledge, LiarBoi
> BrailJOB the Loonbag admitted he knows nothing and Fled the Thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #53http://tinyurl.com/8yobgg4
> Challenged on his lies about Richard Dawkins, LiarBoi BrailJOB the
> Loonbag Fled the Thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #54http://tinyurl.com/6wk79as
> Challenged on his gullible claims that I'd posted a clearly spoofed
> insult to gays, LiarBoi BrailJOB the Loonbag Fled the Thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #55http://tinyurl.com/7d2s93z
> Offered a second chance to debate Jesus, LiarBoi the Loonbag Fled the
> Thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #56http://tinyurl.com/7az9uw6
> Offered the chance to debate the efficacy of prayer, LiarBoi the
> Loonbag Fled the Thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #57http://tinyurl.com/6v6dhy6
> Offered the chance to defend his claims that there's a heaven, LiarBoi
> the Loonbag Fled the Thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #58http://tinyurl.com/6wyp6se
> Offered a third chance to debate Jesus, LiarBoi the Loonbag Fled the
> Thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #59http://tinyurl.com/c47efyr
> LiarBoi BrailJOB used his Flee Will! lol!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #60http://tinyurl.com/7oq9q7d
> Challenged to support his evil characterization of atheists, LiarBoi
> the Loonbag openly admitted he had no cv to qualify him to make such a
> judgment and then Fled the Thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #61http://tinyurl.com/87rrvtf
> Challenged to debate the true meaning of Winter Solstice, LiarBoi the
> Loonbag froze!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #62http://tinyurl.com/7mxogt6
> Challenged on intelligent design, LiarBoi BrailJOB the Loonbag
> intelligently Designed an exit from the thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #63http://tinyurl.com/7axbzsu
> Challenged to discuss evolution, Loonbag the Loinbra evolved into a
> chicken!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #64http://tinyurl.com/7j47ofs
> Budikka offered no challenge whatsoever, but cowardly BrailJOB
> preemptively ran away! This is the best one ever!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #65http://tinyurl.com/7xld5j7
> Challenged on his lie about what Charles Darwin said about bears and
> whales, LiarBoi BrailJOB got all bearish and Fled the Thread!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #66http://tinyurl.com/77s8om8
> Challenged to discuss intercessory prayer failure, LiarBoi the Loonbag
> failed to show!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #67http://tinyurl.com/78p8cl7
> Challenged on his cowardly lies about the Shroud of Turin, LiarBoi
> left so fast that only his ghostly image remained!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #68http://tinyurl.com/7grerk9
> Challenged to support another random claim about another random
> celebrity, LiarBoi went incognito in his predictable way.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #69http://tinyurl.com/7pr6p3r
> Challenged to support yet another of his endless lies about Charles
> Darwin, LiarBoi Fled the Thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #70http://tinyurl.com/83av5dz
> Challenged *again* (see #18) to discuss his LIE about the odds of
> abiogenesis and evolution. LiarBoi figured his odds of survival were
> better elsewhere and evolved rapidly into a monumental chicken!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #71http://tinyurl.com/7k6wrtv
> Challenged to support his claims about atheists, LiarBoi admitted
> there was no god to help him by showing great faith in running and
> hiding.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #72http://tinyurl.com/735e7mu
> Challenged to support his rabid claims about a Republican never-been,
> LiarBoi Fled the Thread
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #73http://tinyurl.com/84svchk
> Challenged to support his homophobic claim that a "homosexualist"
> kidnapped an ape, BrailJOB thought he'd have a gay old time, but was
> kicked in the ass!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #74http://tinyurl.com/7ozbqr7
> Challenged to present evidence for this fake god he wants us to
> praise, LiarBoi the Loonbag Fled the Thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #75http://tinyurl.com/74nvphd
> Challenged *again* (See #65) on his lie about what Charles Darwin said
> about bears and whales, LiarBoi BrailJOB started wailing and Fled the
> Thread!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #76http://tinyurl.com/86vc75j
> Challenged to support his claim that ID is advancing, LiarBoi
> intelligently designed his exit from the thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #77http://tinyurl.com/7xmmaha
> Challenged yet again on his lies that Charles Darwin indulged in
> racism, LiarBoi races for the exit!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #78http://tinyurl.com/784skba
> Challenged on yet another gay slur and mindless diatribe about birth
> control, Loonbag aborted the thread!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #79http://tinyurl.com/7u9exn5
> Challenged to support his lie about Charles Darwin's supposed deathbed
> conversion, LiarBoi converted to a sprinter and Fled the Thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #80http://tinyurl.com/84k2pp4
> Challenged to justify bearing yet more false witness against Charles
> Darwin, BrailJOB the LiarBoi bore himself swiftly from the thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #81http://tinyurl.com/7y3fmpf
> In which LiarBadge proves a moron about Mormons.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #82http://tinyurl.com/8xd4mho
> In which LiarBadge proves he lacks a catholic education about
> Catholics saving lives.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #83http://tinyurl.com/8467uwy
> Challenged to match non-existent science for the Noahic flood with
> solid scientific evidence refuting it, LiarBoi the Loonbag found he
> was all washed up!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #84http://tinyurl.com/7eowjm2
> Challenged to support *any* claim he's posted, LiarBoi Fled the
> Thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #85http://tinyurl.com/7ggtp9z
> Challenged for the third time to support his assertion that there's a
> Hell, LiarBoi ran like Hell!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #86http://tinyurl.com/7abg3xl
> Challenged to support his knee-jerk claim that there's a religious
> resurgence in the USA, LiarBoi shrunk away.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #87http://tinyurl.com/6m8868a
> Challenged on his obsession with mutilating Charles Darwin's corpse,
> Loonbag the BrailJOB Cut & Ran.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #88http://tinyurl.com/723pbso
> Challenged to support his lie that ID is growing, LiarBoi
> intelligently Fled the Thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #89http://tinyurl.com/7tkz7e5
> Challenged on the fact that the cowardice of creationists refutes the
> very lies they spew, LiarBoi the Loonbag beat a retreat.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #90http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/browse_frm/thread/48a9b0a2...
> Challenged on the afct that the literal thousands of Christian sects
> refutes monotheism, LiarBoi split.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #91http://tinyurl.com/7s3kjat
> Challenged to support his claims about the Black Book Holy Bible,
> LiarBoi did a Jonah!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #92http://tinyurl.com/83dk5md
> Challenged again on his LIE about the odds of abiogenesis and
> evolution, LiarBoi became odd and even Fled the thread.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #93http://tinyurl.com/8xvag5e
> Challenged to post evidence for his god, Liarboi admitted he has none.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #94http://tinyurl.com/77b6u8f
> Challenged to back up his lies about Charles Darwin with Evidence,
> Liarboi ran like a Beagle!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #95http://tinyurl.com/85zhcbd
> Challenged to support his odds lie (again) Liarboi Fled the Thread
> (again).
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #96http://tinyurl.com/86p9h8b
> Challenged on his T-Rex red blood cells claim, LiarBoi Fled the Thread
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #97http://tinyurl.com/6s5cfhy
> Challenged to post some scientifically supported alternatives to the
> Theory of Evolution, LiarBoi Fled the Thread!
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #98http://tinyurl.com/83xnyrm
> Challenged on his fraudulent Kent Hovind-Style "challenge" bullshit,
> LiarBoi quietly misled himself away.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #99http://tinyurl.com/7ml2fhx
> LiarBoi Fled the Thread when challenged on his Pascal's wager idiocy.
> I'll wager he won't be back.
>
> LiarBoi BrailJOB Cowardice #100http://tinyurl.com/86tko3z
> LiarBoi ran when challenged to discuss the apatosaurus, thereby
> proving he's a dinosaur.
>
> Budikka

Besque

unread,

Nov 27, 2012, 10:02:51 PM11/27/12

to

Really, since when has a Christian blown himself up killing numerous
other people, or bombing buildings killing people.

unread,

Nov 27, 2012, 11:08:27 PM11/27/12

to

"Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message news:hlwdjsd2-C57F61...@news.giganews.com...

> Besque wrote:
>> On 11/23/2012 7:05 PM, Ralph wrote:
>> > On 11/23/2012 6:47 PM, Besque wrote:
>> >> On 11/23/2012 6:30 PM, Caranx latus wrote:
>> >>> On 11/23/2012 10:38 AM, Besque wrote:
>> >>>> On 11/23/2012 8:05 AM, Caranx latus wrote:
>> >>>>> On 11/22/2012 9:59 PM, Besque wrote:
>> >>>>>> On 11/18/2012 6:00 PM, Budikka666 wrote:

>> >>>>>>> On Nov 18, 10:24 am, Besque wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>>>>>> At no time are Christians supposed to allow being kicked around
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>>>>> So the fictional Jesus Christ, according to your own NT, never
>> >>>>>>> advised turning the other cheek?
>> >>>>>> >
>> >>>>>> Turning the other cheek, does _not_ mean deliberately allowing

>> >>>>>> oneselfto be killed: two different things. Even you should understand this.

Nothing, within the context of love and marriage.

"Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled:
but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge."

Hebrews 13:4

Andrew

unread,

Nov 27, 2012, 11:24:34 PM11/27/12

to

"teresita" wrote in message news:L7SdnRHo3s8-FijN...@giganews.com...

> Besque wrote:
>
>> One reason many people want to be anti-theist is they want to have
>> sexual freedom without guilt
>
> Which begs the question, why do theists have guilt in their sexual
> relationships?

Those in harmony with their Creator don't have guilt.

And do you mean to say that lesbians have no shame?

"Teresita" wrote in message news:d3p8r...@drn.newsguy.com...
>
> I'm a lesbian.
> --
> Teresita

Jeanne Douglas

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 2:20:40 AM11/28/12

to

In article <rYydnfeiZctYECjN...@earthlink.com>,

<snipping irrelevant religious passage>

I'm not interested in your religion, so I need a real answer to my
question.

Jeanne Douglas

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 2:21:26 AM11/28/12

to

In article <WoydnSxbBf4QDCjN...@earthlink.com>,

"Andrew" <andrew....@usa.net> wrote:

> "teresita" wrote in message
> news:L7SdnRHo3s8-FijN...@giganews.com...
> > Besque wrote:
> >
> >> One reason many people want to be anti-theist is they want to have
> >> sexual freedom without guilt
> >
> > Which begs the question, why do theists have guilt in their sexual
> > relationships?
>
> Those in harmony with their Creator don't have guilt.
>
> And do you mean to say that lesbians have no shame?

Some do. Some don't. Exactly the same as gay men, straight men, and
straight women.

> "Teresita" wrote in message news:d3p8r...@drn.newsguy.com...
> >
> > I'm a lesbian.
> > --
> > Teresita

Devils Advocaat

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 5:42:57 AM11/28/12

to

Are you claiming that Christians don't commit crimes?

Explain how most people in prison are Christians?

Point of fact, the majority of those don't find God in prison.

> They know they will have to pay for their crimes.

They should pay for their crimes in the here and now.

Not when they are dead.

> Non-believers, however, have nothing to face.

Wrong, they have to face the law.

> So, they can cause
> harm without any consequences, unless they are found out.

This contradicts your claim that non-believers have nothing to face.

> One
> reason many people want to be anti-theist is they want to have
> sexual freedom without guilt, or consequences.

Then explain why the most hedonistic people one can find in the world
are supposedly Christians.

Devils Advocaat

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 5:43:40 AM11/28/12

to

On 28 Nov, 03:48, Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> In article <hefts.674071$A%.30...@fx26.am4>, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com>

Nothing at all, as long as all participants consent to the activities
they are involved in.

Jeanne Douglas

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 6:29:44 AM11/28/12

to

In article
<27c8e50e-0589-406a...@k6g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>,

Precisely!

Devils Advocaat

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 7:12:12 AM11/28/12

to

On 28 Nov, 11:29, Jeanne Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> In article

> <27c8e50e-0589-406a-823b-5c04620f1...@k6g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>,

Where are you in the world? Nation, province or state will suffice.

Message has been deleted

Devils Advocaat

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 10:54:23 AM11/28/12

to

During the Crusades, the Knights Templar destroyed one of their own
ships with 140 Christians on board in order to kill 10 times as many
Muslims in the opposing fleet.

And with respect to Christians blowing up buildings, attempted or
successful? How about the Gunpowder Plot?

The Magpie

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 11:19:13 AM11/28/12

to

On 28/11/2012 03:02, Besque wrote:>
> Really, since when has a Christian blown himself up killing numerous
> other people, or bombing buildings killing people.
>

Oh, let's see... Timothy McVeigh ring a bell?

Besque

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 12:09:06 PM11/28/12

to

You are twisting the words to mean something entirely different from
what I meant. There's no way to carry on a serious discussion under such
circumstances.

Besque

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 4:25:54 PM11/28/12

to

In article
<6618026d-ca1f-4609...@r3g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>,

California.

Devils Advocaat

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 4:39:35 PM11/28/12

to

Which doesn't disprove what I posted above.

> >>>> They know they will have to pay for their crimes.
>
> >>> They should pay for their crimes in the here and now.
>
> >
> The problem is they must be caught first, however, not all
> criminals are caught. As I pointed our above, my mother' family was
> murdered and the killers were never caught. She grew up in a Church
> supported Orphanage.

I'm sorry to hear of your mother's tragic loss so early in her life.

However, when you examine the statistics regarding solved and unsolved
crimes.

I believe you'll find more crimes are solved than not.

>
> >>> Not when they are dead.
>
> >
> I agree it should be here and now, but what about the ones who
> are never caught?
>
> >>>> Non-believers, however, have nothing to face.
>
> >>> Wrong, they have to face the law.
>
> >
> Not if they can get away and not be caught. They are home
> free, there is no consequences in at least in their own
> minds.

Again you resort to this line of not if they don't get caught.

The truth is more get caught than don't.

>
> >>>> So, they can cause
> >>>> harm without any consequences, unless they are found out.
>
> >>> This contradicts your claim that non-believers have nothing to face.
>
> This is twisting my meaning and I'm sure you are intelligent enough
> to understand this. But just in case, If they are not caught they
> _do_not_ have to face the law and in their own minds they will not
> have to face any consequences in the hereafter, since in their own
> minds there is no hereafter. So, if they are not caught they don't
> have to face the law or anything else.

Well, if the hereafter exists as the theists insist you shouldn't be
worried, as your god will get them.

> >>>> One
> >>>> reason many people want to be anti-theist is they want to have
> >>>> sexual freedom without guilt, or consequences.
>
> >>> Then explain why the most hedonistic people one can find in the world
> >>> are supposedly Christians.
>
> >
> This is just an unfounded unsupported false accusation and a smear.
> But then you can be a false witness, there is no consequences for you.

You've jumped without noticing the key word in that sentence.

Go and read it again.

The truth is in my personal life experience the most hedonistic and
therefore the most hypocritical people have claimed to be Christian.

And given the statistics relating to religion on admission to prison I
suspect what I've seen for myself may be seen in every country where
the population is mostly Christian.

Notice in this statement and the one you jumped at I've never directly
accused Christian people in the way you presumed.

>
> >> You are twisting the words to mean something entirely different from
> >> what I meant. There's no way to carry on a serious discussion under such
> >> circumstances.
>
> > Would you care to elaborate on how I'm twisting your words?
>
> >
> See above!
>

I have :)

Ralph

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 5:11:01 PM11/28/12

to

On 11/27/2012 11:24 PM, Andrew wrote:
> "teresita" wrote in message news:L7SdnRHo3s8-FijN...@giganews.com...
>> Besque wrote:
>>
>>> One reason many people want to be anti-theist is they want to have
>>> sexual freedom without guilt
>> Which begs the question, why do theists have guilt in their sexual
>> relationships?
> Those in harmony with their Creator don't have guilt.
>

Which means sex once a month, in the dark, with both parties blindfolded
and arms tied to preclude foreplay. Yep, that is the theist position.

<snip>

Andrew

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 5:20:36 PM11/28/12

Besque

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 6:56:26 PM11/28/12

to

So, you say.

Jeanne Douglas

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 7:49:03 PM11/28/12

to

In article <BsudnW7MJLKhBSvN...@earthlink.com>,

Why would anybody worship a genocidal torturing psychopathic monster?

Anyone who's not a psychopath himself or an abject coward. Which are you?

Besque

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 8:12:55 PM11/28/12

to

I find it curious that some of these anti-theist want to believe
there is no God, but when one starts pointing to evidence of God's
existence, most of them apparently just don't want to hear it, so
far they just leave the thread. I believe the discovery by
scientist that the universe has the appearance of being _fine_tuned_ for
life is a design characteristic. I think it's far more than just
appearence, I believe it's evidence of God's hand in the origin of the
universe.

Until recent history, scientist believed the universe was eternal,
without beginning and with end. This stood in direct opposition to the
Biblical account, which reads, "In the Beginning God Created the Heavens
and the earth". Today, Science has found evidence that the universe
and the earth did, in fact, have a beginning, as indicated in the Bible.
With some scientist, a universe with a beginning was _not_ a welcome
discovery.
-
>
>
> Worship Him!
>
>

Ralph

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 8:24:45 PM11/28/12

to

Gee Andrew, having a hard time with reading comprehension??? I didn't
exclude your 'god' who made heaven and earth. He has the same evidence
for his existence as Zeus and the rest of the gang.

Ralph

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 8:37:31 PM11/28/12

to

So I say what??? The man was confirmed in the Catholic church!

Ralph

unread,

Nov 28, 2012, 8:44:37 PM11/28/12

to

Hey buddy, what you believe isn't evidence for god. Damn, are all you
theists so brain-washed that you can't see that?

> Until recent history, scientist believed the universe was eternal,
> without beginning and with end. This stood in direct opposition to the
> Biblical account, which reads, "In the Beginning God Created the Heavens
> and the earth". Today, Science has found evidence that the universe
> and the earth did, in fact, have a beginning, as indicated in the
> Bible. With some scientist, a universe with a beginning was _not_ a
> welcome discovery.
> -

Is English your first language?? Prior to modern science all types of
'scientists' philosophers, theologians and other persons had many
thoughts about the world in which we lived.
Scientists didn't know there was a universe until recently, so no, they
didn't think about this and there have been many discoveries that were
not welcome and the glorious church of the almighty god
led the way. Ask poor old Bruno about those nasty little discoveries.

The Magpie

unread,

Nov 30, 2012, 8:55:05 AM11/30/12

to

On 28/11/2012 17:15, Besque wrote:> On 11/28/2012 11:19 AM, The Magpie

Don't be ridiculous! He was a right-wing, evangelical christian and a
member of "survivalist" groups... as was brought up in the court!

WangoTango

unread,

Nov 30, 2012, 3:33:27 PM11/30/12

to

In article <Q4udnZSDdoaeESvN...@giganews.com>, mmman_90
@yahoo.com says...

The "Missionary Position" was invented to make sure the man could verify
that the woman WASN'T having a good time. If it looked like she was
getting into it, he could correct the problem.

But seriously, this person hit the nail on the head, the theists
position is that ALL sex should be engaged in with guilt slathered all
over it. You are suppose to feel bad about feeling good. It is all
about CONTROL.

Birth control is the greatest invention of ALL TIME.

WangoTango

unread,

Nov 30, 2012, 3:34:27 PM11/30/12

to

In article <BsudnW7MJLKhBSvN...@earthlink.com>,
andrew....@usa.net says...

Your regurgitating the same baseless claims gets REALLY old.

Besque

unread,

Nov 30, 2012, 6:58:34 PM11/30/12

to

Anyone can make any claim the chose, including the claim there is
no God, the catch comes when they have to prove it.

Devils Advocaat

unread,

Dec 1, 2012, 2:35:45 AM12/1/12

to

On Nov 30, 11:58 pm, Besque <Bes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/30/2012 3:34 PM, WangoTango wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> > In article <BsudnW7MJLKhBSvNnZ2dnUVZ_sOdn...@earthlink.com>,
> > andrew.321re...@usa.net says...
> >> "Ralph" wrote in messagenews:Vc2dnfF9CMtfDyvN...@giganews.com...

> >>> On 11/28/2012 5:20 PM, Andrew wrote:

> >>>> "Ralph" wrote in messagenews:Q4udnZSDdoaeESvN...@giganews.com...

> >>>>> Andrew wrote:
> >>>>>> "teresita" wrote:
> >>>>>>> Besque wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> One reason many people want to be anti-theist is they want to have
> >>>>>>>> sexual freedom without guilt
>
> >>>>>>> Which begs the question, why do theists have guilt in their sexual
> >>>>>>> relationships?
>
> >>>>>> Those in harmony with their Creator don't have guilt.
>
> >>>>> Which means sex once a month, in the dark, with both
> >>>>> parties blindfolded and arms tied to preclude foreplay.
> >>>>> Yep, that is the theist position.
>
> >>>> Is this why you left the Baptist church?
>
> >>> I left the Baptist church because they were narrow-minded bigots.
> >>> I left the Methodist church because I realized there were no gods,
> >>> Christian or otherwise.
>
> >> You are correct, "there were no gods", besides the
> >> one true and living God who made heaven and earth.
>
> > Your regurgitating the same baseless claims gets REALLY old.
>
> Anyone can make any claim the chose, including the claim there is
> no God, the catch comes when they have to prove it.

Can you "prove" your god exists? Nothing unequivocally "proves" the
existence of your god.