The nicest people happen to believe in God

[JFG]

I think there may be a connection.

[OldMan]

On Nov 11, 4:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think there may be a connection.

Some of the meanest do also, unfortunately.

[JFG]

Yeah, I guess you're right. I don't think about them as much.

[Kent]

On Nov 11, 4:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think there may be a connection.

That has not been my experience.

The biggest jerks I have ever meet in my entire life have been leaders
in various Christian Churches. The main people Jesus condemned were
also religious leaders. I think there may be a connection.

[Bob T.]

Of course not. Why take note of facts that conflict with your world
view?

- Bob T.

[JFG]

Probably.

[JFG]

more like, why think about people I wouldn't want around?

[Saint Onan]

On Nov 12, 11:59 am, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think there may be a connection.

Yeah. Sheep are so much more pleasant than wolves.

[JFG]

Yes. That may be the connection, or at least part of it.

[Doris Ragland]

True---I agree with this-- I will try not to interupt on such being an idoit!!!(at times)

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.

[Saint Onan]

Baaa! baaa!

[OldMan]

On Nov 11, 6:18 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:

I don't 'like' thinking about them either. But one should do so
before making the kind of statement you did.

I don't personally happen to know any atheists as nice as 'Miss
Dorthy'. But I suspect that is mostly because I do not personally
know many atheists. There is nothing inherent in being an atheist or
a theist that will make a person nice or not. A lot of it is just the
way they are.

[ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com]

Are the nicest Fortune 500 CEOs theists or atheists or a mixture of
both? How about the nicest billionaires? Lastly, how about the nicest
paupers (homeless, tramps/hobos, etc.)?

[Doris Ragland]

Dorthy who---who are you talking about...

[Drafterman]

Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc.

Learn it.
Love it.

[Doris Ragland]

I believe in God how about you ??and I think the nicest christain I ever met probably one you would never geuss is...

[Dev]

The massive weight of the evidence you just provided weighs heavily on
my shoulders.

[Dev]

PS: how is being the leader of a religious cult, whether or not said
cult is the Catholic Church, and conquering the world working out for
you?

> > I think there may be a connection.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Doris Ragland]

what does this mean

[LL]

On Nov 11, 4:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think there may be a connection.

LL: Are you talking about the people who believe in god and bombed the
World Trade Center, set off bombs in crowded squares filled with
innocent people, and the serviceman at Fort Hood who killed 14 people
and injured many others? They were ALL people who believe/believed in
god--the nicest people you know.

There very well may be a connection, but it's not the connection you
are all dewey eyed about.

***************

[Doris Ragland]

No I'm not talking about that at all--why would that come to your mind---who I was talking about was several of the christains on these Threads---that are with interigty and polite and loving and witty and shines...good foundation and usually qoutes the scriptures--and draws instead of pushes away...

[Trance Gemini]

Yet another theist Troll posted for no other purpose than to insult and provoke atheists into an abuse fest.

This is reminiscent of XNun's ugly strategy. Joe aka JFG aka Thelemic Catholic must be taking cult abuse lessons from her.

And then theists wonder why we're rude to them.

<rolls eyes>

The insanity of some theists knows no bounds.

***************

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.

--
High Priestess of Ribbonology
God Is A Ribbon!
All Hail The Great Ribbon In The Sky
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/15oct_ibex.htm?list1303103

[Drafterman]

It's Latin for:

"With this, therefore because of this"

It is the name of the logically fallacy Joe committed by assuming that
because two things ("being nice" & "belief in God") are correlated,
then there is some sort of causal relationship between them.

On top of that, we can even argue the existence of any statistically
significant correlation.

On Nov 11, 11:58 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> what does this mean
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc.
>
> > Learn it.
> > Love it.
>
> > On Nov 11, 7:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I think there may be a connection.
>
> >  --
>
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > .

> > For more options, visit this group at

> >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.- Hide quoted text -

[Turner Hayes]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:59 PM, JFG <thelemic...@gmail.com> wrote:

I think there may be a connection.

[citation fucking needed]
 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.

[JFG]

Your observations notwithstanding, I actually do notice that, on the
average, the people I know who believe in God are genuinely nicer
folks than the people who do not. And I do know a few atheists. Two
come to my mind as friends that I know pretty well, and although I
don't think they are mean people, they tend not to be as warm as many
I know who believe in God in one way or another. They tend, in
certain areas at least, towards a skepticism that crosses over the
line to cynicism.

I think there are several things about faith that will tend to make a
person nicer. First, just the idea that life has inherent meaning
beyond just a few short years in the sun and then permanent death.
Secondly, for those who have an actual relationship with God, they
have contact with pure, authentic love, which has a very definite
effect on them. And third, the kind of people who believe in God are
exactly the kind of people who are capable of believing in God, i.e.
they acknowledge that there is more to reality than meets their eyes,
they are open to possibilities they have not yet experienced, and they
acknowledge that their own understanding of the world is not and will
never be supreme. Many atheists, it seems to me, tend to overrate
human knowledge, human cleverness, and other related things that lead,
not to humility, but to pride. Pride is at the top of the list of
capital vices because it specifically enhances separation rather than
love.

Those individuals who use their religion as an excuse to be mean are
the exception rather than the rule. I don't deny they exist, but I
don't know very many of them. I do observe that the friends I can get
really close to, those who are capable of profound intimacy, tend also
to love God. Capacity for profound intimacy seems to be higher on
their priority list than those who do not love God.

[JFG]

On Nov 12, 8:34 am, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's Latin for:
>
> "With this, therefore because of this"
>
> It is the name of the logically fallacy Joe committed by assuming that
> because two things ("being nice" & "belief in God") are correlated,
> then there is some sort of causal relationship between them.
>

I didn't argue that. I said, "I think" there "may be" a connection.

Nice straw man, though.

> On top of that, we can even argue the existence of any statistically
> significant correlation.
>
> On Nov 11, 11:58 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > what does this mean
>
> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc.
>
> > > Learn it.
> > > Love it.
>
> > > On Nov 11, 7:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I think there may be a connection.
>
> > >  --
>
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > > .
> > > For more options, visit this group at

> > >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.-Hide quoted text -

[JFG]

Unfortunately for the entireity of atheist arguments, Trance, you are
one of the meanest. You are kind of a case in point here.

> > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianity%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > .

[Trance Gemini]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:17 PM, JFG <thelemic...@gmail.com> wrote:

Unfortunately for the entireity of atheist arguments, Trance, you are
one of the meanest.  You are kind of a case in point here.

And this is where Joe's delusions reign supreme.

1. I wasn't the one starting 10+ threads abusing me for disagreeing with Joe.
2. I wasn't the one who started this Troll for the sole purpose of insulting atheists and starting an abuse-fest.

Gee that was Joe.

And who's the mean one?

No need to respond to any of my posts Joe. That question was rhetorical and my comments are directed to the nice people on this site (both atheist and theist) and not you.

<snipped>

[Neil Kelsey]

On Nov 12, 9:13 am, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 11, 10:27 pm, OldMan <edjarr...@msn.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 11, 6:18 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 11, 9:13 pm, OldMan <edjarr...@msn.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Nov 11, 4:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > I think there may be a connection.
>
> > > > Some of the meanest do also, unfortunately.
>
> > > Yeah, I guess you're right.  I don't think about them as much.
>
> > I don't 'like' thinking about them either.  But one should do so
> > before making the kind of statement you did.
>
> > I don't personally happen to know any atheists as nice as 'Miss
> > Dorthy'.  But I suspect that is mostly because I do not personally
> > know many atheists.  There is nothing inherent in being an atheist or
> > a theist that will make a person nice or not.  A lot of it is just the
> > way they are.
>
> Your observations notwithstanding, I actually do notice that, on the
> average, the people I know who believe in God are genuinely nicer
> folks than the people who do not.

I notice that people often think that people who agree with them are
nice. I don't think that's very nice of them.

A mafioso thinks that other mafiosos are nicer than non-mafiosos.

> their priority list than those who do not love God.- Hide quoted text -

[Drafterman]

On Nov 12, 12:15 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 8:34 am, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It's Latin for:
>
> > "With this, therefore because of this"
>
> > It is the name of the logically fallacy Joe committed by assuming that
> > because two things ("being nice" & "belief in God") are correlated,
> > then there is some sort of causal relationship between them.
>
> I didn't argue that.  I said, "I think" there "may be" a connection.
>
> Nice straw man, though.

Until you present some reason, other than correlation (which itsef
only upon your experiences, which you admit you biased toward your
conclusion), then it isn't a straw man.

>
>
>
> > On top of that, we can even argue the existence of any statistically
> > significant correlation.
>
> > On Nov 11, 11:58 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > what does this mean
>
> > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc.
>
> > > > Learn it.
> > > > Love it.
>
> > > > On Nov 11, 7:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I think there may be a connection.
>
> > > >  --
>
> > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > > > .
> > > > For more options, visit this group at

> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.-Hidequoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[klytu]

On Nov 11, 7:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think there may be a connection.

klytu: Personally, I haven't noticed any difference. I have met a lot
of nice believers and a lot of nice non-believers. And I have met a
lot of nasty believers and a lot of nasty non-believers.

[klytu]

On Nov 12, 8:34 am, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:

> It's Latin for:
>
> "With this, therefore because of this"
>
> It is the name of the logically fallacy Joe committed by assuming that
> because two things ("being nice" & "belief in God") are correlated,
> then there is some sort of causal relationship between them.
>

Draterman: On top of that, we can even argue the existence of any
statistically
significant correlation.

klytu: Yeah, I was sorta thinking about this as well. In order to show
any statistical correlation, we could start by figuring out the
percentage of nice people in the general population, then compare that
to the percentages of nice people in the theist and atheist
populations. But niceness can be difficult to quantify, and think an
anonymous voting system would do. I'd be willing to do an analysis for
members of this group, but I would need to set up polls where members
could vote anonymously, and only once each, as to whether they think
other particular members are nice.

> On Nov 11, 11:58 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > what does this mean
>
> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc.
>
> > > Learn it.
> > > Love it.
>
> > > On Nov 11, 7:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I think there may be a connection.
>
> > >  --
>
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > > .
> > > For more options, visit this group at

> > >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.-Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[Bill A]

But what is so great about being nice?
I have a higher regard for persons for are creative and imaginative
than I do for persons who are simply "nice". I am familiar with
several photographers over at "flickr" who are very creative and whose
work is well regarded, but whose verbal postings to discussion groups
there are horrible and abusive. So I just look at their photographic
work and ignore their verbal rants (smile).

But I think I will now make an effort to check out whether or not they
hold to any religious beliefs.

[Drafterman]

On Nov 12, 1:38 pm, klytu <jazzyjef...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 8:34 am, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:> It's Latin for:
>
> > "With this, therefore because of this"
>
> > It is the name of the logically fallacy Joe committed by assuming that
> > because two things ("being nice" & "belief in God") are correlated,
> > then there is some sort of causal relationship between them.
>
> Draterman:  On top of that, we can even argue the existence of any
> statistically
> significant correlation.
>
> klytu: Yeah, I was sorta thinking about this as well. In order to show
> any statistical correlation, we could start by figuring out the
> percentage of nice people in the general population, then compare that
> to the percentages of nice people in the theist and atheist
> populations. But niceness can be difficult to quantify, and think an
> anonymous voting system would do. I'd be willing to do an analysis for
> members of this group, but I would need to set up polls where members
> could vote anonymously, and only once each, as to whether they think
> other particular members are nice.

We don't even need to go that far. Joe admitted to ignoring the people
that contradict this "connection" so it's all confirmation bias
anyway.

>
>
>
> > On Nov 11, 11:58 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > what does this mean
>
> > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc.
>
> > > > Learn it.
> > > > Love it.
>
> > > > On Nov 11, 7:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I think there may be a connection.
>
> > > >  --
>
> > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­­­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > > > .
> > > > For more options, visit this group at

> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.-Hidequoted text -

[Trance Gemini]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 1:38 PM, klytu <jazzy...@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Nov 12, 8:34 am, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's Latin for:
>
> "With this, therefore because of this"
>
> It is the name of the logically fallacy Joe committed by assuming that
> because two things ("being nice" & "belief in God") are correlated,
> then there is some sort of causal relationship between them.
>

Draterman:  On top of that, we can even argue the existence of any
statistically
significant correlation.

klytu: Yeah, I was sorta thinking about this as well. In order to show
any statistical correlation, we could start by figuring out the
percentage of nice people in the general population, then compare that
to the percentages of nice people in the theist and atheist
populations. But niceness can be difficult to quantify, and think an
anonymous voting system would do. I'd be willing to do an analysis for
members of this group, but I would need to set up polls where members
could vote anonymously, and only once each, as to whether they think
other particular members are nice.

If you're going to do it based on popularity then it's not a determination of "nice" but a determination of "agreeable" or "popularity".

In order to have a vote on "nice" you have to define "nice" and then people have to check off which characteristics the person has that qualifies them as nice.

Otherwise the poll is not going to give you the answer you want.
 

> On Nov 11, 11:58 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > what does this mean
>
> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc.
>
> > > Learn it.
> > > Love it.
>
> > > On Nov 11, 7:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I think there may be a connection.
>
> > >  --
>
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > > .
> > > For more options, visit this group at
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.-Hide quoted text -
>

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

>
> - Show quoted text -

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.

[Neil Kelsey]

On Nov 12, 10:49 am, Bill A <williamangel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> But what is so great about being nice?



> I have a higher regard for persons for are creative and imaginative
> than I do for persons who are simply "nice". I am familiar with
> several photographers over at "flickr" who are very creative and whose
> work is well regarded, but whose verbal postings to discussion groups
> there are horrible and abusive. So I just look at their photographic
> work and ignore their verbal rants (smile).

I respect creativity and imagination, believe me, but I respect it all
the more when it is accompanied with civility. I've had enough of
"creative geniuses" who are assholes for one lifetime, but that's just
my experience. And the point is, most people are "nice" to some and
not to others, so does that make most people nice or not nice? This
whole thread is really just more pathological narcissistic thinking
from a pathological narcissist - Joe.

> But I think I will now make an effort to check out whether or not they
> hold to any religious beliefs.
>
> On Nov 12, 12:48 pm, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > I notice that people often think that people who agree with them are
> > nice. I don't think that's very nice of them.
>

> > A mafioso thinks that other mafiosos are nicer than non-mafiosos.- Hide quoted text -

[klytu]

On Nov 12, 1:59 pm, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 1:38 PM, klytu <jazzyjef...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 12, 8:34 am, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > It's Latin for:
>
> > > "With this, therefore because of this"
>
> > > It is the name of the logically fallacy Joe committed by assuming that
> > > because two things ("being nice" & "belief in God") are correlated,
> > > then there is some sort of causal relationship between them.
>
> > Draterman:  On top of that, we can even argue the existence of any
> > statistically
> > significant correlation.
>
> > klytu: Yeah, I was sorta thinking about this as well. In order to show
> > any statistical correlation, we could start by figuring out the
> > percentage of nice people in the general population, then compare that
> > to the percentages of nice people in the theist and atheist
> > populations. But niceness can be difficult to quantify, and think an
> > anonymous voting system would do. I'd be willing to do an analysis for
> > members of this group, but I would need to set up polls where members
> > could vote anonymously, and only once each, as to whether they think
> > other particular members are nice.
>
> If you're going to do it based on popularity then it's not a determination
> of "nice" but a determination of "agreeable" or "popularity".
>
> In order to have a vote on "nice" you have to define "nice" and then people
> have to check off which characteristics the person has that qualifies them
> as nice.

klytu: Or something along those lines. Good catch!

> Otherwise the poll is not going to give you the answer you want.

klytu: The more I think about it the poll would have to be set up much
differently than the simple one I had in mind. All sorts of unexpected
biases could creep in. For example, there might be a bias of theists
rating other theists or atheists rating other atheists. Probably the
most objective way to collect the data would involve polling people in
such a way that they didn't even realize they were being polled.

>
>
>
>
>
> > > On Nov 11, 11:58 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > what does this mean
>
> > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc.
>
> > > > > Learn it.
> > > > > Love it.
>
> > > > > On Nov 11, 7:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I think there may be a connection.
>
> > > > >  --
>
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > Groups
> > > > > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > > > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

> > <atheism-vs-christianit­­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com<y%252Bunsubscribe­@googlegroups.com>

>
> > > > > .
> > > > > For more options, visit this group at

> > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.-Hidequotedtext -

>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > --
>
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at

> >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.
>
> --
> High Priestess of Ribbonology
> God Is A Ribbon!

> All Hail The Great Ribbon In The Skyhttp://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/15oct_ibex.htm?list1303103- Hide quoted text -

[Trance Gemini]

Lol. Good luck with that ;-)

The problem is really with defining a term like nice.

It means radically different things to different people.

And their judgment calls are based on those radically different meanings.

Context also matters. People view others according to different standards of nice depending on who they are.

The criteria for a nice boss is different from the criteria for a nice friend or what's considered nice in an intimate relationship.

You've got your work cut out for you if you want to pursue this one.
 

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.

[philosophy]

"The nicest people happen to believe in God" -
Where are they? I haven't met many. What I have
seen is that once you scratch the surface of their
personalities they find it very hard to adjust to life.

[JFG]

On Nov 12, 12:51 pm, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 12:15 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 12, 8:34 am, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > It's Latin for:
>
> > > "With this, therefore because of this"
>
> > > It is the name of the logically fallacy Joe committed by assuming that
> > > because two things ("being nice" & "belief in God") are correlated,
> > > then there is some sort of causal relationship between them.
>
> > I didn't argue that.  I said, "I think" there "may be" a connection.
>
> > Nice straw man, though.
>
> Until you present some reason, other than correlation (which itsef
> only upon your experiences, which you admit you biased toward your
> conclusion), then it isn't a straw man.
>

A straw man is to create a position for your opponent that he never
articulated, and then to argue against that. So yeah, that is what
you did.

>
>
> > > On top of that, we can even argue the existence of any statistically
> > > significant correlation.
>
> > > On Nov 11, 11:58 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > what does this mean
>
> > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc.
>
> > > > > Learn it.
> > > > > Love it.
>
> > > > > On Nov 11, 7:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I think there may be a connection.
>
> > > > >  --
>
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > > > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > > > > .
> > > > > For more options, visit this group at

> > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.-Hidequotedtext -

[OldMan]

On Nov 11, 8:00 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dorthy who---who are you talking about...

A senior adult lady in the church I am a part of.

>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:27 PM, OldMan <edjarr...@msn.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 11, 6:18 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Nov 11, 9:13 pm, OldMan <edjarr...@msn.com> wrote:
>

> > > > On Nov 11, 4:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > I think there may be a connection.
>

> > > > Some of the meanest do also, unfortunately.
>
> > > Yeah, I guess you're right.  I don't think about them as much.
>
> > I don't 'like' thinking about them either.  But one should do so
> > before making the kind of statement you did.
>
> > I don't personally happen to know any atheists as nice as 'Miss
> > Dorthy'.  But I suspect that is mostly because I do not personally
> > know many atheists.  There is nothing inherent in being an atheist or
> > a theist that will make a person nice or not.  A lot of it is just the
> > way they are.
>

> > --
>
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianity%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

[OldMan]

On Nov 11, 8:05 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I believe in God how about you ??

I do!

> and I think the nicest christain I ever met
> probably one you would never geuss is...

>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:00 PM, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dorthy who---who are you talking about...
>

[OldMan]

No question that I get closer to believers than unbelivers. But that
is because of what we share in common rather than because they are
nicer.

[philosophy]

On Nov 12, 2:05 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I believe in God how about you ??and I think the nicest christain I ever met

> probably one you would never geuss is...

Doris, you need to stop deleting the people's names you are
responding to - makes it difficult for us mere mortals to follow.
Let me introduce you to Old Man, our resident Christian/Theist
Part Owner and Moderator of this group.
Believe me when I tell you he is almost mummified in your
religion. The difference between OM and someone like our
latest Christian blow-in kbrh500, is that OM concedes there
are things about many of the practitioners of
Christianity that he personally finds abhorrent - like burning
children in Africa because they are believed to be evil witches.
He does not condone or defend them in any way. He is a
little silent on the issue in the forum about these things,
because I think (my opinion) he feels embarrassed that
so-called followers could even think that way, and he
doesn't want to get into dialogue with other Christians on
this forum, thereby bringing down the religion he loves.
Now, that may be a cop-out, or not. That's up to others
to judge, as it is for him.
Say Hi to Old Man!!

>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:00 PM, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dorthy who---who are you talking about...
>

> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:27 PM, OldMan <edjarr...@msn.com> wrote:
>
> >> On Nov 11, 6:18 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On Nov 11, 9:13 pm, OldMan <edjarr...@msn.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > On Nov 11, 4:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > > I think there may be a connection.
>
> >> > > Some of the meanest do also, unfortunately.
>
> >> > Yeah, I guess you're right.  I don't think about them as much.
>
> >> I don't 'like' thinking about them either.  But one should do so
> >> before making the kind of statement you did.
>
> >> I don't personally happen to know any atheists as nice as 'Miss
> >> Dorthy'.  But I suspect that is mostly because I do not personally
> >> know many atheists.  There is nothing inherent in being an atheist or
> >> a theist that will make a person nice or not.  A lot of it is just the
> >> way they are.
>

[philosophy]

On Nov 12, 2:52 pm, Dev <thedevil...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> The massive weight of the evidence you just provided weighs heavily on
> my shoulders.

Nice to see you're back Devil Boy.
Your absence was noticed, and you were missed.
I see your sense of humour has not diminished in any way:-)

[LL]

On Nov 11, 9:42 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No I'm not talking about that at all--why would that come to your mind---who
> I was talking about was several of the christains on these Threads---that
> are with interigty and polite and loving and witty and shines...good
> foundation and usually qoutes the scriptures--and draws instead of pushes
> away...

LL: Yes, I know what you meant, but I only pointed out that believing
in god is no guarantee of anyone being nice. I agree that several of
the Christians on the group are as you say--but there are many
atheists who also have integrity, are polite and loving and witty,
etc. I just don't think there's a connection between believing in god
and and any of those attributes. Good character is the result of many
factors that have nothing to do with belief--and I would wager that
the percentages of all theists and all atheists who have good
character is probably similar.

***********************

>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 9:04 PM, LL <llp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 11, 4:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I think there may be a connection.
>
> > LL: Are you talking about the people who believe in god and bombed the
> > World Trade Center, set off bombs in crowded squares filled with
> > innocent people, and the serviceman at Fort Hood who killed 14 people
> > and injured many others? They were ALL  people who believe/believed in
> > god--the nicest people you know.
>
> > There very well may be a connection, but it's not the connection you
> > are all dewey eyed about.
>
> > ***************
>
> > --
>
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > .

[LL]

On Nov 12, 10:38 am, klytu <jazzyjef...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 8:34 am, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:> It's Latin for:
>
> > "With this, therefore because of this"
>
> > It is the name of the logically fallacy Joe committed by assuming that
> > because two things ("being nice" & "belief in God") are correlated,
> > then there is some sort of causal relationship between them.
>
> Draterman:  On top of that, we can even argue the existence of any
> statistically
> significant correlation.
>
> klytu: Yeah, I was sorta thinking about this as well. In order to show
> any statistical correlation, we could start by figuring out the
> percentage of nice people in the general population, then compare that
> to the percentages of nice people in the theist and atheist
> populations. But niceness can be difficult to quantify, and think an
> anonymous voting system would do. I'd be willing to do an analysis for
> members of this group, but I would need to set up polls where members
> could vote anonymously, and only once each, as to whether they think
> other particular members are nice.

LL: Well, we DO know that as a percentage of the population, more
theists than atheists wind up in prison. We could start there.


*********************************

>
>
>
> > On Nov 11, 11:58 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > what does this mean
>
> > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc.
>
> > > > Learn it.
> > > > Love it.
>
> > > > On Nov 11, 7:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I think there may be a connection.
>
> > > >  --
>
> > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit ­­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > > > .
> > > > For more options, visit this group at

> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.-Hidequoted text -

[Drafterman]

On Nov 12, 6:56 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 12:51 pm, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 12, 12:15 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 12, 8:34 am, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > It's Latin for:
>
> > > > "With this, therefore because of this"
>
> > > > It is the name of the logically fallacy Joe committed by assuming that
> > > > because two things ("being nice" & "belief in God") are correlated,
> > > > then there is some sort of causal relationship between them.
>
> > > I didn't argue that.  I said, "I think" there "may be" a connection.
>
> > > Nice straw man, though.
>
> > Until you present some reason, other than correlation (which itsef
> > only upon your experiences, which you admit you biased toward your
> > conclusion), then it isn't a straw man.
>
> A straw man is to create a position for your opponent that he never
> articulated, and then to argue against that.  So yeah, that is what
> you did.

Except I'm not making an argument. Ergo I'm not creating a straw man.
But nice try. At least you're getting the definitions correct. You
just need to work on correct application.

In any event, to think there is a connection based solely on
correlation (which itself is an illusion created by confirmation bias)
is the cum hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy.

>
>
>
> > > > On top of that, we can even argue the existence of any statistically
> > > > significant correlation.
>
> > > > On Nov 11, 11:58 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > what does this mean
>
> > > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc.
>
> > > > > > Learn it.
> > > > > > Love it.
>
> > > > > > On Nov 11, 7:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > I think there may be a connection.
>
> > > > > >  --
>
> > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > > > > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > > > > > .
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group at

> > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.-Hidequote...-

[Doris Ragland]

Nice to meet you too.  I am not deleting nothing what do you mean...? I sometimes delete    because I get alot...Thank you---

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.

[Doris Ragland]

Ok ....

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.

[Rupert]

On Nov 13, 1:51 pm, LL <llp...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 10:38 am, klytu <jazzyjef...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 12, 8:34 am, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:> It's Latin for:
>
> > > "With this, therefore because of this"
>
> > > It is the name of the logically fallacy Joe committed by assuming that
> > > because two things ("being nice" & "belief in God") are correlated,
> > > then there is some sort of causal relationship between them.
>
> > Draterman:  On top of that, we can even argue the existence of any
> > statistically
> > significant correlation.
>
> > klytu: Yeah, I was sorta thinking about this as well. In order to show
> > any statistical correlation, we could start by figuring out the
> > percentage of nice people in the general population, then compare that
> > to the percentages of nice people in the theist and atheist
> > populations. But niceness can be difficult to quantify, and think an
> > anonymous voting system would do. I'd be willing to do an analysis for
> > members of this group, but I would need to set up polls where members
> > could vote anonymously, and only once each, as to whether they think
> > other particular members are nice.
>
> LL: Well, we DO know that as a percentage of the population, more
> theists than atheists wind up in prison. We could start there.
>
> *********************************
>

You mean, theists are better-represented in prison than in the
population as a whole?

[Rupert]

On Nov 12, 11:59 am, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think there may be a connection.

Have you done some sort of research study to confirm that? My
experience with my family and friends suggests otherwise. I'm sure
that *your* experience with whoever you hang out with confirms your
theory, but you know, you want to have a bit of scientific methodology
behind such claims.

[philosophy]

On Nov 13, 1:00 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nice to meet you too.  I am not deleting nothing what do you mean...? I
> sometimes delete    because I get alot...Thank you---

Okay, what I mean is this;-
When you hit the Reply button to respond, all the text comes up.
Now, all you do is put your mouse over what you are responding to
and click once. The little blinking thing will come up. Type your
response, don't get rid of all the typing around it - or in other
words, don't clean it up. Just hit send.
Look at Drafterman's response to JFG, on the Right hand side of
the page - it says Nov 13, 12.57pm. (well, on mine it does).
You will notice that under Drafterman's name it says
On Nov 12, 6:56 pm JFG <email address> wrote:
You will notice on yours underneath, there is nothing there.
So, when I skim down the posts, I don't know who you are
responding to. The only way I can find out is to hit the
- Show quoted text - link.
I hope you can follow my explanation.
Cheers

> > <atheism-vs-christianity%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianity%252Buns...@googlegroups.com>

[Doris Ragland]

Ok I will do this

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.

[Lawrey]

Doris,

Did you ever hear it said that birds of a feather tend to
stick together.

If you friends are mostly christian what is you conclusion
likely to be?

On Nov 12, 2:55 am, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> True---I agree with this-- I will try not to interupt on such being an
> idoit!!!(at times)
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 6:43 PM, Saint Onan <gigacy...@ozemail.com.au>wrote:

>
>
>
> > On Nov 12, 11:59 am, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I think there may be a connection.
>

> > Yeah. Sheep are so much more pleasant than wolves.

>
> > --
>
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at

> >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.- Hide quoted text -

[Turner Hayes]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 9:51 PM, LL <llp...@aol.com> wrote:

On Nov 12, 10:38 am, klytu <jazzyjef...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 8:34 am, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:> It's Latin for:
>
> > "With this, therefore because of this"
>
> > It is the name of the logically fallacy Joe committed by assuming that
> > because two things ("being nice" & "belief in God") are correlated,
> > then there is some sort of causal relationship between them.
>
> Draterman:  On top of that, we can even argue the existence of any
> statistically
> significant correlation.
>
> klytu: Yeah, I was sorta thinking about this as well. In order to show
> any statistical correlation, we could start by figuring out the
> percentage of nice people in the general population, then compare that
> to the percentages of nice people in the theist and atheist
> populations. But niceness can be difficult to quantify, and think an
> anonymous voting system would do. I'd be willing to do an analysis for
> members of this group, but I would need to set up polls where members
> could vote anonymously, and only once each, as to whether they think
> other particular members are nice.

LL: Well, we DO know that as a percentage of the population, more
theists than atheists wind up in prison. We could start there.

Of course, convicts are not necessarily "not nice"--particularly considering the vast number of people imprisoned for using drugs.
 

*********************************

>
>
>
> > On Nov 11, 11:58 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > what does this mean
>
> > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc.
>
> > > > Learn it.
> > > > Love it.
>
> > > > On Nov 11, 7:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I think there may be a connection.
>
> > > >  --
>
> > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit ­­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > > > .
> > > > For more options, visit this group at

> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.-Hidequoted text -

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

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.

[thea]

On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 9:00 AM, Turner Hayes <lordla...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 9:51 PM, LL <llp...@aol.com> wrote:

On Nov 12, 10:38 am, klytu <jazzyjef...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 8:34 am, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:> It's Latin for:
>
> > "With this, therefore because of this"
>
> > It is the name of the logically fallacy Joe committed by assuming that
> > because two things ("being nice" & "belief in God") are correlated,
> > then there is some sort of causal relationship between them.
>
> Draterman:  On top of that, we can even argue the existence of any
> statistically
> significant correlation.
>
> klytu: Yeah, I was sorta thinking about this as well. In order to show
> any statistical correlation, we could start by figuring out the
> percentage of nice people in the general population, then compare that
> to the percentages of nice people in the theist and atheist
> populations. But niceness can be difficult to quantify, and think an
> anonymous voting system would do. I'd be willing to do an analysis for
> members of this group, but I would need to set up polls where members
> could vote anonymously, and only once each, as to whether they think
> other particular members are nice.

LL: Well, we DO know that as a percentage of the population, more
theists than atheists wind up in prison. We could start there.

Of course, convicts are not necessarily "not nice"--particularly considering the vast number of people imprisoned for using drugs.
 

 

 

Agreed.

In fact in reading the Bible, I see St. Paul in the Philippian Jail - and oh what a night that must have been.

He received 39 strips, his back is bleeding, and then he is sitting in a stinking hole with stocks on feet and still he is signing praises to His God -- who because he asks, he receives an answer of being released from Jail -- and the Jailer's house gets saved.

What has happened to Christianity that there is now *no power* to have miracles like this happen?

I still see men *saved* in jail and jail being *more religious* than the outside church.  And when they get out of jail they really get upset with the *church* which doesn't have any resemblance to what they experienced in jail.

[Doris Ragland]

Christain--some are scared--I think--as I said you cannot put everything in one basket---and their is a purpose for all things...Why did the Jewish chruch pick Barabais--which was a murder over Jesus?  If you have your eyes on Man and not God--and put your trust on Man--Man breathes out of his Nostrails--God is the one that gave man breath---If a preacher fails and his chruch--and everybody had their faith and eyes upon this preacher---than what--how many would go down with him ---but if you have your heart and mind and soul upon God--a personal relationship with him how would that hender you? 

[Doris Ragland]

We had a few examples on this --In past----Jim Jones- Waco-and others in a smaller scale---you cannot blame christians that don't want to be their or serve in this work---blame,blame,blame, causes great harm--but to forgive the ones that don't understand or is not their part in the body of Christ---and understanding on both sides go along ways--what is one of the greatest weapons of Satan--(rejection) and if a person is rejected where will they go--they will be more likely to go where they will be accepted--and sometimes those places are not of God--but Satan world--and raveing wolves are there always waiting--at the door...

[thea]

On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:

Christain--some are scared--I think--as I said you cannot put everything in one basket---and their is a purpose for all things...Why did the Jewish chruch pick Barabais--which was a murder over Jesus?  If you have your eyes on Man and not God--and put your trust on Man--Man breathes out of his Nostrails--God is the one that gave man breath---If a preacher fails and his chruch--and everybody had their faith and eyes upon this preacher---than what--how many would go down with him ---but if you have your heart and mind and soul upon God--a personal relationship with him how would that hender you? 

 

It doesn't, but I have worked with several ex-cons who are strugling because they want a church that will accept them for who they are in Christ Jesus, and not hold them up as sinners all lthe time.

We expect the world to make them pay for their sins, over and over again, but we do not expect the church to make them always be sinners -- worse than *they are* (other Christians).

It seems that this *ego* trip that some Christian ministers are on - completely negates the power of the *Saving Power of our Lord Jesus Christ.*

 

God accepted St. Paul just like he was.  A murdering oh-ho-ho, who went about putting Christians in jail until the scene on the Damascus Road, where he saw the vision of Jesus and was asked *Why persecute me?*

 

As a Christian, I do not look at a person for what they have done -- I look for the Spirit or Witness of the Holy Spirit in their life.  That way, I can accept a person as a Child of the Living God, without making reference to *who we are, what we are, where've we been, or where we think we are going* and know that we are all going to Heaven the same way.

The Blood of Jesus is free for all.

[ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com]

On Nov 13, 10:40 am, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Christain--some are scared--I think--as I said you cannot put everything in
> one basket---and their is a purpose for all things...Why did the Jewish
> chruch pick Barabais--which was a murder over Jesus?

It was Bar Abbas, not Barabais. How did this criminal in the story
just happen to have a name meaning "Son of the Father"? ... and how
did just so happen that some gospel manuscripts called him Jesus Bar
Abbas?

several Greek manuscripts of Matthew's Gospel have Iēsous Barabbas,
"Jesus Barabbas" - which is believed by a number of scholars to be
more likely the original reading, with Iēsous being deleted either
accidentally or on purpose
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?p=5829419

[thea]

On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:

We had a few examples on this --In past----Jim Jones- Waco-and others in a smaller scale---you cannot blame christians that don't want to be their or serve in this work---blame,blame,blame, causes great harm--but to forgive the ones that don't understand or is not their part in the body of Christ---and understanding on both sides go along ways--what is one of the greatest weapons of Satan--(rejection) and if a person is rejected where will they go--they will be more likely to go where they will be accepted--and sometimes those places are not of God--but Satan world--and raveing wolves are there always waiting--at the door...

 

 

This is why, to me, it is so important to be able to do like St. Paul did when he made the statement in 2 Thessalonians 1:12:

That....*Jesus Christ may be glorified in you, and ye in him.*

This is the tangible evidence of the Witness of the Holy Spirit which St. Paul is referring to.

And, when the supposed Christian's around us do not have this witness -- they are really *none of His*.

I listened to an older couple talk years ago, about how in the mornings they would praise the Lord and *test the Spirit* to make sure they still had the Witness in their lives.

[thea]

Thank you for the information.

[Doris Ragland]

Interesting---but they had him in Jail and had him as a murder---even Barabbas got on his knees--knowing he was not worthy that he knew he was chosen over someone that did nothing..

[Doris Ragland]

I can be traveling all over the place and walk into a store and walk up to the counter and the working at the cash register spririt bears wittness ---where the spririt is there is liberty...

[LL]

LL: Yes, there have been several surveys that show this.


1997 Federal Bureau of Prisons Statistics
1997, Federal Bureau of Prisons, 0.21% of inmates were atheist[7]
The Federal Bureau of Prisons does have statistics on religious
affiliations of inmates. The following are total number of inmates per
religion category:[8]
Catholic 29267 39.164%
Protestant 26162 35.008%
Muslim 5435 7.273%
American Indian 2408 3.222%
Nation 1734 2.320%
Rasta 1485 1.987%
Jewish 1325 1.773%
Church of Christ 1303 1.744%
Pentecostal 1093 1.463%
Moorish 1066 1.426%
Buddhist 882 1.180%
Jehovah Witness 665 0.890%
Adventist 621 0.831%
Orthodox 375 0.502%
Mormon 298 0.399%
Scientology 190 0.254%
Atheist 156 0.209%
Hindu 119 0.159%
Santeria 117 0.157%
Sikh 14 0.019%
Bahai 9 0.012%
Krishna 7 0.009%

LL: Atheists make up more than 10% of the population.


The article adds:


"In "The New Criminology", Max D. Schlapp and Edward E. Smith say that
two generations of statisticians found that the ratio of convicts
without religious training is about 1/10 of 1%. W. T. Root, professor
of psychology at the Univ. of Pittsburgh, examined 1,916 prisoners and
said "Indifference to religion, due to thought, strengthens
character," adding that Unitarians, Agnostics, Atheists and Free-
Thinkers are absent from penitentiariers or nearly so.[9]"

These statistics can be viewed here:

http://freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Percentage_of_atheists

[LL]

"Confirmation bias

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Confirmation bias (or myside bias[1]) is a tendency to search for,
interpret or remember information in a way that confirms
preconceptions or working hypotheses. People can reinforce their
existing attitudes by selectively collecting new evidence, by
interpreting evidence in a biased way or by selectively recalling
information from memory.[2] Some psychologists use "confirmation bias"
for any of these three cognitive biases, while others restrict the
term to selective collection of evidence, using assimilation bias for
biased interpretation.[3]
In many situations, people avoid confirmation bias and test hypotheses
in a genuinely informative way.[2] The biases appear in particular for
issues that are emotionally significant (including some personal and
political topics) and for established beliefs which shape the
individual's expectations.[2][4] Biased search, interpretation and/or
recall have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a
disagreement becomes more extreme as the different parties are exposed
to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs remain after
the evidence for them is taken away)[5], the irrational primacy effect
(a stronger weighting for data encountered early in an arbitrary
series)[6] and illusory correlation (in which people falsely perceive
an association between two events).
Confirmation biases are errors in information processing, as opposed
to the behavioral confirmation effect (also called self-fulfilling
prophecy), in which people's expectations influence their own behavior.
[7] They can lead to disastrous decisions, especially in
organizational, military and political contexts.[8][9] Confirmation
biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs.[10]"

[LL]

LL: That's true, but we're talking about percentages here. I have no
doubt that most people in prison are "not nice." (If they were "nice"
when they went in, they are probably "not nice" after they've been
there for a while.") Anyway, I suggested only that he start his
investigation there.

********************

****************

>
>
>
>
>
> > *********************************
>
> > > > On Nov 11, 11:58 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > what does this mean
>
> > > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc.
>
> > > > > > Learn it.
> > > > > > Love it.
>
> > > > > > On Nov 11, 7:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > I think there may be a connection.
>
> > > > > >  --
>
> > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > Groups
> > > > > > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > > > > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> > > > > > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com><atheism-vs-christianit
> > ­­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com <y%252Buns...@googlegroups.com>>

> > > > > > .
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
>

> >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.-Hidequote...-

>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > --
>
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

[William T. Goat]

On Nov 11, 7:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think there may be a connection.

The meanest people happen to believe that everyone deserves eternal
damnation.

I think there may be a connection.

--Billy

[klytu]

klytu: Thanks for the information. I agree that this is good
background for what I was thinking about.

[Lawrey]

Doris,

What did you buy at the cash register? A Bottle of Vodka!

> >>> On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 7:29 AM, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >>>>>> > > > > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com><atheism-vs-christianit
> >>>>>> ­­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com<y%252Buns...@googlegroups.com>

>
> >>>>>> > > > > .
> >>>>>> > > > > For more options, visit this group at
>

> >>>>>>http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.-Hidequote...-

>
> >>>>>> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> >>>>>> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> >>>>>> --
>
> >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >>>>>> Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to
> >>>>>> atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> >>>>>> atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> >>>>>> .
> >>>>>> For more options, visit this group at

> >>>>>>http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.
>
> >>>>>  --
> >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >>>>> Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> >>>>> To post to this group, send email to
> >>>>> atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> >>>>> atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> >>>>> .
> >>>>> For more options, visit this group at

> >>>>>http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.
>
> >>>>  --
> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >>>> Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> >>>> To post to this group, send email to
> >>>> atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> >>>> atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> >>>> .
> >>>> For more options, visit this group at

> >>>>http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.
>
> >>  --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> >> "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> >> To post to this group, send email to
> >> atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> >> atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> >> .
> >> For more options, visit this group at

> >>http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.
>
> >  --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at

> >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.- Hide quoted text -

[Doris Ragland]

You then again accuse or try to direct a person life into a image of falsehood...I hope you don't do this with many people..Because you  could do great harm....and try to discredit--then again I could just do this---laugh ha ha ha----buy the way at the time I was at that counter I needed it at the time--  ---Since the person at the counter and our lives was on the line---so  people like you are useing your mouth as a weapon as a vemous snake--and have no idea what your talking about---perfect images of oneself are not so perfect are they---your glory is showing....or not---God Bless you too.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.

[Rupert]

Indeed.

[JFG]

On Nov 12, 9:57 pm, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 6:56 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 12, 12:51 pm, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> > > On Nov 12, 12:15 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Nov 12, 8:34 am, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > It's Latin for:
>
> > > > > "With this, therefore because of this"
>
> > > > > It is the name of the logically fallacy Joe committed by assuming that
> > > > > because two things ("being nice" & "belief in God") are correlated,
> > > > > then there is some sort of causal relationship between them.
>

> > > > I didn't argue that.  I said, "I think" there "may be" a connection.
>
> > > > Nice straw man, though.
>
> > > Until you present some reason, other than correlation (which itsef
> > > only upon your experiences, which you admit you biased toward your
> > > conclusion), then it isn't a straw man.
>
> > A straw man is to create a position for your opponent that he never
> > articulated, and then to argue against that.  So yeah, that is what
> > you did.
>
> Except I'm not making an argument. Ergo I'm not creating a straw man.
> But nice try. At least you're getting the definitions correct. You
> just need to work on correct application.
>
> In any event, to think there is a connection based solely on
> correlation (which itself is an illusion created by confirmation bias)
> is the cum hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy.
>

Ah. Except that, that isn't why I believe there is a connection. I
believe there is a connection because I believe the practice of the
true religion works, and if that is the case, then there ought to be a
connection. My observations merely confirm this. So if you are
arguing, above, that I think there is a connection based solely on
correlation, that would be your straw man.

> > > > > On top of that, we can even argue the existence of any statistically
> > > > > significant correlation.
>

> > > > > On Nov 11, 11:58 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > what does this mean
>
> > > > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:05 PM, Drafterman <drafter...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Cum hoc, ergo propter hoc.
>
> > > > > > > Learn it.
> > > > > > > Love it.
>

> > > > > > > On Nov 11, 7:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > I think there may be a connection.
>

> > > > > > >  --
>
> > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > > > > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > > > > > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > > > > > > .
> > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at

> > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.-Hidequote...

[Doris Ragland]

Indeed what ..

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.

[Drafterman]

Which only swaps out "cum hoc ergo propter hoc" for "affirming the
consequent" which is still based upon your admitted confirmation bias.

How does this improve the situation?

 So if you are
> arguing, above, that I think there is a connection based solely on
> correlation, that would be your straw man.

I already said that I'm not making an argument, I'm just pointing out
what fallacies you are making. Even if I'm incorrect, that just means
I'm wrong, not that I'm constructing a straw man. A straw man would be
me misrepresenting your situation and then claiming that you're wrong
because of that misrepresentation.

[Rupert]

On Nov 15, 2:09 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Indeed what ..
>

As I understand LL, she was making the observation that observations
such as "religious people tend to be nicer", or "atheists tend to be
nicer", made on the basis of personal experience, generally tend to be
examples of confirmation bias, and that in order to form a reliable
view about the matter one must look to studies which use some sort of
scientific methodology, taking care to ensure that bias is eliminated.
I was concurring with her on this point.

HTH.

[Rupert]

You made an empirical claim and you are proposing a possible
explanation.

First of all, you haven't yet provided any especially good reason to
think that the empirical claim is true. It remains unconfirmed, and
some evidence has been offered in this thread which would tend to
undermine it.

Now you are saying that there is an explanation involving the alleged
fact that "the practice of the true religion works." Well, the
question arises, "works" in what sense. I have no particularly good
reason to think that it doesn't work for you, whatever that is
supposed to mean. You would probably have more insight into that
matter than I. But *in what sense* do you claim that "the practice of
the true religion works" for most people and what *evidence* can you
offer in support of this contention? You've formed an *impression*
based on your own personal experience that this is the case. Well,
I've formed an *impression* based on personal experience that people
are generally better off without religion but obviously I shouldn't
claim that this *impression* carries any particular evidential weight.
See LL's remarks about confirmation bias. It takes a lot more than
that to make a good case for such claims.

The bottom line is, you've made some assertions with no particular
grounding in any especially good evidence.

[Rupert]

For example, Edward Feser, whom I formerly thought of as some kind of
serious thinker, made the remark in an essay that *everyone knows*
that there is a strong case to be made for a stringent conservative
sexual morality on the basis of social goods, and that when someone
asks someone to produce evidence that pornography causes more social
harm than religious literature that this is absurd. Presumably this
means that it is silly to suggest that we can't form reliable opinions
about such matters without doing careful analysis of the nature of
social harm and careful empirical homework.

That he expresses such views, and even claims that they are obvious,
leads me to revise my former evaluation of him as a serious thinker.
(Sorry, Alan Wostenberg, but I will finish reading that book of his
which I bought at your suggestion.)

[Lawrey]

Doris,

You were meant to laugh. It was in no way intended to offend.
If it did I am truly sorry, please acept my profuse appologies.
It was an "Off-the-cuff" response.

> > <atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com<y%252Bunsubscribe@­googlegroups.com>
> > ><atheism-vs-christianit
> > > >>>>>> ­­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com<y%252Buns...@googlegroups.com>
> > <y%252Buns...@googlegroups.com <y%25252Bun...@googlegroups.com>

>
> > > >>>>>> > > > > .
> > > >>>>>> > > > > For more options, visit this group at
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.-Hidequote...
>

> > > >>>>>> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > >>>>>> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > >>>>>> --
>
> > > >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > >>>>>> Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > > >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to
> > > >>>>>> atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > > >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> >  > >>>>>> atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

> > <atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com<y%252Bunsubscribe@­googlegroups.com>

>
> > > >>>>>> .
> > > >>>>>> For more options, visit this group at
> > > >>>>>>http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.
>
> > > >>>>>  --
> > > >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > >>>>> Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > > >>>>> To post to this group, send email to
> > > >>>>> atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > > >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > >>>>> atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

> > <atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com<y%252Bunsubscribe@­googlegroups.com>

>
> > > >>>>> .
> > > >>>>> For more options, visit this group at
> > > >>>>>http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.
>
> > > >>>>  --
> > > >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > >>>> Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > > >>>> To post to this group, send email to
> > > >>>> atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > > >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > >>>> atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

> > <atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com<y%252Bunsubscribe@­googlegroups.com>

>
> > > >>>> .
> > > >>>> For more options, visit this group at
> > > >>>>http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.
>
> > > >>  --
> > > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>

> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -

[ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com]

On Nov 14, 10:06 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I believe there is a connection because I believe the practice of the
> true religion works,

What is true religion?

> and if that is the case, then there ought to be a
> connection.  My observations merely confirm this.

If that were the case, one would be able to determine which religion
is true by measuring the niceness of adherents of various religions
and it would be possible for two mutually contradictory religions to
both be true by virtue of the metric that their followers are equally
nice.

[Saint Onan]

On Nov 15, 11:02 pm, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"

<ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Nov 14, 10:06 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I believe there is a connection because I believe the practice of the
> > true religion works,
>
> What is true religion?
>
> > and if that is the case, then there ought to be a
> > connection. My observations merely confirm this.
>
> If that were the case, one would be able to determine which religion
> is true by measuring the niceness of adherents of various religions
> and it would be possible for two mutually contradictory religions to
> both be true by virtue of the metric that their followers are equally
> nice.

Buddhism declared the WINNAH!

[Trance Gemini]

And frankly, Catholicism would end up on the bottom of this dung heap, given both their history, and the behavior of way too many of their adherents.

I don't really consider it "nice" for priests to rape little children and then for other priests (under the Instruction of the Church/Vatican/Pope or whatever or whoever issues "Instructions") to hide the rapist priests in the chancery and cover up their crimes under threat of excommunication.

Nor do I consider it "nice" for Catholics to harass, vilify and attempt to discredit those who disagree with them (Donohue).

And the list goes on.....
 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.

--
High Priestess of Ribbonology
God Is A Ribbon!
All Hail The Great Ribbon In The Sky
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/15oct_ibex.htm?list1303103

[Trance Gemini]

On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 9:07 AM, semi <semino...@gmail.com> wrote:

OldMan also knows that those so called Christian practices are not
Christian practices.

Can you Christians tell that to the Christians in Africa who are doing this please?

I think the children who are being abused, tortured and murdered in the name of Christianity might appreciate that.

I know someone mentioned that one agency was starting to do this but frankly a lot more needs to be done.

On Nov 12, 8:46 pm, philosophy <smwil...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 2:05 pm, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I believe in God how about you ??and I think the nicest christain I ever met
> > probably one you would never geuss is...
>
> Doris, you need to stop deleting the people's names you are
> responding to - makes it difficult for us mere mortals to follow.
> Let me introduce you to Old Man, our resident Christian/Theist
> Part Owner and Moderator of this group.
> Believe me when I tell you he is almost mummified in your
> religion.  The difference between OM and someone like our
> latest Christian blow-in kbrh500, is that OM concedes there
> are things about many of the practitioners of
> Christianity that he personally finds abhorrent - like burning
> children in Africa because they are believed to be evil witches.
> He does not condone or defend them in any way. He is a
> little silent on the issue in the forum about these things,
> because I think (my opinion) he feels embarrassed that
> so-called followers could even think that way, and he
> doesn't want to get into dialogue with other Christians on
> this forum, thereby bringing down the religion he loves.
> Now, that may be a cop-out, or not. That's up to others
> to judge, as it is for him.
> Say Hi to Old Man!!
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:00 PM, Doris Ragland <dr4...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Dorthy who---who are you talking about...
>
> > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:27 PM, OldMan <edjarr...@msn.com> wrote:
>
> > >> On Nov 11, 6:18 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > On Nov 11, 9:13 pm, OldMan <edjarr...@msn.com> wrote:

>
> > >> > > On Nov 11, 4:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > > > I think there may be a connection.
>

> > >> > > Some of the meanest do also, unfortunately.
>
> > >> > Yeah, I guess you're right.  I don't think about them as much.
>
> > >> I don't 'like' thinking about them either.  But one should do so
> > >> before making the kind of statement you did.
>
> > >> I don't personally happen to know any atheists as nice as 'Miss
> > >> Dorthy'.  But I suspect that is mostly because I do not personally
> > >> know many atheists.  There is nothing inherent in being an atheist or
> > >> a theist that will make a person nice or not.  A lot of it is just the
> > >> way they are.

>
> > >> --
>
> > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > >> "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > >> To post to this group, send email to
> > >> atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> > >> atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

> > >> .
> > >> For more options, visit this group at
> > >>http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.

[mdb]

>The insanity of some theists knows no bounds.

Trance Gemini,
Do you think that theists concoct arguments like these out of a false
humility? I am a theist, but I prefer to look at individuals as much
as possible without trying to discern whether they are "nice" or
"mean." I like to get to know someone before placing such a label
upon them. I think people are nice and people are mean.

I want to apologize on behalf of my camp since these kinds of
judgments are not profitable in this forum.

On Nov 12, 4:32 am, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:04 AM, LL <llp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 11, 4:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I think there may be a connection.
>

> > LL: Are you talking about the people who believe in god and bombed the
> > World Trade Center, set off bombs in crowded squares filled with
> > innocent people, and the serviceman at Fort Hood who killed 14 people
> > and injured many others? They were ALL  people who believe/believed in
> > god--the nicest people you know.
>
> > There very well may be a connection, but it's not the connection you
> > are all dewey eyed about.
>
> Yet another theist Troll posted for no other purpose than to insult and
> provoke atheists into an abuse fest.
>
> This is reminiscent of XNun's ugly strategy. Joe aka JFG aka Thelemic
> Catholic must be taking cult abuse lessons from her.
>
> And then theists wonder why we're rude to them.
>
> <rolls eyes>
>
> The insanity of some theists knows no bounds.
>
>
>
>
>
> > ***************

>
> > --
>
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.
>
> --

[Trance Gemini]

On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 11:24 AM, mdb <michae...@gmail.com> wrote:

>The insanity of some theists knows no bounds.

Trance Gemini,
Do you think that theists concoct arguments like these out of a false
humility?

Some do. Joe is one who does this sort of thing quite regularly.
 

 I am a theist, but I prefer to look at individuals as much
as possible without trying to discern whether they are "nice" or
"mean."

Niceness and meanness are relative.
 

 I like to get to know someone before placing such a label
upon them.  I think people are nice and people are mean.

Exactly.
 

I want to apologize on behalf of my camp since these kinds of
judgments are not profitable in this forum.

Thank you MDB, the thought is appreciated but you are not the one who owes us an apology. Joe is.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=.

[Neil Kelsey]

On Nov 16, 8:24 am, mdb <michaeldb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >The insanity of some theists knows no bounds.
>
> Trance Gemini,
> Do you think that theists concoct arguments like these out of a false
> humility?  I am a theist, but I prefer to look at individuals as much
> as possible without trying to discern whether they are "nice" or
> "mean."  I like to get to know someone before placing such a label
> upon them.

Ummm...we've gotten to know "JFG" quite well. If by "false humility"
you mean "Narcissistic Personality Disorder," then yes, in my opinion
(at least) theists concoct arguments like these out of a false
humility.

>  I think people are nice and people are mean.

And for some people their religious beliefs are just a vehicle for
their psychological problems.

> I want to apologize on behalf of my camp since these kinds of
> judgments are not profitable in this forum.

No apology necessary for me at least, but thanks. I feel sorry for
those stricken with mental illnesses and personality disorders, but am
adamant that they need to be challenged when inflicting their insane
worldview on sane people, since some sane people are gullible.

> > All Hail The Great Ribbon In The Skyhttp://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/15oct_ibex.htm?list1303103- Hide quoted text -

[philosophy]

On Nov 17, 2:24 am, mdb <michaeldb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >The insanity of some theists knows no bounds.
>
> Trance Gemini,
> Do you think that theists concoct arguments like these out of a false
> humility?  I am a theist, but I prefer to look at individuals as much
> as possible without trying to discern whether they are "nice" or
> "mean."  I like to get to know someone before placing such a label
> upon them.  I think people are nice and people are mean.
>
> I want to apologize on behalf of my camp since these kinds of
> judgments are not profitable in this forum.

That's a nice thought, but you shouldn't have to take responsibility
for others actions. The intent is appreciated.

[mdb]

> No apology necessary for me at least, but thanks. I feel sorry for
> those stricken with mental illnesses and personality disorders, but am
> adamant that they need to be challenged when inflicting their insane
> worldview on sane people, since some sane people are gullible.

Certainly, you wouldn't accuse all theists of mental illness or
gullibility would you? That is rich if you are.

> > > All Hail The Great Ribbon In The Skyhttp://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/15oct_ibex.htm?list1303103-Hide quoted text -

[mdb]

> That's a nice thought, but you shouldn't have to take responsibility
> for others actions. The intent is appreciated.

As a newbie to the group, I just wanted you to know a theist
personally who is not preoccupied with categorizing people by such
general terms.

[philosophy]

On Nov 17, 7:43 am, mdb <michaeldb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > That's a nice thought, but you shouldn't have to take responsibility
> > for others actions.  The intent is appreciated.
>
> As a newbie to the group, I just wanted you to know a theist
> personally who is not preoccupied with categorizing people by such
> general terms.

Well, that's fair enough. Probably the only one who comes close
is Old Man. Have a look at some of his postings. He is the more
respected theist on this site by some atheists, because he does
appear to try.

[Neil Kelsey]

On Nov 16, 1:41 pm, mdb <michaeldb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > No apology necessary for me at least, but thanks. I feel sorry for
> > those stricken with mental illnesses and personality disorders, but am
> > adamant that they need to be challenged when inflicting their insane
> > worldview on sane people, since some sane people are gullible.
>
> Certainly, you wouldn't accuse all theists of mental illness or
> gullibility would you?

No. The vast majority of theists are simply the victims of childhood
indoctrination. Children can't really be considered to be gullible
since they are too young to have had the chance to develop any
defences against being indoctrinated. Naive is a better word.

>  That is rich if you are.

Well then you have nothing to worry about.

> > > > All Hail The Great Ribbon In The Skyhttp://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/15oct_ibex.htm?list1303103-Hidequoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[JFG]

On Nov 12, 8:14 pm, OldMan <edjarr...@msn.com> wrote:
> On Nov 12, 9:13 am, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> > On Nov 11, 10:27 pm, OldMan <edjarr...@msn.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 11, 6:18 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

> > > > On Nov 11, 9:13 pm, OldMan <edjarr...@msn.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Nov 11, 4:59 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I think there may be a connection.
>

> > > > > Some of the meanest do also, unfortunately.
>
> > > > Yeah, I guess you're right.  I don't think about them as much.
>
> > > I don't 'like' thinking about them either.  But one should do so
> > > before making the kind of statement you did.
>
> > > I don't personally happen to know any atheists as nice as 'Miss
> > > Dorthy'.  But I suspect that is mostly because I do not personally
> > > know many atheists.  There is nothing inherent in being an atheist or
> > > a theist that will make a person nice or not.  A lot of it is just the
> > > way they are.
>

> > Your observations notwithstanding, I actually do notice that, on the
> > average, the people I know who believe in God are genuinely nicer
> > folks than the people who do not.  And I do know a few atheists.  Two
> > come to my mind as friends that I know pretty well, and although I
> > don't think they are mean people, they tend not to be as warm as many
> > I know who believe in God in one way or another.  They tend, in
> > certain areas at least, towards a skepticism that crosses over the
> > line to cynicism.
>
> > I think there are several things about faith that will tend to make a
> > person nicer.  First, just the idea that life has inherent meaning
> > beyond just a few short years in the sun and then permanent death.
> > Secondly, for those who have an actual relationship with God, they
> > have contact with pure, authentic love, which has a very definite
> > effect on them.  And third, the kind of people who believe in God are
> > exactly the kind of people who are capable of believing in God, i.e.
> > they acknowledge that there is more to reality than meets their eyes,
> > they are open to possibilities they have not yet experienced, and they
> > acknowledge that their own understanding of the world is not and will
> > never be supreme.  Many atheists, it seems to me, tend to overrate
> > human knowledge, human cleverness, and other related things that lead,
> > not to humility, but to pride.  Pride is at the top of the list of
> > capital vices because it specifically enhances separation rather than
> > love.
>
> > Those individuals who use their religion as an excuse to be mean are
> > the exception rather than the rule.  I don't deny they exist, but I
> > don't know very many of them.  I do observe that the friends I can get
> > really close to, those who are capable of profound intimacy, tend also
> > to love God.  Capacity for profound intimacy seems to be higher on
> > their priority list than those who do not love God.
>
> No question that I get closer to believers than unbelivers.  But that
> is because of what we share in common rather than because they are
> nicer.

I acknowledge that I may have a prejudice here. But I still stick by
my initial statement. I might be wrong, but I don't think I am.

[JFG]

A theory enables a prediction, and observation confirms the
prediction, which in turn confirms the theory. How is this any
different from the physical sciences?

>   So if you are
>
> > arguing, above, that I think there is a connection based solely on
> > correlation, that would be your straw man.
>
> I already said that I'm not making an argument, I'm just pointing out
> what fallacies you are making. Even if I'm incorrect, that just means
> I'm wrong, not that I'm constructing a straw man. A straw man would be
> me misrepresenting your situation and then claiming that you're wrong
> because of that misrepresentation.
>

Ok.

[JFG]

Religion is supposed to make sinners into saints, and in the Catholic
Church we have myriads of canonized Saints who have used it to do just
that. So the lives of the Saints, by themselves, confirm the good of
Catholicism. My own personal observations are just icing on the cake.

[JFG]

On Nov 15, 7:02 am, "ranjit_math...@yahoo.com"

<ranjit_math...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Nov 14, 10:06 pm, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I believe there is a connection because I believe the practice of the
> > true religion works,
>
> What is true religion?
>

Roman Catholicism.

> > and if that is the case, then there ought to be a
> > connection.  My observations merely confirm this.
>
> If that were the case, one would be able to determine which religion
> is true by measuring the niceness of adherents of various religions
> and it would be possible for two mutually contradictory religions to
> both be true by virtue of the metric that their followers are equally
> nice.

I would go so far as to assert that the Catholic Saints are the nicest
of all, hands down.

[JFG]

On Nov 12, 12:37 pm, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:17 PM, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Unfortunately for the entireity of atheist arguments, Trance, you are
> > one of the meanest.  You are kind of a case in point here.
>
> And this is where Joe's delusions reign supreme.
>
> 1. I wasn't the one starting 10+ threads abusing me for disagreeing with
> Joe.
> 2. I wasn't the one who started this Troll for the sole purpose of insulting
> atheists and starting an abuse-fest.
>
> Gee that was Joe.
>
> And who's the mean one?
>
> No need to respond to any of my posts Joe. That question was rhetorical and
> my comments are directed to the nice people on this site (both atheist and
> theist) and not you.
>

It's ok, Trance, I will reply to you anyway. I have nothing in
particular against you, though I could. I actually still hope that
one day, you'll discover what nice means.

> <snipped>

[JFG]

The problem is that niceness is kind of a subjective assessment,
wouldn't you agree?

On Nov 13, 12:20 am, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Nov 12, 11:59 am, JFG <thelemiccatho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I think there may be a connection.
>

[JFG]

On Nov 12, 4:28 pm, philosophy <smwil...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
> "The nicest people happen to believe in God" -
> Where are they?  I haven't met many.  What I have
> seen is that once you scratch the surface of their
> personalities they find it very hard to adjust to life.
>

Yeah, maybe I'm an exception to that rule. I think anyone who takes
it seriously will find in it the means of improving their approach to
the maze.