It's sad to see someone so full of hate and ignorance. I'm just glad people like you (filthy, evil atheists) make up such a small percentage of the world population (I believe it's around 2%, which is 2% too much...

[TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist Christianity ]]

I. Just thinking about the pain and evil people like you have brought
to the world, it brings tears to my eyes. I'll be praying that once
you are a grown-up, you'll leave these childish delusions of yours
behind, and come to accept the awesome love of our vengeful God.

[showmethehoney]

"awesome love of a vengeful God"??? vengeful and loving do not seem
like words that go together very well. seems like one hand would be
slapping your face while the other one would be patting you on the
head. one of the two would certainly not be an ingredient in my life
salad.

and please dont forget how some xtians slaughtered those who did not
follow their religion. your head is in a biased cloud my friend. wake
up!

On Dec 9, 8:44 am, "TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist

[George Chalkin]

A true atheist brings no pain or evil to the world--only good, because
enlightenment brings freedom to the mind from religion, and atheists
promote enlightenment. It is the religious atheists that give the true
atheist the bad name. A true atheist is content merely to be amused at
the endless variety of stupidity in religious behavior, and then
comment on it.

The religious are an endless source of amusement, and worthy of our
ridicule. And wouldn't you know, identifying irony such as your silly
hypocrisy is an exercise in intelligence and not only a demonstration
of the benefits of atheism, but also as a good example of right
living.

The percentage of true atheists is probably less than 2%. And the
religious atheist is correctly labeled evil for obvious reasons, but
your indiscriminate lack of good judgement has erroneously lumped the
non-religious into the religious.

I think it's actually quite amusing to see hateful ingnorant people
like yourself, taking your own ignorance so seriously--an endless
source of amusement, and sometimes hilarious. Keep up the "good fight"
there True Christian.

On Dec 9, 5:44 am, "TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist

[Trance Gemini]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 11:35 AM, George Chalkin <george...@live.com> wrote:

> I. Just thinking about the pain and evil people like you have brought
> to the world, it brings tears to my eyes. I'll be praying that once
> you are a grown-up, you'll leave these childish delusions of yours
> behind, and come to accept the awesome love of our vengeful God.
>

A true atheist brings no pain or evil to the world--only good, because
enlightenment brings freedom to the mind from religion, and atheists
promote enlightenment. It is the religious atheists that give the true
atheist the bad name. A true atheist is content merely to be amused at
the endless variety of stupidity in religious behavior, and then
comment on it.

Hey George,

Welcome to AvC and nice post :-).

Just a heads up for you. Some of us suspect TC of being a Poe.

We might be wrong but then again ....
 

The religious are an endless source of amusement, and worthy of our
ridicule. And wouldn't you know, identifying irony such as your silly
hypocrisy is an exercise in intelligence and not only a demonstration
of the benefits of atheism, but also as a good example of right
living.

The percentage of true atheists is probably less than 2%. And the
religious atheist is correctly labeled evil for obvious reasons, but
your indiscriminate lack of good judgement has erroneously lumped the
non-religious into the religious.

I think it's actually quite amusing to see hateful ingnorant people
like yourself, taking your own ignorance so seriously--an endless
source of amusement, and sometimes hilarious. Keep up the "good fight"
there True Christian.

On Dec 9, 5:44 am, "TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist
Christianity ]" <X...@OPERAMAIL.COM> wrote:

> I. Just thinking about the pain and evil people like you have brought
> to the world, it brings tears to my eyes. I'll be praying that once
> you are a grown-up, you'll leave these childish delusions of yours
> behind, and come to accept the awesome love of our vengeful God.

--

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=en.

--
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

[George Chalkin]

> Just a heads up for you. Some of us suspect TC of being a Poe.
>

Trance, thanks for the complement. I think I was Poe in one of my
other lives!
>
On Dec 9, 8:40 am, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > 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=en.
>
> --
> 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 -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[dali_70]

On Dec 9, 11:35 am, George Chalkin <georgechal...@live.com> wrote:

>It is the religious atheists that give the true atheist the bad name.

What do you mean by a religious atheist? Can you give an example.
Thanks :)

[George Chalkin]

> >It is the religious atheists that give the true atheist the bad name.
>
> What do you mean by a religious atheist? Can you give an example.
> Thanks :)
>

Two perfect examples: Stalin and Mao. Two of the biggest monsters
humanity has ever known.

[thea]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:35 AM, George Chalkin <george...@live.com> wrote:

> I. Just thinking about the pain and evil people like you have brought
> to the world, it brings tears to my eyes. I'll be praying that once
> you are a grown-up, you'll leave these childish delusions of yours
> behind, and come to accept the awesome love of our vengeful God.
>

A true atheist brings no pain or evil to the world--only good

 

 

Nope -- the atheist I know in person are not *good people* - have no good in them and will never have.

I don't think atheism equates with *being good* -- nope - does not work thataway.

 

In order to be *good* you have to have something outside of yourself that you believe in.  And since atheism believes in nothing - then the nothing of *good* is being described and there is no such thing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

--

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.

[Trance Gemini]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:36 PM, George Chalkin <george...@live.com> wrote:

> >It is the religious atheists that give the true atheist the bad name.
>
> What do you mean by a religious atheist? Can you give an example.
> Thanks :)
>

Two perfect examples: Stalin and Mao. Two of the biggest monsters
humanity has ever known.

That might make an interesting discussion thread George.

Is political dogma a religion, or is it like a religion?
 

>

On Dec 9, 8:58 am, dali_70 <w_e_coyot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 9, 11:35 am, George Chalkin <georgechal...@live.com> wrote:
>
> >It is the religious atheists that give the true atheist the bad name.
>
> What do you mean by a religious atheist? Can you give an example.
> Thanks :)

--

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=en.

[Neil Kelsey]

On Dec 9, 9:42 am, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:35 AM, George Chalkin <georgechal...@live.com>wrote:
>
> > > I. Just thinking about the pain and evil people like you have brought
> > > to the world, it brings tears to my eyes. I'll be praying that once
> > > you are a grown-up, you'll leave these childish delusions of yours
> > > behind, and come to accept the awesome love of our vengeful God.
>
> > A true atheist brings no pain or evil to the world--only good
>
> Nope -- the atheist I know in person are not *good people* - have no good in
> them and will never have.
> I don't think atheism equates with *being good* -- nope - does not work
> thataway.

I agree. Atheism is simply the lack of religious belief.

> In order to be *good* you have to have something outside of yourself that
> you believe in.  And since atheism believes in nothing - then the nothing of
> *good* is being described and there is no such thing.

I disagree that religious belief, or lack of relgious belief, has
nothing to do with "goodness." You can be "good" whether you're an
atheist, Christian, Muslim, or Martian.


And atheists do believ in things "outside of themselves. For instance,
I'm an atheist, and I love my daughters unconditionally. My daughters
are outside of myself. Do you think I'm being good when I love my
daughters unconditionally?

> > 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=en.- Hide quoted text -

[Trance Gemini]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:42 PM, thea <thea...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:35 AM, George Chalkin <george...@live.com> wrote:

> I. Just thinking about the pain and evil people like you have brought
> to the world, it brings tears to my eyes. I'll be praying that once
> you are a grown-up, you'll leave these childish delusions of yours
> behind, and come to accept the awesome love of our vengeful God.
>

A true atheist brings no pain or evil to the world--only good

 

 

Nope -- the atheist I know in person are not *good people* - have no good in them and will never have.

I don't think atheism equates with *being good* -- nope - does not work thataway.

 

In order to be *good* you have to have something outside of yourself that you believe in.  And since atheism believes in nothing - then the nothing of *good* is being described and there is no such thing.

Were Jim Jones and Dave Koresh good Thea?

They were both self-proclaimed Christians who believed in your holy spirit.
 

[thea]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_...@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 9, 9:42 am, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:35 AM, George Chalkin <georgechal...@live.com>wrote:

>
> > > I. Just thinking about the pain and evil people like you have brought
> > > to the world, it brings tears to my eyes. I'll be praying that once
> > > you are a grown-up, you'll leave these childish delusions of yours
> > > behind, and come to accept the awesome love of our vengeful God.
>
> > A true atheist brings no pain or evil to the world--only good
>
> Nope -- the atheist I know in person are not *good people* - have no good in
> them and will never have.
> I don't think atheism equates with *being good* -- nope - does not work
> thataway.

I agree. Atheism is simply the lack of religious belief.

> In order to be *good* you have to have something outside of yourself that
> you believe in.  And since atheism believes in nothing - then the nothing of
> *good* is being described and there is no such thing.

I disagree that religious belief, or lack of relgious belief, has
nothing to do with "goodness." You can be "good" whether you're an
atheist, Christian, Muslim, or Martian.

 

Define being *good*??!!! :)

 

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

[Trance Gemini]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 1:11 PM, thea <thea...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_...@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 9, 9:42 am, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:35 AM, George Chalkin <georgechal...@live.com>wrote:

>
> > > I. Just thinking about the pain and evil people like you have brought
> > > to the world, it brings tears to my eyes. I'll be praying that once
> > > you are a grown-up, you'll leave these childish delusions of yours
> > > behind, and come to accept the awesome love of our vengeful God.
>
> > A true atheist brings no pain or evil to the world--only good
>
> Nope -- the atheist I know in person are not *good people* - have no good in
> them and will never have.
> I don't think atheism equates with *being good* -- nope - does not work
> thataway.

I agree. Atheism is simply the lack of religious belief.

> In order to be *good* you have to have something outside of yourself that
> you believe in.  And since atheism believes in nothing - then the nothing of
> *good* is being described and there is no such thing.

I disagree that religious belief, or lack of relgious belief, has
nothing to do with "goodness." You can be "good" whether you're an
atheist, Christian, Muslim, or Martian.

 

Define being *good*??!!! :)

Unfortunately you made the original assertion that atheists can't be good because we don't have belief.

That means that you are the one who is required to provide us with the definition of Good :-)

<snipped>

[George Chalkin]

> > Two perfect examples: Stalin and Mao. Two of the biggest monsters
> > humanity has ever known.
>
> That might make an interesting discussion thread George.
>
> Is political dogma a religion, or is it like a religion?
>

You may be right.
>
Characterization is not given enough credit, as being unscientific or
anecdotal, but Bio's are largely characterization. I guess it is all
in how someone defines terms, or redefines them. But in my philosophy
classes the number one issue was always clarity. It really doesn't
matter how you define terms as long as they are clear, or at least can
be clarrified. Definitions are very important, and I guess you could
say that characterization is extended definition.
>
In my opinion, when one holds to arbitrary rules without principle or
purpose, or when sentiment over-rules your best judgement, you are in
the area of dogma. Sentiment can always be re-aligned to suit the
situation, although sometimes it may be hard to let go of long-held
traditions. But people must not abandon tradition simply because it is
just tradition, but must look at the purpose of the tradition, and
possibly develop new traditions that are not so generally offensive,
such as denying women, or some other group, the right to vote.
>
On Dec 9, 9:42 am, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:36 PM, George Chalkin <georgechal...@live.com>wrote:
>
> > > >It is the religious atheists that give the true atheist the bad name.
>
> > > What do you mean by a religious atheist? Can you give an example.
> > > Thanks :)
>
> > Two perfect examples: Stalin and Mao. Two of the biggest monsters
> > humanity has ever known.
>
> That might make an interesting discussion thread George.
>
> Is political dogma a religion, or is it like a religion?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 9, 8:58 am, dali_70 <w_e_coyot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Dec 9, 11:35 am, George Chalkin <georgechal...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > > >It is the religious atheists that give the true atheist the bad name.
>
> > > What do you mean by a religious atheist? Can you give an example.
> > > Thanks :)
>
> > --
>
> > 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=en.
>
> --
> 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 -

[thea]

You ain't gonna like this one:  :)

 

The meaning of *good* to a Christian is when we are doing God's will in our lives.  The only *good* is when you are making sure everything in your life is a reflection of your belief that Jesus died in your place on Calvary.  It means that you have the *fruit of the Spirit* living in you.  It also means that you are much aware of the *Christ in you the hope of Glory.*

 

[Trance Gemini]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 1:25 PM, George Chalkin <george...@live.com> wrote:

> > Two perfect examples: Stalin and Mao. Two of the biggest monsters
> > humanity has ever known.
>
> That might make an interesting discussion thread George.
>
> Is political dogma a religion, or is it like a religion?
>

You may be right.
>
Characterization is not given enough credit, as being unscientific or
anecdotal, but Bio's are largely characterization. I guess it is all
in how someone defines terms, or redefines them. But in my philosophy
classes the number one issue was always clarity. It really doesn't
matter how you define terms as long as they are clear, or at least can
be clarrified. Definitions are very important, and I guess you could
say that characterization is extended definition.
>
In my opinion, when one holds to arbitrary rules without principle or
purpose, or when sentiment over-rules your best judgement, you are in
the area of dogma. Sentiment can always be re-aligned to suit the
situation, although sometimes it may be hard to let go of long-held
traditions. But people must not abandon tradition simply because it is
just tradition, but must look at the purpose of the tradition, and
possibly develop new traditions that are not so generally offensive,
such as denying women, or some other group, the right to vote.

Agree completely.

I generally characterize communism as being like religion and make the point that there is no fundamental difference between political and religious dogma

They are both based on doctrines, deify their leaders, and offer a totalitarian social structure.

I guess when it comes right down to it the end result is the same so it doesn't really matter how one characterizes it.

Your comments have been really good so far, so I was just interested if you had any specific reasons for presenting it that way so that I could self-evaluate my position as well as explore yours.

Just curiousity :-)

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=en.

[Rupert]

On Dec 10, 12:44 am, "TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist

Better pray hard!

[Trance Gemini]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 1:27 PM, thea <thea...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Trance Gemini <trance...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 1:11 PM, thea <thea...@gmail.com> wrote:

<snipped>
 

 

Define being *good*??!!! :)

Unfortunately you made the original assertion that atheists can't be good because we don't have belief.

That means that you are the one who is required to provide us with the definition of Good :-)

 

 

You ain't gonna like this one:  :)

Haha.
 

 The meaning of *good* to a Christian is when we are doing God's will in our lives.  The only *good* is when you are making sure everything in your life is a reflection of your belief that Jesus died in your place on Calvary.  It means that you have the *fruit of the Spirit* living in you.  It also means that you are much aware of the *Christ in you the hope of Glory.*

Fascinating how Christians always redefine words so completely that no dictionary would ever recognize them. Lol.
 
Well, according to your definition, you are correct. Atheists can and never will be "good".

However, Jim Jones and David Koresh can be.

Do you see a problem with your definition?

 

--

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=en.

[George Chalkin]

> Nope -- the atheist I know in person are not *good people* - have no good in
> them and will never have.
> I don't think atheism equates with *being good* -- nope - does not work
> thataway.
>
> In order to be *good* you have to have something outside of yourself that
> you believe in. And since atheism believes in nothing - then the nothing of
> *good* is being described and there is no such thing.
>

This must be some sort of syndrome here? I could understand not being
able to see things from someone elses vantage because you didn't know
enough about them, or because you made certain assumptions about how
they felt about things because of ignorance, but then later discovered
your error, but are you telling me that you cannot remember a time
when you didn't have faith in anything else but God? I know I am
alive; I at least have to believe in that or I couldn't acknowledge my
consciousness. And trust me I believe in a lot more than just being
alive. I think that atheists are much more sensitive than you give
them credit for.
>

On Dec 9, 9:42 am, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > 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=en.- Hide quoted text -

[Neil Kelsey]

On Dec 9, 10:11 am, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 9, 9:42 am, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:35 AM, George Chalkin <georgechal...@live.com
> > >wrote:
>
> > > > > I. Just thinking about the pain and evil people like you have brought
> > > > > to the world, it brings tears to my eyes. I'll be praying that once
> > > > > you are a grown-up, you'll leave these childish delusions of yours
> > > > > behind, and come to accept the awesome love of our vengeful God.
>
> > > > A true atheist brings no pain or evil to the world--only good
>
> > > Nope -- the atheist I know in person are not *good people* - have no good
> > in
> > > them and will never have.
> > > I don't think atheism equates with *being good* -- nope - does not work
> > > thataway.
>
> > I agree. Atheism is simply the lack of religious belief.
>
> > > In order to be *good* you have to have something outside of yourself that
> > > you believe in.  And since atheism believes in nothing - then the nothing
> > of
> > > *good* is being described and there is no such thing.
>
> > I disagree that religious belief, or lack of relgious belief, has
> > nothing to do with "goodness." You can be "good" whether you're an
> > atheist, Christian, Muslim, or Martian.
>
> Define being *good*??!!! :)

Wow! That's a question worthy of e_space.

good - adjective (from Dictionary.com)

1. morally excellent; virtuous; righteous; pious: a good man.
2. satisfactory in quality, quantity, or degree: a good teacher; good
health.
3. of high quality; excellent.
4. right; proper; fit: It is good that you are here. His credentials
are good.
5. well-behaved: a good child.
6. kind, beneficent, or friendly: to do a good deed.
7. honorable or worthy; in good standing: a good name.
8. educated and refined: She has a good background.
9. financially sound or safe: His credit is good.
10. genuine; not counterfeit: a good quarter.
11. sound or valid: good judgment; good reasons.
12. reliable; dependable; responsible: good advice.
13. healthful; beneficial: Fresh fruit is good for you.
14. in excellent condition; healthy: good teeth.
15. not spoiled or tainted; edible; palatable: The meat was still good
after three months in the freezer.
16. favorable; propitious: good news.
17. cheerful; optimistic; amiable: in good spirits.
18. free of distress or pain; comfortable: to feel good after
surgery.
19. agreeable; pleasant: Have a good time.
20. attractive; handsome: She has a good figure.
21. (of the complexion) smooth; free from blemish.
22. close or intimate; warm: She's a good friend of mine.
23. sufficient or ample: a good supply.
24. advantageous; satisfactory for the purpose: a good day for
fishing.
25. competent or skillful; clever: a good manager; good at
arithmetic.
26. skillfully or expertly done: a really good job; a good play.
27. conforming to rules of grammar, usage, etc.; correct: good
English.
28. socially proper: good manners.
29. remaining available to one: Don't throw good money after bad.
30. comparatively new or of relatively fine quality: Don't play in the
mud in your good clothes.
31. best or most dressy: He wore his good suit to the office today.
32. full: a good day's journey away.
33. fairly large or great: a good amount.
34. free from precipitation or cloudiness: good weather.
35. Medicine/Medical. (of a patient's condition) having stable and
normal vital signs, being conscious and comfortable, and having
excellent appetite, mobility, etc.
36. fertile; rich: good soil.
37. loyal: a good Democrat.
38. (of a return or service in tennis, squash, handball, etc.) landing
within the limits of a court or section of a court.
39. Horse Racing. (of the surface of a track) drying after a rain so
as to be still slightly sticky: This horse runs best on a good
track.
40. (of meat, esp. beef) noting or pertaining to the specific grade
below “choice,” containing more lean muscle and less edible fat than
“prime” or “choice.”
41. favorably regarded (used as an epithet for a ship, town, etc.):
the good ship Syrena.

None of the above dictionary definitions of the word "good"
correspond to the one you gave. Christians don't get to define the
English language.

So use defintion #1. With that in mind, I'll ask you again, do you

> > <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=en.-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=en.- Hide quoted text -
>

> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[George Chalkin]

> I generally characterize communism as being like religion and make the point
> that there is no fundamental difference between political and religious
> dogma
>

I guess I tend to see religion as more of a behavioral concept
affecting the perception and congnition, and dogma as more of a rigid
or habitual practice. And I see niether of these tendencies in your
behavior by the way.

>
> They are both based on doctrines, deify their leaders, and offer a
> totalitarian social structure.
>

Excellent characterization, might there be a social need for such
concepts?

>
> I guess when it comes right down to it the end result is the same so it
> doesn't really matter how one characterizes it.
>

Generally I would agree, but sometimes I am trying to make a
distinction or nuance, if for nothing more than trying to be humorous,
but most of time I think the nuances are important, and I can think of
at least one important reason to identify a cleverly hidden deception,
that seems to have some wierd unconscious control over some people--
almost like hypnosis. Ever notice that?

>
> Your comments have been really good so far, so I was just interested if you
> had any specific reasons for presenting it that way so that I could
> self-evaluate my position as well as explore yours.
>

I think I tend to get bored with the same old pattern of thought after
a while and so I look for new and creative ways to learn for
inspiration. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't, but I
always learn from it. There is so much to learn, and so much important
learning that people don't even study anymore. I have learned a lot
from this forum, already. Thank you.


On Dec 9, 10:42 am, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > <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=en.
>
> > > --
> > > 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 -
>
> > > - 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=en.
>
> --
> 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 -
>

> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[jennifer]

you dont know what you are doing making jabs at the Holy Spirit Be
careful my friends. On 12/9/09, Trance Gemini

>>> 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=en.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> 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=en.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>

[Neil Kelsey]

On Dec 9, 11:12 am, jennifer <zjennife...@gmail.com> wrote:
> you dont know what you are doing making jabs at the Holy Spirit Be
> careful my friends.

Ominous sounding threats are not evidence that the Holy Spirit is
real, and they make you look like kind of a douche.

> On 12/9/09, Trance Gemini
>
>
>
> <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:42 PM, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:35 AM, George Chalkin

> >> <georgechal...@live.com>wrote:

> >>> 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=en.
>
> >> --
> >> 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=en.
>
> > --
> > 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
>
> > --
>
> > 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=en.- Hide quoted text -

[Trance Gemini]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:10 PM, George Chalkin <george...@live.com> wrote:

> I generally characterize communism as being like religion and make the point
> that there is no fundamental difference between political and religious
> dogma
>

I guess I tend to see religion as more of a behavioral concept
affecting the perception and congnition, and dogma as more of a rigid
or habitual practice.

Ah Okay. Then I can see where that comes from. I see it as a social structure which it has been in the past.

However, it's true that today, now that Secularism is more common, it really is more of a behavioral construct.

There are very few theocracies left or countries with strong theocratic influences on the state.
 

And I see niether of these tendencies in your
behavior by the way.

>
> They are both based on doctrines, deify their leaders, and offer a
> totalitarian social structure.
>

Excellent characterization, might there be a social need for such
concepts?

That's a topic in and of itself. I'm not sure I can answer that in one paragraph.

So, I'll just say Yes and No for now. Lol.

>
> I guess when it comes right down to it the end result is the same so it
> doesn't really matter how one characterizes it.
>

Generally I would agree, but sometimes I am trying to make a
distinction or nuance, if for nothing more than trying to be humorous,
but most of time I think the nuances are important, and I can think of
at least one important reason to identify a cleverly hidden deception,
that seems to have some wierd unconscious control over some people--
almost like hypnosis. Ever notice that?

A lot of the time distinctions are important. On a personal level I like to be "correct" and that's why I like to explore these issues with other atheists. The importance IMO is determined by what the consequences of the statement are.

I'm not sure I understand the last part of your sentence.
 

>
> Your comments have been really good so far, so I was just interested if you
> had any specific reasons for presenting it that way so that I could
> self-evaluate my position as well as explore yours.
>

I think I tend to get bored with the same old pattern of thought after
a while and so I look for new and creative ways to learn for
inspiration. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't, but I
always learn from it. There is so much to learn, and so much important
learning that people don't even study anymore. I have learned a lot
from this forum, already. Thank you.

That's a good thing. I believe in life long learning and that's something that's important to me too.

I'm glad the forum is contributing to that for you. It has for me.

Hope you'll stick around.
 

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=en.

[Trance Gemini]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:12 PM, jennifer <zjenn...@gmail.com> wrote:

you dont know what you are doing making jabs at the Holy Spirit Be
careful my friends.

I didn't make any jabs at your holy spirit Jennifer.

I simply asked Thea if Jim Jones and David Koresh were considered good given that they also believe in your holy spirit.

Perhaps you could answer my question?

 

[Trance Gemini]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_...@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 9, 11:12 am, jennifer <zjennife...@gmail.com> wrote:
> you dont know what you are doing making jabs at the Holy Spirit Be
> careful my friends.

Ominous sounding threats are not evidence that the Holy Spirit is
real, and they make you look like kind of a douche.

Can't disagree with that. Lol.

[George Chalkin]

> > I guess I tend to see religion as more of a behavioral concept
> > affecting the perception and congnition, and dogma as more of a rigid
> > or habitual practice.
>
> Ah Okay. Then I can see where that comes from. I see it as a social
> structure which it has been in the past.
>
> However, it's true that today, now that Secularism is more common, it really
> is more of a behavioral construct.
>
> There are very few theocracies left or countries with strong theocratic
> influences on the state.
>

Well, I think the distinction is important, and I am happy you
recognize it, because society is obviuosly influenced by politics, and
in our case of living under democratic republics, it is more like the
"tail wagging the dog"--politics, in our form of government has been
declared, by the people. Secularism is waning, and I think there is a
danger of losing secularism altogether in government. My founders were
concerned about this issue later in life, knowing that they probably
wouldn't live long enough to see such a disappointment. But the
founders realized the poosibility, and their concerns exended beyond
their own lives to future generations, and I don't think they were
just pretending to be magnanimous. I have concerns as well. I guess I
am just trying to be unselfish, or good, as a motive for even caring
about these issues. But there are younger people that either need to
care more, or wake up to what "I percieve" may be going on. Now you
might not see the same things, nor have the same concerns that I do
about it.

>
> > but most of time I think the nuances are important, and I can think of
> > at least one important reason to identify a cleverly hidden deception,
> > that seems to have some wierd unconscious control over some people--
> > almost like hypnosis. Ever notice that?
>
> A lot of the time distinctions are important. On a personal level I like to
> be "correct" and that's why I like to explore these issues with other
> atheists. The importance IMO is determined by what the consequences of the
> statement are.
>
> I'm not sure I understand the last part of your sentence.
>

Maybe the last part of my sentence makes more sense now?
>




On Dec 9, 11:29 am, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

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

[Neil Kelsey]

On Dec 9, 11:32 am, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

>  On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 9, 11:12 am, jennifer <zjennife...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > you dont know what you are doing making jabs at the Holy Spirit Be
> > > careful my friends.
>
> > Ominous sounding threats are not evidence that the Holy Spirit is
> > real, and they make you look like kind of a douche.
>
> Can't disagree with that. Lol.

I've been watching too much Craig Ferguson. That guy is freaking
hilarious.

[Trance Gemini]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:48 PM, George Chalkin <george...@live.com> wrote:

> > I guess I tend to see religion as more of a behavioral concept
> > affecting the perception and congnition, and dogma as more of a rigid
> > or habitual practice.
>
> Ah Okay. Then I can see where that comes from. I see it as a social
> structure which it has been in the past.
>
> However, it's true that today, now that Secularism is more common, it really
> is more of a behavioral construct.
>
> There are very few theocracies left or countries with strong theocratic
> influences on the state.
>

Well, I think the distinction is important, and I am happy you
recognize it, because society is obviuosly influenced by politics, and
in our case of living under democratic republics, it is more like the
"tail wagging the dog"--politics, in our form of government has been
declared, by the people.

If you're American, yes I would agree.

I'm Canadian and our issues are different.

Of course what happens in the US has a huge impact on us and we are not a purely secular state.

And religion has encroached in areas where it doesn't belong but not in the same way.
 

Secularism is waning, and I think there is a
danger of losing secularism altogether in government.

That's always a risk.
 

My founders were
concerned about this issue later in life, knowing that they probably
wouldn't live long enough to see such a disappointment. But the
founders realized the poosibility, and their concerns exended beyond
their own lives to future generations, and I don't think they were
just pretending to be magnanimous. I have concerns as well. I guess I
am just trying to be unselfish, or good, as a motive for even caring
about these issues. But there are younger people that either need to
care more, or wake up to what "I percieve" may be going on. Now you
might not see the same things, nor have the same concerns that I do
about it.

No, I get it. I have very much the same concerns.
 

>
> > but most of time I think the nuances are important, and I can think of
> > at least one important reason to identify a cleverly hidden deception,
> > that seems to have some wierd unconscious control over some people--
> > almost like hypnosis. Ever notice that?

I think so if I understand you correctly. Lol.
 

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=en.

[Trance Gemini]

Who is he? Am I missing out on a good comic?
 

--

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=en.

[George Chalkin]

> > > > but most of time I think the nuances are important, and I can think of
> > > > at least one important reason to identify a cleverly hidden deception,
> > > > that seems to have some wierd unconscious control over some people--
> > > > almost like hypnosis. Ever notice that?
>
> I think so if I understand you correctly. Lol.
>

I'm sorry, maybe you have the same problem--if I gave an example it
might come across as extremely anecdotal and offensive to some people,
and may be very difficult to defend. Is it worth the effort? I would
have to weigh that question!

On Dec 9, 12:27 pm, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

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

[Trance Gemini]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 3:36 PM, George Chalkin <george...@live.com> wrote:

> > > > but most of time I think the nuances are important, and I can think of
> > > > at least one important reason to identify a cleverly hidden deception,
> > > > that seems to have some wierd unconscious control over some people--
> > > > almost like hypnosis. Ever notice that?
>
> I think so if I understand you correctly. Lol.
>

I'm sorry, maybe you have the same problem--if I gave an example it
might come across as extremely anecdotal and offensive to some people,
and may be very difficult to defend. Is it worth the effort? I would
have to weigh that question!

Not a problem. Let's leave it alone. Sometimes that's the best approach. I'll think on it. :-)
 

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=en.

[Neil Kelsey]

On Dec 9, 12:28 pm, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

>  On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 9, 11:32 am, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >  On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com
> > >wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 9, 11:12 am, jennifer <zjennife...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > you dont know what you are doing making jabs at the Holy Spirit Be
> > > > > careful my friends.
>
> > > > Ominous sounding threats are not evidence that the Holy Spirit is
> > > > real, and they make you look like kind of a douche.
>
> > > Can't disagree with that. Lol.
>
> > I've been watching too much Craig Ferguson. That guy is freaking
> > hilarious.
>
> Who is he? Am I missing out on a good comic?

Late Night with Craig Ferguson - the Scottish guy who follows Dave
Letterman. His opening monologue is the best I've seen, and it's
improvised (as opposed to cue cards, like Conan O'Brian).

> > 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=en.
>
> --
> 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]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_...@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 9, 12:28 pm, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>  On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com>wrote:

> > On Dec 9, 11:32 am, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >  On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com
> > >wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 9, 11:12 am, jennifer <zjennife...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > you dont know what you are doing making jabs at the Holy Spirit Be
> > > > > careful my friends.
>
> > > > Ominous sounding threats are not evidence that the Holy Spirit is
> > > > real, and they make you look like kind of a douche.
>
> > > Can't disagree with that. Lol.
>
> > I've been watching too much Craig Ferguson. That guy is freaking
> > hilarious.
>
> Who is he? Am I missing out on a good comic?

Late Night with Craig Ferguson - the Scottish guy who follows Dave
Letterman. His opening monologue is the best I've seen, and it's
improvised (as opposed to cue cards, like Conan O'Brian).

Ah okay. I nod off at 10:00PM lol. So that's why I've never seen him.

I'll try to stay up one night and see if I can catch him.

[TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist Christianity ]]

On 9 dez, 18:56, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>  

All atheists believe in evolution, which means they don't believe in
morality and think we should all act like animals.

-Atheists try to shift the burden of proof unfairly upon theists (ie,
atheists make the wild and unprovable claim that God does not exist,
and then unfairly expect us Christians to prove that He DOES exist)

-The Bible says atheism is wrong, and the Bible is always right (see:
Genesis 1:1, Psalms 14:1, Psalms 19:1, Romans 1:19-20)

-Some famous atheists have shown they occasionally have doubts about
their disbelief, which proves that all atheists really do believe in
God. Of course, no Christian has ever doubted the existence of God.

-Everybody who has ever been in the army will tell you that there are
no atheists in foxholes. That is, once they are in danger of death,
the atheist will strip himself of his irrational disbelief in God, and
come to admit he believed in God all along. Only liberal slimebags
like MSNBC report otherwise.

-Communism, which is inherently evil, is founded by atheism, and all
atheists are probably secret communists.

-Because we can think of the existence of God, God must obviously
exists, and therefore atheists are illogical.

-Everything in the universe shows obvious and undeniable signs that it
was created by a mind far superior to our own.

-a lot of mass murderers were atheists, and all atheists, having no
morality to guide them, are only a bad day away from going on a
genocide spree. There have no exactly zero cases on Christian mass
murderers throughout all of history.

-no atheists contribute to charitable causes, and all Christians do.
This is because of atheist's beliefs in Darwinism.

[Neil Kelsey]

On Dec 9, 12:56 pm, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:

>  On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 9, 12:28 pm, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >  On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com
> > >wrote:
> > > > On Dec 9, 11:32 am, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >  On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Neil Kelsey <
> > neil_kel...@hotmail.com
> > > > >wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Dec 9, 11:12 am, jennifer <zjennife...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > you dont know what you are doing making jabs at the Holy Spirit
> > Be
> > > > > > > careful my friends.
>
> > > > > > Ominous sounding threats are not evidence that the Holy Spirit is
> > > > > > real, and they make you look like kind of a douche.
>
> > > > > Can't disagree with that. Lol.
>
> > > > I've been watching too much Craig Ferguson. That guy is freaking
> > > > hilarious.
>
> > > Who is he? Am I missing out on a good comic?
>
> > Late Night with Craig Ferguson - the Scottish guy who follows Dave
> > Letterman. His opening monologue is the best I've seen, and it's
> > improvised (as opposed to cue cards, like Conan O'Brian).
>
> Ah okay. I nod off at 10:00PM lol. So that's why I've never seen him.
>
> I'll try to stay up one night and see if I can catch him.

3 words...PVR

[Trance Gemini]

Poe 10/10. Yup. You covered everything ;-)

--

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=en.

[Trance Gemini]

You're talking to a person who still has a VCR ;-)
 

--

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=en.

[grisha]

What do you expect from a village idiot?

On Dec 9, 7:11 am, showmethehoney <alenasha...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> "awesome love of a vengeful God"??? vengeful and loving do not seem
> like words that go together very well. seems like one hand would be
> slapping your face while the other one would be patting you on the
> head. one of the two would certainly not be an ingredient in my life
> salad.
>
> and please dont forget how some xtians slaughtered those who did not
> follow their religion. your head is in a biased cloud my friend. wake
> up!
>
> On Dec 9, 8:44 am, "TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist

[LL]

On Dec 9, 9:42 am, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:36 PM, George Chalkin <georgechal...@live.com>wrote:
>
> > > >It is the religious atheists that give the true atheist the bad name.
>
> > > What do you mean by a religious atheist? Can you give an example.
> > > Thanks :)
>
> > Two perfect examples: Stalin and Mao. Two of the biggest monsters
> > humanity has ever known.
>
> That might make an interesting discussion thread George.
>
> Is political dogma a religion, or is it like a religion?

LL: It works like a religion on vulnerable--and in this case, evil
people. Stalin and Mao were not atheists. They were true believers in
the god of communism.

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

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 9, 8:58 am, dali_70 <w_e_coyot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Dec 9, 11:35 am, George Chalkin <georgechal...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > > >It is the religious atheists that give the true atheist the bad name.
>
> > > What do you mean by a religious atheist? Can you give an example.
> > > Thanks :)
>

> > --
>
> > 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 Dec 9, 10:11 am, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 9, 9:42 am, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 10:35 AM, George Chalkin <georgechal...@live.com

> > >wrote:
>
> > > > > I. Just thinking about the pain and evil people like you have brought
> > > > > to the world, it brings tears to my eyes. I'll be praying that once
> > > > > you are a grown-up, you'll leave these childish delusions of yours
> > > > > behind, and come to accept the awesome love of our vengeful God.
>

> > > > A true atheist brings no pain or evil to the world--only good
>
> > > Nope -- the atheist I know in person are not *good people* - have no good
> > in
> > > them and will never have.
> > > I don't think atheism equates with *being good* -- nope - does not work
> > > thataway.
>

> > I agree. Atheism is simply the lack of religious belief.
>

> > > In order to be *good* you have to have something outside of yourself that
> > > you believe in.  And since atheism believes in nothing - then the nothing
> > of
> > > *good* is being described and there is no such thing.
>

> > I disagree that religious belief, or lack of relgious belief, has
> > nothing to do with "goodness." You can be "good" whether you're an
> > atheist, Christian, Muslim, or Martian.
>
> Define being *good*??!!! :)

LL: Thea, you didn't need a definition when you posted your original
remarks--you asked for it only when someone challenged your position!

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

>
>
>
>
>
> > And atheists do believ in things "outside of themselves. For instance,
> > I'm an atheist, and I love my daughters unconditionally. My daughters
> > are outside of myself. Do you think I'm being good when I love my
> > daughters unconditionally?
>

> > > > , because
> > > > enlightenment brings freedom to the mind from religion, and atheists

> > > > promote enlightenment. It is the religious atheists that give the true

> > > > atheist the bad name. A true atheist is content merely to be amused at
> > > > the endless variety of stupidity in religious behavior, and then
> > > > comment on it.
>
> > > > The religious are an endless source of amusement, and worthy of our
> > > > ridicule. And wouldn't you know, identifying irony such as your silly
> > > > hypocrisy is an exercise in intelligence and not only a demonstration
> > > > of the benefits of atheism, but also as a good example of right
> > > > living.
>
> > > > The percentage of true atheists is probably less than 2%. And the
> > > > religious atheist is correctly labeled evil for obvious reasons, but
> > > > your indiscriminate lack of good judgement has erroneously lumped the
> > > > non-religious into the religious.
>
> > > > I think it's actually quite amusing to see hateful ingnorant people
> > > > like yourself, taking your own ignorance so seriously--an endless
> > > > source of amusement, and sometimes hilarious. Keep up the "good fight"
> > > > there True Christian.
>

> > > > On Dec 9, 5:44 am, "TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist

> > > > Christianity ]" <X...@OPERAMAIL.COM> wrote:
> > > > > I. Just thinking about the pain and evil people like you have brought
> > > > > to the world, it brings tears to my eyes. I'll be praying that once
> > > > > you are a grown-up, you'll leave these childish delusions of yours
> > > > > behind, and come to accept the awesome love of our vengeful God.
>

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

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

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

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

[LL]

On Dec 9, 1:32 pm, "TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist

Christianity ]" <X...@OPERAMAIL.COM> wrote:
> On 9 dez, 18:56, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >  
>
> All atheists believe in evolution, which means they don't believe in
> morality and think we should all act like animals.

LL: Atheists don't believe in evolution. Nobody does. Intelligent,
rational people accept the scientific evidence of evolution. That's
all it takes. No belief necessary.
>
>TC: -Atheists try to shift the burden of proof unfairly upon theists (ie,

> atheists make the wild and unprovable claim that God does not exist,
> and then unfairly expect us Christians to prove that He DOES exist)

LL: Atheists don't shift the burden of proof fairly or unfairly. The
burden of proof is ALWAYS on the person making the claim--and in this
case it's people like you.

Atheists don't say god does not exist. They say there is no evidence
that such a being exists--and no theist has ever provided such
evidence.


TC: >

> -The Bible says atheism is wrong, and the Bible is always right (see:
> Genesis 1:1, Psalms 14:1, Psalms 19:1, Romans 1:19-20)

LL: So the bible is right because it says it's right!
>
TC: -Some famous atheists have shown they occasionally have doubts

about
> their disbelief, which proves that all atheists really do believe in
> God. Of course, no Christian has ever doubted the existence of God.

LL: I beg to differ. Many Christians have doubts about their beliefs.
They are generally the more intelligent ones.
>
TC: -Everybody who has ever been in the army will tell you that there

are
> no atheists in foxholes.

LL: Oh, but there have been plenty of atheists in foxholes. I've known
several. They go in as atheists and they come out as atheists. I knew
a man who was in the Navy at Pearl Harbor when it was bombed. He was
not seriously injured, but he was an atheist when he went there and he
was an atheist when it was over and is an atheist to this day. He was
under fire many times.

TC: That is, once they are in danger of death,

> the atheist will strip himself of his irrational disbelief in God, and
> come to admit he believed in God all along. Only liberal slimebags
> like MSNBC report otherwise.

LL: That's your religious leaders leading you astray again--and you
falling for it hook line and sinker. Plenty of atheists face death and
suffering every day and remain atheists. Get an education.
>
TC: -Communism, which is inherently evil, is founded by atheism, and

all
> atheists are probably secret communists.

LL: Now you're really showing your incredible ignorance. You are
really not worth debating. You haven't got a functioning brain.
>
TC: -Because we can think of the existence of God, God must obviously

> exists, and therefore atheists are illogical.

LL: So you can't think of the thousands of gods that have been
believed in throughout history? If you can, then they "obviously
exist." Do you know the meaning of logic?
>
TC: -Everything in the universe shows obvious and undeniable signs

that it
> was created by a mind far superior to our own.

LL: No, it doesn't and anyone who thinks so is intellectually
challenged.
>
TC: -a lot of mass murderers were atheists, and all atheists, having

no
> morality to guide them, are only a bad day away from going on a
> genocide spree. There have no exactly zero cases on Christian mass
> murderers throughout all of history.

LL: Ha, ha, ha. There have been countless mass murderers who were
Christians. Hitler was a Christian. I suppose you do what most
Christians do and claim that anyone who is a mass murderer isn't a
"real" Christian.

Why do you suppose there are far more Christians in prison than
atheists. In fact, there are hardly any atheists at all in prison--
which has been documented more than once.
>
TC: > -no atheists contribute to charitable causes, and all Christians

do.
> This is because of atheist's beliefs in Darwinism.

LL: The fact that you can say that shows you must be living under a
rock with snakes, insects and slime! Most of the atheists I know
contribute generously to charitable causes. But I know plenty of
Christians who do not. Your ignorance is blatantly showing again. But
keep on writing in, you are an excellent example of a supremely
ignorant theist and you keep on proving it every time you post. It's
very rewarding to read your posts.

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

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

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

[grisha]

When I read posts like this one, my first thought is that some
undercover atheist is making fan of Christians. My second thought is
that nobody can be that good.

On Dec 9, 1:32 pm, "TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist

[philosophy]

On Dec 10, 7:32 am, "TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist
Christianity ]" <X...@OPERAMAIL.COM> wrote:


Good one TC. Your really are a POE, but just to take it on:

All christians believe in evolution, They must do, because they have
highjacked the evolution theory and are claiming it as their own
under the guise of Creation Science - which means they don't believe

in
morality and think we should all act like animals.

Theists try to shift the burden of proof unfairly upon atheists (ie,
theists make the wild and unprovable claim that God does exist,
and then unfairly expect atheists to prove them wrong)

The Bible does not say atheism is wrong, so the Bible right?
There is no word "atheist / atheism" in the Bible.

Some famous theists have shown they occasionally have doubts about
their belief, which proves that all theists really do not believe in
God. Of course, no atheist has ever doubted the lack of existence of
God.

Everybody who has ever been in the army will tell you that there are

no catholics in foxholes. That is, the local priests will send the
Prodestants out to be killed, while the catholics stay at home and
screw the boys and women. So reported my mother who was
a nurse during WW2. Her words were "they were conspicuous by
their absence."

The Inquisition, which was inherently evil, was founded by theism, and
all
theists are probably secret Inquisitors.

Because atheists can think of the non-existence of God, God must
obviously
not exist, and therefore theists are illogical to think that he does.

Everything in the universe shows obvious and undeniable signs that it

evolved by natural processes, ie evolution through natural selection.

A lot of mass murderers were theists, and all theists, having no

morality to guide them, are only a bad day away from going on a

genocide spree. There have been many cases on Christian mass
murderers throughout all of history. Hitler, Jim Jones, et al.

Few theists contribute to charitable causes, and all atheists do.
This is because of theist's beliefs in crapology.

How did I go TC? Is this nearer the mark?

[TLC]

Atheists in Foxholes

Atheists in foxholes, some say they are myths,
Creations of the mind who just don't exist.

Yet, they answered the call to defend, with great pride.
With reason their watchword, they bled and they died.

They took Saratoga from the British crown,
Secured America's freedom at the Battle of Yorktown.

From Sumter to Appomattox, fields flowed with their blood.
When the cannons grew silent, the flag proudly stood.

From the Marne to the Argonne, in trenches and tanks,
They defeated the Germans -- the whole world gave thanks.

They were bombed at Pearl Harbor, fought on to Berlin.
Many freethinking women served along with the men.

Still war keeps erupting -- Iraq, Bosnia, and Kosovo.
Where is the peace that eludes people so?

It is broken by tyrants who bear crosses and creeds,
That overshadow reason with hate and cruel deeds.

So atheists prevail until your work is complete.
Mothers mourn, children cry, and bigots plan your defeat.

By air, land, and sea, you answer freedom's call.
Without god or faith, you seek liberty for all.


http://www.ffrf.org/foxholes/

[Treebeard]

On Dec 10, 12:40 am, LL <llp...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Dec 9, 1:32 pm, "TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist
>
> Christianity ]" <X...@OPERAMAIL.COM> wrote:
> > On 9 dez, 18:56, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >  
>
> > All atheists believe in evolution, which means they don't believe in
> > morality and think we should all act like animals.
>
> LL: Atheists don't believe in evolution. Nobody does. Intelligent,
> rational people accept the scientific evidence of evolution. That's
> all it takes. No belief necessary.

Since knowledge is "justified true belief", you are wrong. And you've
been shown to be wrong, and yet still continue to use this disproven
argument. Why is that?

>
>
>
> >TC:  -Atheists try to shift the burden of proof unfairly upon theists (ie,
> > atheists make the wild and unprovable claim that God does not exist,
> > and then unfairly expect us Christians to prove that He DOES exist)
>
> LL: Atheists don't shift the burden of proof fairly or unfairly. The
> burden of proof is ALWAYS on the person making the claim--and in this
> case it's people like you.

In some cases, it is on the theist. However, most of the atheists on
this board have more of a burden of proof for their statements than I
do, since I concede that my belief in theism is just that: belief.
Asking me to prove to the level of knowledge a belief is, therefore,
ridiculous.

>
> Atheists don't say god does not exist.

Strong atheists do. Weak atheists do not. That's the definition of
the terms.

> They say there is no evidence
> that such a being exists--and no theist has ever provided such
> evidence.

TC is actually correct that in a lot of cases I get arguments like
"You shouldn't believe in God because He's fictional/a myth/an
invention of humans" from atheists which can only be justified as a
claim that God doesn't really exist, and yet when I challenge them on
that and demand they prove that claim they retreat to "Well, I just
have a lack of belief". Then those statements are unjustified, and so
they shouldn't make them.

You cannot speak for all atheists here.

Thus ends the even remotely reasonable part of the OP.

[Trance Gemini]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:21 AM, LL <llp...@aol.com> wrote:

On Dec 9, 9:42 am, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:36 PM, George Chalkin <georgechal...@live.com>wrote:

>
> > > >It is the religious atheists that give the true atheist the bad name.
>
> > > What do you mean by a religious atheist? Can you give an example.
> > > Thanks :)
>

> > Two perfect examples: Stalin and Mao. Two of the biggest monsters
> > humanity has ever known.
>
> That might make an interesting discussion thread George.
>
> Is political dogma a religion, or is it like a religion?

LL: It works like a religion on vulnerable--and in this case, evil
people. Stalin and Mao were not atheists. They were true believers in
the god of communism.

Yes. I agree.
 

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

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 9, 8:58 am, dali_70 <w_e_coyot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Dec 9, 11:35 am, George Chalkin <georgechal...@live.com> wrote:
>
> > > >It is the religious atheists that give the true atheist the bad name.
>
> > > What do you mean by a religious atheist? Can you give an example.
> > > Thanks :)
>
> > --
>
> > 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=en.
>
> --
> 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

--

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=en.

[Trance Gemini]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 1:19 AM, grisha <gralm...@gmail.com> wrote:

When I read posts like this one, my first thought is that some
undercover atheist is making fan of Christians.  My second thought is
that nobody can be that good.

That's why I gave him a 10/10 ;-). Poe Call.
 

--

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=en.

[thea]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Trance Gemini <trance...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 1:27 PM, thea <thea...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Trance Gemini <trance...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 1:11 PM, thea <thea...@gmail.com> wrote:

<snipped>
 

 

Define being *good*??!!! :)

Unfortunately you made the original assertion that atheists can't be good because we don't have belief.

That means that you are the one who is required to provide us with the definition of Good :-)

 

 

You ain't gonna like this one:  :)

Haha.
 

 The meaning of *good* to a Christian is when we are doing God's will in our lives.  The only *good* is when you are making sure everything in your life is a reflection of your belief that Jesus died in your place on Calvary.  It means that you have the *fruit of the Spirit* living in you.  It also means that you are much aware of the *Christ in you the hope of Glory.*

Fascinating how Christians always redefine words so completely that no dictionary would ever recognize them. Lol.

 

The Bible definitions are more interesting that the dictionary.  Especially when it comes to big words like *bastard*?!

 

 
Well, according to your definition, you are correct. Atheists can and never will be "good".

However, Jim Jones and David Koresh can be.

Do you see a problem with your definition?

 

 

I know that people who say they are Christians and then do the atrocities these guys have done leave a bad taste for Atheist and Christian alike.

And, I know that Atheist have suffered the same way -- lumping all into one boiling pot (oh how I love Shakespeare and his witches in Macbeth - hubbub) does not define what all believe or know.

Christianity has always yelled loudest when jerks like Jim and David have supposedly proved that Christianity is worse than anything the Atheist would do.

However, this is what it is like when you know the truth, and you say the truth, and some nut takes part of what you say, but does not understand that he has to stay underneath the *Blood of the Cross of Calvary*, and let Jesus handle his problems for him.

Since, we all inside of us, have something that wants, to be accepted by someone - most seek for approval from other human beings -- a true Christian however, seeks only approval from God Almighty Himself.  That is why we pray -- Thanking the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ - because it places this *self* into the arena where God can work on us.

 

The Bible says that we are not *good* and only through the *Cross of Calvary*, does this wicked self become cruicified, so that it not I who live but Jesus living through me.

 

Good - could also equate to *love thy neighbor as thyself* - even when he is blowing his leaves in your yard for you to pick up - or blowing snow around your car, while he is cleaning off his own. (snow plow drivers are good at this).

[Trance Gemini]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 9:02 AM, thea <thea...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Trance Gemini <trance...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 1:27 PM, thea <thea...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Trance Gemini <trance...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 1:11 PM, thea <thea...@gmail.com> wrote:

<snipped>
 

 

Define being *good*??!!! :)

Unfortunately you made the original assertion that atheists can't be good because we don't have belief.

That means that you are the one who is required to provide us with the definition of Good :-)

 

 

You ain't gonna like this one:  :)

Haha.
 

 The meaning of *good* to a Christian is when we are doing God's will in our lives.  The only *good* is when you are making sure everything in your life is a reflection of your belief that Jesus died in your place on Calvary.  It means that you have the *fruit of the Spirit* living in you.  It also means that you are much aware of the *Christ in you the hope of Glory.*

Fascinating how Christians always redefine words so completely that no dictionary would ever recognize them. Lol.

 

The Bible definitions are more interesting that the dictionary.  Especially when it comes to big words like *bastard*?!

 

 
Well, according to your definition, you are correct. Atheists can and never will be "good".

However, Jim Jones and David Koresh can be.

Do you see a problem with your definition?

 

 

I know that people who say they are Christians and then do the atrocities these guys have done leave a bad taste for Atheist and Christian alike.

Sorry Thea. That (nor any of the following) will get you off this hook.

You provided a Biblical definition and of course that Biblical definition excludes atheists.

Thea said:
"The meaning of *good* to a Christian is when we are doing God's will in our lives.  The only *good* is when you are making sure everything in your life is a reflection of your belief that Jesus died in your place on Calvary.  It means that you have the *fruit of the Spirit* living in you.  It also means that you are much aware of the *Christ in you the hope of Glory.*"

I'm willing to accept that according to *your* definition of "good" that atheists can never be good.

However, all of the following stated they were Christian, stated they "were doing God's will", stated that they had "the fruit of the Spirit living within them" (paraphrased) and stated they were aware that Christ was their hope of Glory and all of the other biblical type rhetoric associated with being a Christian.

That puts the following within your concept of "good" whether you like it or not.
Hitler
Koresh
Jones
Any number of serial killers like BTK
Garrido (kidnapped, sexually abused and tortured little Jaycee, got her pregnant and did the same to their children)
and many, many other of the most evil that society has ever discovered.

The No True Scotsman (they're not really christians) fallacy cannot get you off the hook if you insist that biblical definition of "good" is what determines whether someone is "good" or not.

Sorry.
 

[thea]

And I don't see any of those names as *good* as they certainly didn't conform to the moral order of the universe per Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary.

[Trance Gemini]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:12 PM, thea <thea...@gmail.com> wrote:

And I don't see any of those names as *good* as they certainly didn't conform to the moral order of the universe per Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary.

I agree and for that reason you might want to consider retracting your definition of good and using the one from Merriam-Webster instead.

Of course, once you retract your biblical definition of "good" and accept the Merriam-Webster definition of "good", you will also have to acknowledge that Atheists can be good people (as well as bad) and Christians can be bad people (as well as good).

;-)

What do you think?

[e_space]

anybody can 'state' anything they want about themselves. it is how
they are perceived by society that defines them. many people call
themselves christians and then do repulsive things. are they really
christians? i think not. im not sure, but didnt koresh claim he was
'god'? when claiming or stating something makes it reality, the planet
will surely go to hell...not that it hasnt already ;-)

[thea]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:18 AM, Trance Gemini <trance...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:12 PM, thea <thea...@gmail.com> wrote:

And I don't see any of those names as *good* as they certainly didn't conform to the moral order of the universe per Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary.

I agree and for that reason you might want to consider retracting your definition of good and using the one from Merriam-Webster instead.

Of course, once you retract your biblical definition of "good" and accept the Merriam-Webster definition of "good", you will also have to acknowledge that Atheists can be good people (as well as bad) and Christians can be bad people (as well as good).

;-)

What do you think?

 

I don't think there is a difference between *good* and *good* -- the definition of *good* in the Bible is if you are serving the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel - Jesus!  And the only way you serve Him is by remembering that *God dwells in the praises of His People* so you say, Thank You, Jesus and per St. Paul even for the good and bad in your life -- and watch as *all things work for *good* to them that love God and are called according to His Purpose.* (my quote)

And morality only as defined by the Bible makes *good sense* -- anything else is the mixed up melting pot of the cauldron (whoopee - Shakespear again).

[LL]

LL: Thanks TLC. Here's an article by an atheist in a foxhole:

I Was an Atheist in a Foxhole

by Philip K. Paulson
Belief in life after death was a dangerous indulgence in Vietnam

Watching the Vietnam War during the mid-1960s on the nightly news
inspired me to perform my patriotic duty and join the Army. There, I
was trained as a light weapons infantryman and a paratrooper. I was
ordered to the front lines of battle in South Vietnam in September
1966 and fought until January 1968. I extended my tour of duty for the
special privilege of an early honorable discharge.

My Vietnam War experiences began in the fall of 1966 fighting the
South Vietnamese communists — the Viet Cong. After my first month in
Vietnam, I became an atheist. My former religion was Lutheran, due to
my Swedish ancestry which traditionally dictates that progeny be so
baptized. I could understand only a primitive concept of God. I
rebelled. No compassionate God, I thought, would permit all this
killing to happen. After witnessing the dead and wounded during my
first "firefight," I looked up and said, "You sadistic God! You're not
worthy of my worship!"

Medical evacuation by helicopter "dust-off" was a comfort to many
soldiers in the jungles. When soldiers incurred critical wounds, they
could expect to be returned home to the United States. Otherwise, they
could be assured of arriving at a hospital operating table and being
treated with professional care, usually in about thirty minutes.
However, when ambushed and outnumbered by an enemy force with superior
firepower, the fear of dying strikes one's intellect and emotions to
the point of crippling panic.

This happened to me near a hamlet northwest of Saigon. I, along with
five other men, was assigned to night duty at an outpost about a half-
mile from company perimeters. We carried only our M-16 rifles,
grenades, Claymore mines, and a two-way radio to protect us. That
night we were surprised by an assault group of Viet Cong guerrilla
fighters. Three dead young American soldiers were silhouetted by the
moon's reflections inside our outpost bunker. The radio man sputtered,
"Oh, Lord! Lord! Help us!" My response to him was to stop praying. I
exclaimed, "To hell with God! You help us! You radio back for mortar
and artillery fire support!" Fortunately, he regained his composure
and radioed the forward observers for fire support to be directed at
our map coordinates. Common sense dictated that staying alive was more
important than wasting precious time praying. Consequently, he save
our lives.

The next morning, I was thrilled to see the men from my company.
Fortunately, I didn't sustain any personal injuries from the night
assault. However, the assaults of the next morning struck me
personally when a surviving soldier said to me, "See, Paulson, God
answers prayers." I replied, "I'm damn glad that someone was an
atheist in a foxhole!" He laughed because he thought I was joking, and
I had to allow him to believe that I was — I had to keep my atheism to
myself.

I knew that proclaiming to be an atheist while on duty in South
Vietnam could likely prejudiced promotions and possibly cause harmful
reprisals. An atheist was perceived as tantamount to being a
communist. Our army chaplain was a fundamentalist Christian who saw
the devil in virtually everything he didn't believe in. Army chaplains
wielded a lot of power; their opinions could make the difference
between whether or not you got promoted. So, I was quiet about my
nonbelief in God.

I suffered through horrifying moments, expecting to be killed. I was
convinced that no cosmic rescuer would same me. Besides, I believed
life after death was merely wishful thinking. There were times when I
expected to suffer a painful, agonizing death. My frustration and
anger at being caught in a dilemma of life- and-death situations
simply infuriated me. Hearing the sound of bullets whistling through
the air and popping near my ears was damned scary. Fortunately, I was
never physically wounded.

One day I heard the chaplain preach that we should be happy and
willing to die so that we could be with Jesus. After hearing that,
some people praised God. I cursed Gold. Cursing and swearing were very
therapeutic and healthy for me; it game me the courage of Hercules. It
gave me confidence in my ability and skill to stay alive. I was
determined to live on this side of the grave. I could not believe that
there was a better life than this one, so I rejected the foolish
notion that my existence was based upon the extremes of God and the
devil, heaven and hell, and life after death.

When facing death, my thought was to stay alive. I was just infuriated
by all the people praying and wasting my precious time and theirs.
When the chips are down and there's no one to turn to for help, and
you've found out that it's just you who has been helping all along,
that's the big difference. I discovered in combat that there is no one
to turn to — it's just you who has been saving your own ass all along.
My answer to death was simply, "Oh well, I'll be pushing daisies." If
I survived and looked at another person's death, I'd think it's not my
body that's being counted." I was fighting to stay alive — not praying
for life after death.

I told my company clerk to issue me new dogtags with "none" stamped on
them for my religious preference. The excuse I gave was that I didn't
have any religion. Although I didn't know it at the time, I was a
humanist.

Later when I was getting short (a term used in Vietnam for guys who
were nearing discharge and would be returning home), I felt freer to
proclaim my atheism and started spouting off. I figured, what could
they do then — kill me?

When I had first arrived in South Vietnam and reported to my assigned
military unit, I told my platoon sergeant that I could not kill
anyone. He told me that there are no pacifists or atheists in
foxholes. He was wrong. One of my army buddies was a very bright and
articulate medic. I asked him why he wasn't carrying a rifle or even a
pistol, and he replied that he was a pacifist. His pacifism was
unpopular with some soldiers in the company, and he received some
verbal ridicule and scorn. However, this didn't seem to bother him.

Being under fire didn't seem to bother him either or keep him from
performing his duty. I recall seeing my buddy risk his life many times
during very frightening battles, fearlessly running about various
terrain and attending to the wounded. Then, one dreadful day, I saw
his lifeless body riddled with bullet holes, struck dead by Viet Cong
small-arms fire. They wrapped him in a body bag for dust-off. I recall
my platoon sergeant's remark, "That pacifist might have lived if he
had had a weapon to defend himself."

I remember that when I first thought about enlisting, I wondered if I
might be a conscientious objector. I really wrestled with that thought
at the beginning, wondering, "Could I really kill somebody?" But when
ultimately faced with the choice in a combat situation — to kill or be
killed — I opted for life. However, my buddy did find himself in that
situation: he couldn't kill, yet he chose to go into the service. And
they sent him to Vietnam. They should have kept him in the States. He
ended up getting killed.

The small bands of Viet Cong soldiers practiced guerrilla warfare:
strike and ambush and retreat into the jungle. We searched and
destroyed the Viet Cong's sanctuaries with our small platoon and squad-
sized patrols. My company was ordered to demolish their tunnels,
destroy their food supplies, confiscate their munitions, and take into
custody all surviving prisoners of war.

The heavy foliage in South Vietnam's jungles was treacherous. I recall
sneaking up death-laden trails and through heavy under- brush where
shattered, razor-sharp bamboo booby traps could cut a finger clean
off. I recall with disgust the monsoon rains, blood-sucking leaches
crawling everywhere, and the merciless malaria-carrying mosquitoes.
Every stroke of the noisy machete cutting a jungle trail brought fear
of the Viet Cong; they could hear us and planned their ambushes
accordingly. Aircraft would sometimes fly overhead spraying orange
clouds of chemicals to defoliate the jungle below. This chemical,
known as Agent Orange, was sometimes sprayed directly on top of us.
Severe skin rashes would result day later.

During one search-and-destroy mission of tunnel complexes, we came
upon hundred-pound sacks of rice. My company commander summoned by
radio a demolition team to burn up this cache of rice with white
phosphorous explosives. I pleaded with the commander to stop the
demolition group from burning the sacks. I challenged his sense of
moral responsibility, reminding him of the villages and hamlets we had
traveled through were we had witnessed thousands of starving refugees
crying for something to eat. I threatened to write to my congressman.
Frustrated and angry, I climbed atop the pile with my rifle and
threatened to remain there and die if necessary, rather than permit
them to burn it up. My commander ordered a squad of soldiers to force
me down from the pile, but no one could grab me without getting a
swift kick off the pile. The commander then threatened, "Come down or
you'll be court marshaled." Finally, after much futile prodding, he
gave in and said, "Okay, come on down, we'll transport the rice out."
He radioed for armored transport carriers to transport the sacks of
rice to the local communities for distribution.

My defiant act of insubordination could have resulted in severe
disciplinary action. Fortunately, I only received a verbal reprimand
by the company commander. But I'll never forget what he told me: "You
should know that that rice is going into the hands of the Viet Cong.
When we leave, the Viet Cong will come and steal it from the people."

During mid-1967, the North Vietnamese Army marched out of southern
Laos along the Ho Chi Minh Trail. Our military tactics changed from
guerrilla warfare to full company-size combat movement. We confronted
full regiments of North Vietnamese combat units in the northern
highlands of South Vietnam. I can still vividly remember the carnage,
my buddies screaming for help, and my terror at the sight of the dead
and dying. I fought in one of the bloodiest battles of Vietnam: the
battle for Dak To in November 1967. I deeply missed my army buddies
who died in those mountains. In my rage and sorrow, I openly expressed
my atheistic philosophy to anyone — whether they wanted to hear it or
not.

I was surprised to meet the chaplain again prior to departing Vietnam.
He rhetorically inquired if I was ever "saved" and if I had ever felt
the presence of the Holy Spirit. he had heard through the grapevine
that I didn't believe in God, and he expressed fearful concern that if
I died I would go to hell. I told him not to bother worrying about me.
I was happy to live a long and happy life. Before saying good bye, I
left him with one inspirational thought: "If you think the Holy Spirit
is great, try thinking freely — unfettered by superstitions and
ritualistic creeds."

In 1973, I decided that I agreed with the philosophy of the American
Humanist Association. I needed to belong to a group of nontheists who
share my vision of hope and who inculcate rational methods of
reasoning, social sympathy, and cooperative skills.

Today, I have redefined my sense of patriotism. To be a patriotic
American is to recognize that I am also a citizen of a world
community; after all, a peaceful earth has no hostile boundaries. The
AHA's Humanist Manifesto II was most appealing to me. It offers
constructive alternatives to resolve conflicts without future wars and
bloodshed. The thirteenth point of Humanist Manifesto II proclaims:

The world community must renounce the resort to violence and force as
a method of solving international disputes. We believe in the peaceful
adjudication of differences by international courts and by the
development of the arts of negotiation and compromise. War is
obsolete. So is the use of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.
It is a planetary imperative to reduce the level of military
expenditures and turn these savings to peaceful and people- oriented
uses.

Philip K. Paulson has a bachelor's degree in Journalism, a master's
degree in Public Administration, and a master's degree in Management
of Information Systems. He is an active member of the Humanist
Association of San Diego and a Plaintiff in a federal court suit
against the city of San Diego to challenge the constitutionality of a
latin cross placed on Mount Soledad Public Park.

(This article appeared in the September/October 1989 issue of The
Humanist magazine.)

[LL]

On Dec 10, 3:47 am, Treebeard <allan_c_cybuls...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> On Dec 10, 12:40 am, LL <llp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 9, 1:32 pm, "TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist
>
> > Christianity ]" <X...@OPERAMAIL.COM> wrote:
> > > On 9 dez, 18:56, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > >  
>
> > > All atheists believe in evolution, which means they don't believe in
> > > morality and think we should all act like animals.
>
> > LL: Atheists don't believe in evolution. Nobody does. Intelligent,
> > rational people accept the scientific evidence of evolution. That's
> > all it takes. No belief necessary.
>
> Since knowledge is "justified true belief", you are wrong.  And you've
> been shown to be wrong, and yet still continue to use this disproven
> argument. Why is that?

LL: Who's showing me that I'm wrong? I haven't seen one intelligent,
rational person say I'm wrong about this, least of all you.

You can redefine any word you want. It doesn't make you look one iota
smarter.

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

>
>
>
> > >TC:  -Atheists try to shift the burden of proof unfairly upon theists (ie,
> > > atheists make the wild and unprovable claim that God does not exist,
> > > and then unfairly expect us Christians to prove that He DOES exist)
>
> > LL: Atheists don't shift the burden of proof fairly or unfairly. The
> > burden of proof is ALWAYS on the person making the claim--and in this
> > case it's people like you.
>
> In some cases, it is on the theist.  However, most of the atheists on
> this board have more of a burden of proof for their statements than I
> do, since I concede that my belief in theism is just that: belief.
> Asking me to prove to the level of knowledge a belief is, therefore,
> ridiculous.

LL: No it isn't. You obviously can't justify your beliefs, so you try
to shift the burden of proof. According to the rules of critical
thinking (about which you obviously know nothing)the burden is never
on the person to whom the claim is made.

>
>
>
> > Atheists don't say god does not exist.
>
> Strong atheists do.  Weak atheists do not.  That's the definition of
> the terms.

LL: Then ask the so called "strong atheists" who say this to prove
their point and let us know what they say! We'll be waiting with bated
breath. You won't find many on this discussion group. Most of the
atheists here know better than to take the position that no god
exists. They say there is no evidence and no reason to believe a god
exists, that's all. However, some will say that the Abrahamic god
cannot exist because his so-called attributes are a complete
contradiction. But I'm afraid you wouldn't understand that subtlety.

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

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

[George Chalkin]

Very nice sentiment. It reminds me of where the military got their
"don't ask, don't tell" policy, as it applies to gays. Back in them
there days of the "old" military, the "don't ask, don't tell" applied
to religion. The military was completely secular back then, but now it
isn't. It seems every time religion rears it's ugly head, a double
standard appears.

[e_space]

the 'head' of religion is ugly. i would not say that all practioners
of such are though, would you? they simply have a belief that you do
not share. does that make them all ugly or bad?

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

[LL]

On Dec 10, 10:23 am, George Chalkin <georgechal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Very nice sentiment. It reminds me of where the military got their
> "don't ask, don't tell" policy, as it applies to gays. Back in them
> there days of the "old" military, the "don't ask, don't tell" applied
> to religion. The military was completely secular back then, but now it
> isn't. It seems every time religion rears it's ugly head, a double
> standard appears.

LL: Indeed! Well said.


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

> > them to burn it up. My commander ordered a squad...
>
> read more »

[Neil Kelsey]

On Dec 10, 9:23 am, e_space <espace1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> anybody can 'state' anything they want about themselves. it is how
> they are perceived by society that defines them.

You constantly encourage people to look inside themselves and to not
learn from others. How is that defining yourself by how others
perceive you? If people think that you're nuts, are you going to
define yourself as nuts?

Man. You are all over the map. Your policy of continued ignorance is
working.

> many people call
> themselves christians and then do repulsive things. are they really
> christians?

No True Scotsman fallacies does not mean that someone who believes
Jesus Christ was the divine son of God is not a Christian.

> i think not. im not sure, but didnt koresh claim he was
> 'god'? when claiming or stating something makes it reality, the planet
> will surely go to hell...not that it hasnt already  ;-)

Oh right, you think Earth is "hell." More evidence of your vaunted
state of happiness. Good thing you included a happy winkie thing at
the end or I might think you're miserable.

[George Chalkin]

> the 'head' of religion is ugly. i would not say that all practioners
> of such are though, would you? they simply have a belief that you do
> not share. does that make them all ugly or bad?
>

Huh, "the nose of the camel under the edge of the tent comes to mind",
or "give them and inch and they take a mile"? Religion has no place in
secular government. What difference does is make whether or not
someone is religious, in a completely religion neutral secular
environment, or what religion someone believes for that matter. All
laws should be sucular, and there should be no religious assumptions.
All performance and reward should be evaluated by merit, with the
assumption that character is character no matter what the creed,
color, gender, preference, whatever. Just leave religion out of it,
what is so hard to get about this secular concept?

[Rupert]

On Dec 11, 4:43 am, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:18 AM, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:12 PM, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> And I don't see any of those names as *good* as they certainly didn't
> >> conform to the moral order of the universe per Merriam-Webster's Collegiate
> >> Dictionary.
>
> > I agree and for that reason you might want to consider retracting your
> > definition of good and using the one from Merriam-Webster instead.
>
> > Of course, once you retract your biblical definition of "good" and accept
> > the Merriam-Webster definition of "good", you will also have to acknowledge
> > that Atheists can be good people (as well as bad) and Christians can be bad
> > people (as well as good).
>
> > ;-)
>
> > What do you think?
>
> I don't think there is a difference between *good* and *good* -- the
> definition of *good* in the Bible is if you are serving the God of Abraham,
> Isaac and Israel - Jesus!  And the only way you serve Him is by remembering
> that *God dwells in the praises of His People* so you say, Thank You, Jesus
> and per St. Paul even for the good and bad in your life -- and watch as *all
> things work for *good* to them that love God and are called according to His
> Purpose.* (my quote)
> And morality only as defined by the Bible makes *good sense* -- anything
> else is the mixed up melting pot of the cauldron (whoopee - Shakespear
> again).
>

Can you help me a bit in figuring out "morality as defined by the
Bible"?

I need some assistance with interpretation.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html

[Trance Gemini]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:43 PM, thea <thea...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 11:18 AM, Trance Gemini <trance...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:12 PM, thea <thea...@gmail.com> wrote:

And I don't see any of those names as *good* as they certainly didn't conform to the moral order of the universe per Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary.

I agree and for that reason you might want to consider retracting your definition of good and using the one from Merriam-Webster instead.

Of course, once you retract your biblical definition of "good" and accept the Merriam-Webster definition of "good", you will also have to acknowledge that Atheists can be good people (as well as bad) and Christians can be bad people (as well as good).

;-)

What do you think?

Unfortunately for you there is a very big and critical difference between the biblical definition of "good"  as stated by you:

Thea said:
"The meaning of *good* to a Christian is when we are doing God's will in our lives.  The only *good* is when you are making sure everything in your life is a reflection of your belief that Jesus died in your place on Calvary.  It means that you have the *fruit of the Spirit* living in you.  It also means that you are much aware of the *Christ in you the hope of Glory.*"

And the dictionary definition in Merriam Webster:

1 a : something that is good b (1) : something conforming to the moral order of the universe (2) : praiseworthy character : goodness c : a good element or portion
2 a : advancement of prosperity or well-being <the good of the community> <it's for your own good> b : something useful or beneficial <it's no good trying>
3 a : something that has economic utility or satisfies an economic want b plural : personal property having intrinsic value but usually excluding money, securities, and negotiable instruments c plural : cloth d plural : something manufactured or produced for sale : wares, merchandise <canned goods> e plural British : freight
4 : good persons —used with the
5 plural a : the qualities required to achieve an end b : proof of wrongdoing <didn't have the goods on him — T. G. Cooke>

— for good also for good and all : forever, permanently

— in good with : in a favored position with

— to the good 1 : for the best : beneficial <efforts to restrict credit were all to the good — Time>
2 : in a position of net gain or profit <wound up $10 to the good>

 

I don't think there is a difference between *good* and *good* -- the definition of *good* in the Bible is if you are serving the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel - Jesus!  And the only way you serve Him is by remembering that *God dwells in the praises of His People* so you say, Thank You, Jesus and per St. Paul even for the good and bad in your life -- and watch as *all things work for *good* to them that love God and are called according to His Purpose.* (my quote)

And morality only as defined by the Bible makes *good sense* -- anything else is the mixed up melting pot of the cauldron (whoopee - Shakespear again).

As you can see, there is absolutely nothing in common with two definitions and since the english language dictionary definition is what society in general uses to define the word good, anyone can be good according to the dictionary definition.

This is in direct contrast with your biblical definition which excludes *everyone* with the exception of christians.

In addition, the part of the definition which states that good is "something conforming to the moral order of the universe" (which I would accept and agree with) says nothing about a god.

Since atheists can and do conform to the "moral order of the universe" because our morality is based on materialism/naturalism which is directly founded in the "moral order of the universe" and not in ancient obedience manual written 2000 years ago.

And since the dictionary definition doesn't require a god or a god belief, as soon as you accept the dictionary definition then you have to admit that your statement that "atheists can't be good" is wrong.

If you exclude the dictionary definition then you have to acknowledge that Hitler, Koresh, Jones, BTK Killer, etc are "good" people.

I'm afraid you can't have it both ways.

Sorry.

[e_space]

please stay on subject. we were talking about whether or not people
are *good* simply because they 'state' they are xtian. i dont belong
to any religion and dont 'state' that i am good, bad or indifferent,
so even your misguided opinions of me dont add up to a hill of beans.

what you think of me really has little relevance in my life, in fact
none ... [this is a pop up] macros are neat huh? saves a lot of
retyping ;-)

[e_space]

i think religion should be banished, but to make a general statement
about 'religion raising its ugly head' is rather broad sweeping. in
the context of keeping religion out of military enrollment or decision
making, i agree with you.

[e_space]

using subtle bait today huh? ;-)

> http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html- Hide quoted text -

[Neil Kelsey]

On Dec 10, 11:48 am, e_space <espace1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> please stay on subject.

That's hilarious, coming from you.

> we were talking about whether or not people
> are *good* simply because they 'state' they are xtian.

So I guess when you said "anybody can 'state' anything they want about
themselves" you were forced to type that at gunpoint? Because you
weren't limiting the topic to Christianity when you said that. How's a
guy supposed to convert to your beliefs when you keep contradicting
yourself?

> i dont belong to any religion

You have your own.

> and dont 'state' that i am good, bad or indifferent,
> so even your misguided opinions of me dont add up to a hill of beans.

So then you were wrong, or lying, when you said that "it is how
they (people) are perceived by society that defines them."

> what you think of me really has little relevance in my life, in fact
> none ...

So you were lying.

> [this is a pop up]  macros are neat huh? saves a lot of
> retyping  ;-)

And you're still lying.

> On Dec 10, 1:34 pm, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 10, 9:23 am, e_space <espace1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > anybody can 'state' anything they want about themselves. it is how
> > > they are perceived by society that defines them.
>
> > You constantly encourage people to look inside themselves and to not
> > learn from others. How is that defining yourself by how others
> > perceive you? If people think that you're nuts, are you going to
> > define yourself as nuts?
>
> > Man. You are all over the map. Your policy of continued ignorance is
> > working.
>
> > >  many people call
> > > themselves christians and then do repulsive things. are they really
> > > christians?
>
> > No True Scotsman fallacies does not mean that someone who believes
> > Jesus Christ was the divine son of God is not a Christian.
>
> > > i think not. im not sure, but didnt koresh claim he was
> > > 'god'? when claiming or stating something makes it reality, the planet
> > > will surely go to hell...not that it hasnt already  ;-)
>
> > Oh right, you think Earth is "hell." More evidence of your vaunted
> > state of happiness. Good thing you included a happy winkie thing at

> > the end or I might think you're miserable.- Hide quoted text -

[thea]

Thank you for sending this article.

 

 

[Treebeard]

On Dec 10, 1:22 pm, LL <llp...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Dec 10, 3:47 am, Treebeard <allan_c_cybuls...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 10, 12:40 am, LL <llp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 9, 1:32 pm, "TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist
>
> > > Christianity ]" <X...@OPERAMAIL.COM> wrote:
> > > > On 9 dez, 18:56, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > >  
>
> > > > All atheists believe in evolution, which means they don't believe in
> > > > morality and think we should all act like animals.
>
> > > LL: Atheists don't believe in evolution. Nobody does. Intelligent,
> > > rational people accept the scientific evidence of evolution. That's
> > > all it takes. No belief necessary.
>
> > Since knowledge is "justified true belief", you are wrong.  And you've
> > been shown to be wrong, and yet still continue to use this disproven
> > argument. Why is that?
>
> LL: Who's showing me that I'm wrong? I haven't seen one intelligent,
> rational person say I'm wrong about this, least of all you.
>
> You can redefine any word you want. It doesn't make you look one iota
> smarter.

From wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge

"Philosophical debates in general start with Plato's formulation of
knowledge as "justified true belief"."

TG has also used that definition. It's the common one when you talk
about belief and epistemology (ie philosophy) which is what you're
doing.

What definition are you trying to use?

>
> **********************************************************
>
>
>
>
>
> > > >TC:  -Atheists try to shift the burden of proof unfairly upon theists (ie,
> > > > atheists make the wild and unprovable claim that God does not exist,
> > > > and then unfairly expect us Christians to prove that He DOES exist)
>
> > > LL: Atheists don't shift the burden of proof fairly or unfairly. The
> > > burden of proof is ALWAYS on the person making the claim--and in this
> > > case it's people like you.
>
> > In some cases, it is on the theist.  However, most of the atheists on
> > this board have more of a burden of proof for their statements than I
> > do, since I concede that my belief in theism is just that: belief.
> > Asking me to prove to the level of knowledge a belief is, therefore,
> > ridiculous.
>
> LL: No it isn't.

Yes, it is. You cannot demand that I prove something to the standards
of knowledge that I claim is at the level of belief. To do so, of
course, I have to accept that I am limited to the properties of
beliefs in talking about it. However, since I personally do not think
it irrational to belief that God doesn't exist (I do tend to think
that agnosticism might be) and accept that I could very well be wrong,
I do so, so you have no cause to demand more proof from me.

> You obviously can't justify your beliefs, so you try
> to shift the burden of proof. According to the rules of critical
> thinking (about which you obviously know nothing)the burden is never
> on the person to whom the claim is made.

However, critical thinking must accept that the burden of proof is to
the level of certainty the claimant is claiming.

>
>
>
> > > Atheists don't say god does not exist.
>
> > Strong atheists do.  Weak atheists do not.  That's the definition of
> > the terms.
>
> LL: Then ask the so called "strong atheists" who say this to prove
> their point and let us know what they say!

They say "Sorry, but we merely have a lack of belief".

> We'll be waiting with bated
> breath. You won't find many on this discussion group.

On the contrary. A great number of them make arguments like the ones
I mentioned in my last paragraph. Or do you not think that claims of
"God is a myth" mean that you are claiming that God does not exist?

> Most of the
> atheists here know better than to take the position that no god
> exists. They say there is no evidence and no reason to believe a god
> exists, that's all. However, some will say that the Abrahamic god
> cannot exist because his so-called attributes are a complete
> contradiction. But I'm afraid you wouldn't understand that subtlety.

That's not a subtlety at all; that's a claim of non-existence. And
they're wrong about that, and would have to prove it. Or do you
disagree that those who say that about the Abrahamic God need to prove
that claim?

[Observer]

On Dec 9, 5:44 am, "TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist
Christianity ]" <X...@OPERAMAIL.COM> wrote:
> I. Just thinking about the pain and evil people like you have brought
> to the world, it brings tears to my eyes.

Observer
I would suggest a complete psychological work up by trained unbiased
professionals. It appears to me that the pot is beginning to crack.

Now if you would provide proof of the pain and evil that people like
(who?) have brought into the world. Your writing is so poor that it is
almost unintelligible.

When a mind begins to deteriorate to the point that tears and pain are
produced by the disbelief of others in crackpot superstitious nonsense
a serious problem is emerging . Get help.






I'll be praying that once
> you are a grown-up,

I find your attempted act of witchcraft and ritualized fetishistic
magic, appalling .

We are living in a time wherein the actualities of the universe are
known to us and are more and more controlled by applying scientific
method. You shame all of humanity by clinging to the ancient
demonology , magic and superstitious filth .

Get help , get an education. The ignorant do not understand science as
they have not read it those of you who refuse to do so are incredibly
stupid ,misanthropic, and live the lives of parasites wherein the hard
work of others , their support for scientific method, and well rounded
educations are are repaid by your indolence, intellectual sloth, and
horrible ignorance.

You have a responsibility as to your fellows which you fail to
shoulder. Why ?

Learn to learn !


you'll leave these childish delusions of yours
> behind, and come to accept the awesome love of our vengeful God.

Observer

You are an embarrassment to all of human kind.

Get Help !

Psychonomist

[TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist Christianity ]]

On 9 dez, 19:57, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>  On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 9, 12:56 pm, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >  On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Neil Kelsey <neil_kel...@hotmail.com
> > >wrote:
>
> > > > On Dec 9, 12:28 pm, Trance Gemini <trancegemi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >  On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Neil Kelsey <> > neil_kel...@hotmail.com







Mr. Gracias,

why are you so full of hate? I don't understand your horrible
intolerance towards Christianity. What have we ever done to you? We
try to spread love to the world, and you come on here and mock us.
Your just proof of how empty and bitter the heart of an atheist really
is

Luckily, Jesus said I'm blessed by your persecution. But don't worry,
I'll pray for you, because I am SOOO much a better person than you

God bless.

[Trance Gemini]

LOL! usted es agradable ;-)

--

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=en.

[e_space]

read the title at the top of the forum ;-)

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

[Neil Kelsey]

On Dec 10, 4:02 pm, e_space <espace1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> read the title at the top of the forum   ;-)

You have serious comprehension problems, since it was you who changed
the subject to "anybody can 'state' anything they want about
themselves," which, since you seem to need everything spelled out for
you (and even then it's a coin toss), isn't a statement about
Chrisianity - you know, that long word in the title of the forum. So
instead of being a hypocritical and sanctimonious git about a topic
that YOU changed, maybe you could just go with the flow of next time.

Your policy to remain ignorant is still working for you. I'm curious,
were you ever diagnosed with ADD?

[TLC]

TRUECRISTIAN, "why are you so full of hate? I don't understand your

horrible intolerance towards Christianity. What have we ever done to
you? We try to spread love to the world,"

Just a few obvious examples:

The Crusades.

The Inquisitions.

Witch trials in Europe and America.

The Divine right of Kings (valid until killed by another Divinely-
appointed King).

Missionaries destroying/converting smaller, "heathen" religions and
cultures.

Missionaries such as Mother Teresa.

The demonization of other religions, e.g. Christianity demonizing
Pagans ("They're devil-worshippers!"), the Romans demonizing
Christians ("They're atheists and cannibals!").

Persecution of Heretics - e.g. Galileo for daring to suggest that the
Earth orbits the Sun.

Children dying because their parents refused them medical treatment on
religious grounds; relying instead on faith-healers and prayer.

Slavery, supposedly supported by scripture ("Slaves, obey your earthly
masters with respect and fear, just as you would obey Christ.",
St.Paul, Ephesians 6:5)

Holy wars - followers of different faiths (or even the same faith)
killing each other in the name of their (benevolent, loving and
merciful) gods.

The destruction of great works of art considered to be pornographic/
blasphemous, and the persecution of the artists.

Censorship (often destructive) of speech, art, books, music, films,
poetry, songs and, if possible, thought.

Persecution/punishment of blasphemers (Salman Rushdie still has a
death sentence on him), and blasphemy laws in general.

The requirement of theism in order to stand for public office or to
testify in court.

Serial killers believing they are doing the work of Satan (or
sometimes Jesus).

Often-fatal exorcisms by priests believing they are destroying the
work of Satan.

People suffering dreadful injury or death in the belief that their
faith has made them invulnerable (e.g. people climbing into lion
enclosures at zoos, with a Bible as protection).

Whole societies divided by minor differences in belief or doctrine,
often resulting in violence.

Mass suicides of cult-members following a charismatic leader who
believes the world is about to End (most recently, the Heaven's Gate
and Solar Temple cults - there will be more as we approach the year
2000).

The attempted genocide of followers of a particular faith (e.g. the
Jewish Holocaust, "ethnic cleansing" in former Yugoslavia).

The discouragement of rational, critical thought (resulting in young-
earth creationists, for example).

Uncontrolled population growth caused (or at least helped) by churches
prohibiting birth-control and abortion. (You can also add : unwanted
pregnancies, ill-fated forced marriages, and pregnant teenagers
condemned to a life in mental institutions to avoid embarrassing their
families.)

The spread of sexually transmitted diseases (e.g. AIDS) due to
churches prohibiting the use of condoms.
Believers whipping, impaling, poisoning or crucifying themselves
during religious festivals as a demonstration of their faith and
piety.

The indoctrination of children into the religion of their parents,
giving them an arbitrary, life-long belief that is almost entirely
dependent on their place of birth.

Women treated as second-class citizens or even slaves.

Pentecostal snake-handlers (Augusta Chronicle news article)

Persecution of homosexuals (Genocide of gay and lesbian youth)

Abuse of power, authority and trust by religious leaders (for
financial gain or sexual abuse of followers and even children).

Minor religions ("cults") stockpiling weapons to defend themselves
from the Armies Of Satan (i.e. the police and the government).


On 10 Dec, 22:28, "TRUECRISTIANBorn Again Fundamentalist

[TLC]

http://www.abarnett.demon.co.uk/atheism/harm.html

[TLC]

TRUECRISTIAN,

Are all those other fantasy believers who don't believe in jesus and
who out number christians, also filthy and evil??

[thea]

Jesus said that there would be few who found Him.  *Narrow is the way that leads to life in Jesus Christ - and broad is the road to destruction.*

I believe that the reason we are even having to have discussions like we have on this board is because Christianity failed to live for the Lord Jesus Christ - and ministers started serving themselves (meaning - making money) and so the filthy lucre that is available has made the Denominations all bow down to the State - and fail to stand up for what is really right for the people.

If Christianity had been preached as it should have been preached, and people really followed the (give thanks for all things - for this is the will of God concerning you).  I believe that we would all be in better shape than we are -- for we would have realized that it is *all for one and one for all* with Jesus being the head of all.

In other words, it is Christianity that does not have any *power* that is the cause of our troubles.  Show me a *man of God* who has tapped into the *power of God* and I will show you true Christianity.

It is just like the pastor I read about in the Northern U.S., who talked with the Angels.  The stories HE told of the ministering of the Angels.  No, I don't believe that our first step is to look for Angels - but Angels are to minister for us who know the Lord Jesus Christ.

The Angels in his book were laughing about the fun they had when they took the lynch pins out of the chariot wheels when Israel was crossing the red sea as they came out of Egypt.

And, in this book he also made another statement that I found very interesting.  He said that when we die we have another chance to believe in Jesus -- but most of the time whatever takes our time here, will be what we are interested in there - and so be lost forever.

 

 

 

[LL]

On Dec 11, 8:08 am, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jesus said that there would be few who found Him.

LL: Well, he's been shown to be wrong yet again, hasn't he?



Major Religions of the World
Ranked by Number of Adherents


Christianity: 2.1 billion
Islam: 1.5 billion
Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist: 1.1 billion
Hinduism: 900 million
Chinese traditional religion: 394 million
Buddhism: 376 million
primal-indigenous: 300 million
African Traditional & Diasporic: 100 million
Sikhism: 23 million
Juche: 19 million
Spiritism: 15 million
Judaism: 14 million
Baha'i: 7 million
Jainism: 4.2 million
Shinto: 4 million
Cao Dai: 4 million
Zoroastrianism: 2.6 million
Tenrikyo: 2 million
Neo-Paganism: 1 million
Unitarian-Universalism: 800 thousand
Rastafarianism: 600 thousand
Scientology: 500 thousand

Largest religious bodies in the world:

Religious Body Number of Adherents
Catholic Church** 1,100,000,000
Sunni Islam* 1,000,000,000
Eastern Orthodox Church* 225,000,000
Jinja Honcho* 83,000,000
Anglican Communion* 77,000,000
Assemblies of God* 50,000,000
Ethiopian Orthodox Church 35,000,000
Evangelische Kirche in Deutschland (EKD)* 27,400,000
Iglesia ni Cristo (based in the Philippines) 27,000,000
Sikhism 23,000,000
Juche (North Korea) 19,000,000
Seventh-day Adventist Church 16,811,519
Jehovah's Witnesses** 16,500,000
Southern Baptist Convention* 16,000,000
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 12,275,822
United Methodist Church* 11,708,887
Soka Gakkai 11,000,000
New Apostolic Church 10,260,000
Ahmadiyya * 10,000,000
Veerashaivas (Lingayats) 10,000,000
Coptic Orthodox 10,000,000
Sathya Sai Baba 10,000,000
Church of Uganda 8,000,000
Choge Buddhism 8,000,000
Church of Sweden 7,143,292
Church of God in Christ 6,500,000
Kimbanguist Church 6,500,000
Bahai World Faith 6,000,000
Universal Church of the Kingdom of God
(Igreja Universal do Reino de Deus) 6,000,000
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America 5,500,000
China Christian Council 5,000,000
Rissho Koseikai 5,000,000
Swaminarayanism 5,000,000
Aglipayan Church 4,500,000
Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland 4,400,000
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Denmark 4,350,000
Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee) 4,000,000
Kale Heywet (SIM, Ethiopia) 4,000,000
Church of Norway (Evangelical Lutheran) 3,850,000
Church of South India 3,800,000
Armenian Apostolic Church 3,500,000
Christian Congregation (Brazil) 3,120,000
National Baptist Convention of America 3,106,000
"God is Love" Pentecostal Church (Igreja Pentecostal "Deus e Amo")
3,000,000
Zion Christian Church (South Africa) 3,000,000
Cao Dai 3,000,000
Ch'ondogyo 3,000,000
Church of the Lord Aladura 3,000,000
Reiyukai 3,000,000
United Church of Canada 3,000,000
International Church of the Foursquare Gospel 2,863,232
Balinese Hinduism 2,800,000
Christian and Missionary Alliance 2,644,296
Netherlands Reformed Church (NHK) 2,600,000
Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod 2,582,440
Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) 2,560,201
Protestant Christian Batak Church
(Huria Kristen Batak Protestan -- HKBP, Indonesia) 2,500,000
Evangelical Churches of West Africa 2,500,000
Progressive National Baptist Convention 2,500,000
Tenrikyo 2,350,000
United Pentecostal Church International 2,300,000
Evangelical Lutheran Church in Tanzania 2,200,000
Presbyterian Church of Korea (Haptong) 2,094,338
Africa Inland Church (Kenya) 2,000,000
Brazil for Christ 2,000,000
Churches of Christ 2,000,000
Church of Jesus Christ in Madagascar 2,000,000
Syrian Orthodox Church ("Jacobite") 2,000,000
Radhasoami 2,000,000
United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism 2,000,000
True (Old Calendar) Orthodox Church of Greece 2,000,000
Reformed Church in Hungary 2,000,000
American Muslim Society 2,000,000
Presbyterian Church of Korea (Tonghap) 1,660,248
Council of Baptist Churches of NE India 1,630,000
Ethiopian Evangelical Church Mekane Yesus 1,625,994
Baptist Bible Fellowship International 1,600,000
Salvation Army 1,500,000
Myanmar Baptist Convention 1,500,000
Malagasy Lutheran Church (Madagascar) 1,500,000
American Baptist Churches in the U.S.A. 1,455,855
Brazilian Baptist Convention 1,440,000
Dutch Reformed Church (NGK; South Africa) 1,403,180
Alawi 1,400,000
Council of Evangelical Methodist Churches
of Latin America and the Caribbean 1,400,000
Uniting Church in Australia 1,386,000
United Church of Christ 1,377,320
Christ Apostolic Church (Nigeria) 1,300,000
Union of American Hebrew Congregations (Reform) 1,300,000
Pentecostal Church of Indonesia 1,280,000
African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church 1,252,369
Church of Central Africa, Presbyterian (CCAP; Malawi) 1,250,000
Nigerian Baptist Convention 1,250,000
Church of the Nazarene 1,216,657
African Methodist Episcopal Church 1,200,000
Divine Light Mission 1,200,000
Church of God Miss. Intl. (Nigeria) 1,200,000
British Methodist Church 1,200,000
Church of North India 1,125,000
Christian Churches and Churches of Christ 1,070,000
Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) 1,043,943
United Orthodox Jewish Congregation of America 1,043,943
Lott Carey Baptist Foreign Mission Convention, USA 1,050,000
Evangelical Church of the Lutheran Confession in Brazil 1,000,000
ISKCON 1,000,000
Syrian Orthodox Church of Malabar (Mar Thoma) 1,000,000
National Primitive Baptist Convention of the U.S.A. 1,000,000
Pentecostal Assemblies of the World 1,000,000
PL Kyodan 1,000,000
Sekai Kyuseikyo 1,000,000
Church of Christ in Nigeria 1,000,000
Unity Church 1,000,000
Igreja Evangelica Pentecostal (Brazil) 1,000,000
Church of Scotland 1,000,000
Sukyo Mahikari 1,000,000

LL: Count up the Christian churches.

There are 225 million Christians in the United States.

These are among the "few" who have found Jesus.


Thea:  *Narrow is the way that

> leads to life in Jesus Christ - and broad is the road to destruction.*

LL: In the face of the statistics that quote is absolutely ridiculous.
Broad is the road to destruction, indeed. Christianity is definitely
at the head of the pack on that particular road.

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

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

[thea]

Yep - a form of godliness - but with no Power!!

This is religion - but not true Christianity.

True Christianity is something whereby you come to realized that organized churches do not have anything that really satisfy's your longing for Jesus and the Holy Spirit in your life.

That is when you find you have to *study to show yourself approved unto God*.

It is a personal experience and just because someone says they know God -- I say -- show me the Power of God in your life.

 

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

[e_space]

fighting an uphill battle huh? lol

> > > > atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com<atheism-vs-christianit­y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com><atheism-vs-christianit
> > y%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com <y%252Buns...@googlegroups.com>>
> >  > > .
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -

[philosophy]

On Dec 12, 5:27 am, LL <llp...@aol.com> wrote:

Now that's interesting.
Wherever you got these statistics from take a look at the
third one:

Christianity: 2.1 billion
Islam: 1.5 billion
Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist: 1.1 billion

Hey, we're not so far behind Islam!

[philosophy]

On Dec 10, 8:32 pm, TLC <tlc.tere...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Atheists in Foxholes
>

Thanks for this TLC.
I have seen it before, but it's always nice to read
it again.

[LL]

On Dec 11, 12:17 pm, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yep - a form of godliness - but with no Power!!
> This is religion - but not true Christianity.
> True Christianity is something whereby you come to realized that organized
> churches do not have anything that really satisfy's your longing for Jesus
> and the Holy Spirit in your life.
> That is when you find you have to *study to show yourself approved unto
> God*.
> It is a personal experience and just because someone says they know God -- I
> say -- show me the Power of God in your life.

LL: Are you saying that when a person calls himself a christian, he is
lying if he doesn't fit your narrow definition?

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

[LL]

On Dec 11, 7:59 pm, philosophy <smwil...@tpg.com.au> wrote:
> On Dec 12, 5:27 am, LL <llp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Now that's interesting.
> Wherever you got these statistics from take a look at the
> third one:
>
> Christianity: 2.1 billion
> Islam: 1.5 billion
> Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist: 1.1 billion
>
> Hey, we're not so far behind Islam!

LL: Pretty good, huh? And not one church, preacher or missionary among
us.

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

[e_space]

there are tons of preachers among you, just a different message ;-)

[Treebeard]

On Dec 12, 2:34 am, LL <llp...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Dec 11, 12:17 pm, thea <thea.n...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Yep - a form of godliness - but with no Power!!
> > This is religion - but not true Christianity.
> > True Christianity is something whereby you come to realized that organized
> > churches do not have anything that really satisfy's your longing for Jesus
> > and the Holy Spirit in your life.
> > That is when you find you have to *study to show yourself approved unto
> > God*.
> > It is a personal experience and just because someone says they know God -- I
> > say -- show me the Power of God in your life.
>
> LL: Are you saying that when a person calls himself a christian, he is
> lying if he doesn't fit your narrow definition?

Ah, the standard invalid conflation made so often here: if someone
says something and is wrong, but really did believe they were correct,
they are lying.

Being wrong is the same thing as being a liar, right?

> ...
>
> read more »

[e_space]

conveniently 4 groups were combined to make up the 1.1 billion. many
who are not xtian or islamic, are far from being atheists. if you
define atheism in the same brushstroke as non-religious, you are doing
your cause an injustice. one can believe in 'god' without being
religious. imo, religion actually distances one from 'god', cuz they
are simply believing what they are taught rather looking in a place
where some advancement might be made.

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

[Neil Kelsey]

On Dec 12, 3:43 am, e_space <espace1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> conveniently 4 groups were combined to make up the 1.1 billion. many
> who are not xtian or islamic, are far from being atheists. if you
> define atheism in the same brushstroke as non-religious, you are doing
> your cause an injustice. one can believe in 'god' without being
> religious. imo, religion actually distances one from 'god',

So, you think religion "distances one from 'god'". That is tacit
acknowledgement that you think that 'god' exists. Even if you don't
have the same definition of 'god' as others, that means you are
religious.

re⋅li⋅gious– adjective (from dictionary.com):

1. of, pertaining to, or concerned with religion

re⋅li⋅gion –noun

1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the
universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency
or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and
often containing a moral code

Since 'god' is a superhuman agency, and you believe in 'god,' then you
are religious, according to any dictionary. Of course, given your
stated policy that you are "not here to learn anything" I expect you
will continue to maintain that you are not religious. The problem with
your policy is, although it allegedly makes you happy (if thinking
that the Earth is hell and hating people so much that you think
suicide is a good way to get away from them can be considered
"happiness"), it makes you look like an idiot.

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

[philosophy]

On Dec 12, 9:43 pm, e_space <espace1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> conveniently 4 groups were combined to make up the 1.1 billion. many
> who are not xtian or islamic, are far from being atheists. if you
> define atheism in the same brushstroke as non-religious, you are doing
> your cause an injustice. one can believe in 'god' without being
> religious. imo, religion actually distances one from 'god', cuz they
> are simply believing what they are taught rather looking in a place
> where some advancement might be made.

Considering the 1.1 billion is supposedly 2% of the population
I think it is a fair comment on my part. The four groups were
Secular/Non religious/Agnostic/Atheist. Granted they are not
all the same, or they would all have the same name, but you are
nit-picking ear space. I know you like to do this, but it really
would be in your interests to choose your targets a little more
sensibly. Also, your last sentence is an assumption, so I will
ask you to "prove it".

> ...
>
> read more »

[e_space]

hmmmm back to the name calling i see. just when i was starting to
think you were a reasonable poster.

why dont you simply state the number of atheists? personally, i dont
like being clumped in with atheists because what i have seen from them
so far is quite uninviting. your comment is similar to saying 'soccer
is the most popular sport in the world with 2.1 billion players.
basketball, football, hockey and golf players total 1.8 billion, so we
are almost as popular as soccer" ... does that make sense to you? in
case you are not aware of it, non-religious people dont have to be
atheists. they can actually believe in 'god', although not the man
made version of such. if you wish to consider this nit picking, fill
your boots. ;-)

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

[e_space]

funny that i dont see the word 'god' in your quoted description of
religion.

hey, i thought you were an atheist! and now you are saying 'god is a
superhuman agency'!?!?

just to get your little repetitive tick sorted out, i claimed i dont
come here TO learn. i never said that i havent learned anything here,
or wouldnt accept knowledge if it were presented to me, have i? you
see neil, you simply twist words to your own liking. they dont have to
have any relationship with truth and typically are just your wild
reaching opinions that are accented by your childish, but negatively
motivated, enthusiasm. tsk tsk ;-)

[philosophy]

On Dec 13, 2:35 am, e_space <espace1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> hmmmm back to the name calling i see. just when i was starting to
> think you were a reasonable poster.

Tut, tut ear space, it's a term of endearment, is it not?
I'd much rather have this one than "showmethehoney".

> ...
>
> read more »

[e_space]

lol ... thats funny mouth_draft. whoops, you dont mind me calling you
that, do ya??? hahaha ;-)

many have inserted adjectives for the letter 'e' in e_space, as is my
desire, but this is the first for 'ear'. it seems to reflect the
maturity level of those that use such a nice term of endearment, so
quite appropriate coming from you guys, ya hear me??? lol ... you guys
are fun to play with. ya keep my bratty nature alive and well ;-)

hey! anybody else want to sign up for their very own Term Of
Endearment nik??? maybe TG could be brain_trance? or it could be
shared with DK so he can register as brain_dead??? hahahahahahahaha

ear_space to mouth_draft ... over and out! hahahaha

[e_space]

hey, you could be nose_philosophy ... get it??? hahahahaha

[e_space]

fun playing sandbox hey kids? hahaha

[e_space]

with appologies, how about shit_server for obs??? hahahaha

[LL]

> > > > > In other words, it is Christianity that does not have any *power* that is...
>
> read more »

[LL]

LL: If you believe in any god, it is a "man-made version" of god. If
you believe in any god, even if it's designed by you, you are not an
atheist, either.


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

> > > > > > leads to life in Jesus Christ - and broad is the road...
>
> read more »

[LL]

On Dec 12, 10:20 am, e_space <espace1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> fun playing sandbox hey kids? hahaha

LL: YOU're here of your own volition, aren't you? You must enjoy the
sandbox.

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