Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

clergy letter project

391 views
Skip to first unread message

TomS

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 8:49:57 AM3/1/15
to
Remember the Clergy Letter Project?

<http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>

It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.


--
God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
---Tom S.

RonO

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 10:34:59 AM3/1/15
to
On 3/1/2015 7:48 AM, TomS wrote:
> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
>
> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
>
> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
>
>
They also have letters for other religions. How many Rabbi are there in
North America? The number of Rabbi signatures (514) may catch the bogus
list of "scientists" that the Discovery always puts up. The video that
I link to below claims that there are 3 million scientists working in
Biology, and the current Discovery Institute list can't have more than
1,000. How many Rabbi are there in the US?

The Discovery Institute has the list of losers that would sign a
statement that doesn't even say what the ID perps actually use it for.
They always trot it out as if there is real scientific doubt about
biological evolution and support for the ID scam, but the statement
doesn't even mention that intelligent design exists, and only has some
partial lame creationist type bogus definition of biological evolution.
You'd think that they could make the definition more accurate just to
pretend to be doing something legitimate.

http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/index.php

Probably still less than 1,000 "signatures." For this bogus list. You
have to wonder who would sign a letter that was this dishonest. If they
were true IDiots, why hide the fact? Why not sign something that really
means what they want to express? If they are not true
IDiot/Creationists, why sign such a list that has been used for years as
a propaganda ploy for the creationist ID scam?

This is how they screen the signatories. Beats me how they are
verified. My guess is that a lot of the signatories on the list do not
have PhDs or MDs since the Discovery Institute does not list such
degrees before their names. You do not have to be a scientist to sign
the list, or, obviously, understand anything about biological evolution.
I do not know when the PhD requirement came in. Forrest Mims is known
not to have a PhD and is on the current list. One initial list that I
recall seeing had a dentist on it before they cleaned up the list.

QUOTE:
Signatories of the Scientific Dissent From Darwinism must either hold a
Ph.D. in a scientific field such as biology, chemistry, mathematics,
engineering, computer science, or one of the other natural sciences; or
they must hold an M.D. and serve as a professor of medicine. Signatories
must also agree with the following statement:

"We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and
natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful
examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."

If you meet these criteria, please consider signing the statement by
emailing con...@dissentfromdarwin.org.
END QUOTE:

It looks like this YouTube video by Don Exodus was made around 7 years
after the first list came out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty1Bo6GmPqM

The video should be amusing and informative enough for most TO regulars.
It is about the 101 scientist list.

For the current list a lot of the affiliations of the "scientists" seems
to be questionable. Berlinski is listed as affiliated with Princeton.
I don't know how long it has been since Berlinski was employed by a
university. Dembski is affiliated with the University of Chicago.
Dembski seems to have been a student at the University of Chicago, but
that was years before he signed the list. He got a graduate degree from
the Princeton theological seminary after Chicago and before signing the
list in 2001. Stephen Meyer isn't listed until page 10 and for some
reason he has Cambridge University instead of the Christian college he
was teaching at, at the time. Jonathan Wells isn't listed until page 14
and has UC Berkeley as his affiliation. My guess is that they should
list all signatories as to what they were currently doing when they
signed, but because of embarrassment, listed them as to where they got
their degree instead. I don't think that Wells has, had a job in
science since he joined the Discovery Institute. So my guess is that
the video's claims about bogus affiliations hold up even on the later
lists. The list was supposedly updated Feb 2015. None of these guys
have bothered to update the list so my guess is that it is the same with
a lot of the signatories. I don't know why they spread the ID perps out
through the list. They were all on the first list of 100 so why put
Wells out on page 14? They are keeping the dead on the list so it will
likely keep growing for the time being.

Ron Okimoto




Message has been deleted

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 5:04:56 PM3/1/15
to
On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 1:54:56 PM UTC-8, Ray Martinez wrote:
> 13,000 traitors standing with Richard Dawkins.
>
> I can offer no better evidence supporting existence of an invisible Deceiver.
>
> Ray (species immutabilist)

COMMENT REVISED:

13,000 traitors standing with Richard Dawkins without any awareness of anything horribly wrong.

I can offer no better evidence supporting existence of an invisible Deceiver.

Ray

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 5:09:56 PM3/1/15
to
On 3/1/15 2:54 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
> On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
> 13,000 traitors standing with Richard Dawkins.

They are "traitors" for accepting the same scientific theory that a
scientist does? How does that make them traitors, Ray?


>
> I can offer no better evidence supporting existence of an invisible Deceiver.

You offer your own delusion as evidence of an "invisible deceiver"? How
meta.


DJT

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 5:14:56 PM3/1/15
to
On 3/1/15 3:01 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
> On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 1:54:56 PM UTC-8, Ray Martinez wrote:
>> On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
>>> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
>>>
>>> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
>>>
>>> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
>>> ---Tom S.
>>
>> 13,000 traitors standing with Richard Dawkins.
>>
>> I can offer no better evidence supporting existence of an invisible Deceiver.
>>
>> Ray (species immutabilist)
>
> COMMENT REVISED:
>
> 13,000 traitors standing with Richard Dawkins without any awareness of anything horribly wrong.

Just like you don't have any awareness of your horrible ignorance....



>
> I can offer no better evidence supporting existence of an invisible Deceiver.

Again, you are offering your own delusions as evidence of an "invisible
deceiver". Who deceived you, Ray? Why do you continue to oppose
honest, and learned men of God?


DJT

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 5:19:56 PM3/1/15
to
On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 2:09:56 PM UTC-8, Dana Tweedy wrote:
> On 3/1/15 2:54 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
> > On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
> >> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
> >>
> >> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
> >>
> >> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
> >> ---Tom S.
> >
> > 13,000 traitors standing with Richard Dawkins.
>
> They are "traitors" for accepting the same scientific theory that a
> scientist does? How does that make them traitors, Ray?

Your inability to understand simple claims is getting worse. I said they are traitors for accepting the same origin of diversity theory as Atheists without any awareness of something horribly wrong.

>
>
> >
> > I can offer no better evidence supporting existence of an invisible Deceiver.
>
> You offer your own delusion as evidence of an "invisible deceiver"? How
> meta.
>
>
> DJT

Based on comment strength, evasion noted.

The point remains: When persons who think of themselves as Christians stand with Atheists and not the Bible the same becomes prima facie evidence supporting existence of an invisible Deceiver. This is exactly what we expect to see if the Deceiver exists.

Ray

Message has been deleted

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 5:39:55 PM3/1/15
to
On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 2:24:57 PM UTC-8, Ray Martinez wrote:
CORRECTION INSERTED:

Just pointing out that the Bible claims existence of an invisible Deceiver. If the claim is true the[n] we should find persons perceived as Christians standing with their enemies without any awareness of something horribly wrong. I offer the Clergy Letter Project as spectacular evidence supporting the Biblical claim about Satan.

RM

TomS

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 6:04:58 PM3/1/15
to
"On Sun, 01 Mar 2015 09:31:40 -0600, in article <mcvbbj$7sp$1...@dont-email.me>,
RonO stated..."
Not that anyone would care, but I don't accept that random mutation and
natural selection account for the complexity of life. For one thing,
there is more than mutation which is a source of change; and there is
more than natural selection involved. Moreover, careful examination is
always going to turn up surprises, which is why careful examination is
a good idea. Of course, ship-shod examination is useless.

TimR

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 6:09:56 PM3/1/15
to
On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:39:55 PM UTC-5, Ray Martinez wrote:

>
> Just pointing out that the Bible claims existence of an invisible Deceiver. If the claim is true the[n] we should find persons perceived as Christians standing with their enemies without any awareness of something horribly wrong. I offer the Clergy Letter Project as spectacular evidence supporting the Biblical claim about Satan.
>
> RM

I am not sure the Bible claims what Ray thinks it does.

However, if true, and if the Clergy Project proves Satan, then the existence of Satan would be at least suggestive that God must exist too.

Hee, hee.


Burkhard

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 6:09:56 PM3/1/15
to
Really? Where?

jillery

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 6:14:56 PM3/1/15
to
The problem with that argument is, it's unprovable which claims are
from Satan and which are from God.

--
Intelligence is never insulting.

czeba...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 6:49:55 PM3/1/15
to
So now you have to imagine demons to prop up your pathetic cause. You are one sad case Rayray...

gregwrld

RonO

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 7:19:56 PM3/1/15
to
My guess is that unless you trip up a biologist you won't find any that
supports the bogus incomplete definition biological evolution. It is
almost like a trick question just to check to see if someone knows what
they are talking about. The neutral theory is decades old, and my guess
is that there aren't too many people that understand the data that do
not accept that genetic drift, just basically random changes, are a
significant part of biological evolution. It isn't even only mutation.
Even prokaryotes can genetically recombine their DNA, so it is how
that genetic variation can be transferred and mixed up in different
combinations with another organisms DNA. Anyone that doesn't understand
how important that is doesn't seem to have much to say about the subject
and their opinion can't carry much weight in any discussion. The fact
is that we know a lot more about biological evolution than is in the
statement and none of it includes any bogus ID science.

It would be nice if they really want students to carefully examine
anything. The whole switch scam is just a bogus obfuscation scam that
the creation scientists used to run when they wanted to deflect
attention from their lame creation science. It is only designed to lead
the students into believing that they don't have to examine the
evidence. All you have to say about the issue is that the IDiots have
nothing as good as what they claim isn't good enough. If they really
had something they wouldn't have started to run the bait and switch on
their own creationist supporters 13 years ago. That should be close
enough examination for anyone.

I'll just summarize the state if the ID scam as I have come to
understand it in the last few months of checking on just what is going
on in la la land. There have been multiple threads that I have posted
with the links and details.

In two weeks it will be 13 years of never giving the creationist rubes
the promised ID science and only giving them a lame switch scam that
doesn't even mention that ID ever existed. Wells' Ohio 2002 report to
the other IDiots plainly states that the decision to run the bait and
switch on the Ohio creationist rubes was made before he and Meyers went
to Ohio. Their dog and pony IDiot show was just a show. They had no
intention of providing any ID science for the Ohio state board to teach.
It has already been over a year ago that the ID perps ran the bait and
switch on the creationist rubes in Texas and Louisiana that bent over
for the switch scam when they couldn't get the promised ID science.
They didn't get support for what they tried to do from the ID perps that
sold them the switch scam. Really, if the ID perps had not put the
brakes on the creationist fiasco we would have already tested the switch
scam in the court system in two states. Now the ID perp's excuse is
that teachers are too ignorant to teach the ID science and that they do
not want it to be lost in the politics, when there is no ID science and
politics is all they ever had. These are the IDiots that targeted
legislators and school boards instead of doing the hard work of
producing some real science.

13 years of never coming up with the promised ID science when they need
it. Who could possibly believe that they have anything of value to add
to any argument? They don't even believe it themselves or they would
have put up or shut up long ago. It has been almost 9 years since
Philip Johnson admitted that the ID perps never had any ID science worth
putting forward once the Dover decision came in against the IDiots.
What does it take? Will people finally take him seriously after he
dies? This was the fellow that the other ID perps called the godfather
of the ID movement and was among the people that got the ID scam rolling.

The international society for intelligent design died back in 2008, and
the society stopped publishing their journal after the Dover fiasco in
2005. The Intelligent Design Network that was supposed to be composed
of academics that supported intelligent design seems to have died back
in 2009 (over half a decade ago). How many "scientists" on the ID
perp's bogus list still want their names on the list? These jokers are
even keeping the dead on their list. There pretty much are no IDiot
organizations left for them to belong to unless they can join up with
the ID perps at the Discovery Institute, but who would want to? Ex
senator Santorum was a long time IDiot, but he had the bait and switch
run on him. Santorum has gone back to calling what he wants to teach
creationism instead of intelligent design. How many other disenchanted
IDiots are there?

Ron Okimoto

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 7:54:55 PM3/1/15
to
On 3/1/15 3:22 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
> On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 2:14:56 PM UTC-8, Dana Tweedy wrote:
> Just pointing out that the Bible claims existence of an invisible Deceiver.

The the Bible makes a reference to a deceiver, but doesn't say it's
invisible. Of course, one doesn't have to be deceived by a supernatural
being. A televangelist can deceive as well.



> If the claim is true the we should find persons perceived as Christians standing with their enemies without any awareness of something horribly wrong.

Which you are a great example, except for the "perceived as Christian"
part. But then again, you perceive yourself as Christian, yet you show
no sign of accepting Christ's teachings, or believing in his message. I
suppose that may count.

> I offer the Clergy Letter Project as spectacular evidence supporting the Biblical claim about Satan.

Yet you, yourself make a much better example of a deceived person,
opposing God, and not being aware of how much damage you are doing to
Christianity. You even oppose those who try to tell you the truth.

Try giving up your hate, your fear, and your ignorance. You might even
begin to understand how badly,and for how long you've been deceived.

DJT

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 7:54:55 PM3/1/15
to
The Bible says nothing about the deceiver being invisible.


> If the claim is true the[n] we should find persons perceived as Christians standing with their enemies without any awareness of something horribly wrong.

A description that fits Ray perfectly.



> I offer the Clergy Letter Project as spectacular evidence supporting the Biblical claim about Satan.

You unknowingly offer yourself as much better evidence that a deceived
person can often be totally unaware that he is deceived. You imagine
yourself to be right, yet you have no evidence to support you.


DJT

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 8:09:56 PM3/1/15
to
On 3/1/15 3:18 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
> On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 2:09:56 PM UTC-8, Dana Tweedy wrote:
>> On 3/1/15 2:54 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
>>> On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
>>>> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
>>>>
>>>> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
>>>> ---Tom S.
>>>
>>> 13,000 traitors standing with Richard Dawkins.
>>
>> They are "traitors" for accepting the same scientific theory that a
>> scientist does? How does that make them traitors, Ray?
>
> Your inability to understand simple claims is getting worse.

I understand simple claims, Ray. I sometimes don't understand your
twisted thought processes. I take that as a sign that I'm still sane.


> I said they are traitors for accepting the same origin of diversity theory as Atheists without any awareness of something horribly wrong.


Which I pointed out makes no sense. Agreeing with atheists, and
Buddhists, and Taoists, and Hindus, and even millions of other
Christians about a scientific theory does nothing to make one a traitor.
All it makes one is informed.

There's no "awareness" it's wrong, because it's not wrong. It's only
your own deception that tells you it is. Why do you trust your
delusions rather than evidence to the contrary?



>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I can offer no better evidence supporting existence of an invisible Deceiver.
>>
>> You offer your own delusion as evidence of an "invisible deceiver"? How
>> meta.
>>
>>
>> DJT
>
> Based on comment strength, evasion noted.


What "evasion" and what does the "comment strength" have to do with
anything?


>
> The point remains: When persons who think of themselves as Christians stand with Atheists and not the Bible the same becomes prima facie evidence supporting existence of an invisible Deceiver.

Your delusional assumptions are not evidence of anything, Ray, unless
it's evidence of you being deceived.


> This is exactly what we expect to see if the Deceiver exists.

We'd see people, like you, deceived, and unable to admit their own
error. We'd see someone, again like you, full of anger, resentment, and
fear, lashing out against anyone who doesn't share your soul destroying
hatred.

It's not too late, Ray. You can reject Satan, and his works, but only
you can do it for you.

DJT

deadrat

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 8:19:56 PM3/1/15
to
Only made by the down-at-keel, of course.

deadrat

unread,
Mar 1, 2015, 8:24:56 PM3/1/15
to
Good thing then that we have Ray to tell us which is which.


Ernest Major

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 3:39:57 AM3/2/15
to
The bits written by Dante and Milton :-)
>
> If the claim is true the[n] we should find persons perceived as
> Christians standing with their enemies without any awareness of
> something horribly wrong. I offer the Clergy Letter Project as
> spectacular evidence supporting the Biblical claim about Satan.
>>
>> RM
>>
>

--
alias Ernest Major

Burkhard

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 3:59:55 AM3/2/15
to
If only... :o) Dante's Satan is as visible as it gets

"he had three faces: one in front bloodred;
and then another two that, just above
the midpoint of each shoulder, joined the first;
and at the crown, all three were reattached;
the right looked somewhat yellow, somewhat white;
the left in its appearance was like those
who come from where the Nile, descending, flows"

which is why Gustave Doré could make the famous engravings based on his
description.

TimR

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 8:44:56 AM3/2/15
to
Ray's vision of the "deceiver" doesn't come from the Bible, but from the book of Enoch, which Ray dismisses as non-canonical.

Bob Casanova

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 1:29:53 PM3/2/15
to
On Sun, 1 Mar 2015 14:01:56 -0800 (PST), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ray Martinez
<pyram...@yahoo.com>:
Oh, look! Everyone is out of step except Ray!
--

Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 3:39:53 PM3/2/15
to
I'm only responding because I don't see what you're talking about.

Ray

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 3:39:53 PM3/2/15
to
On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 3:49:55 PM UTC-8, czeba...@gmail.com wrote:
> So now you have to imagine demons to prop up your pathetic cause. You are one sad case Rayray...
>
> gregwrld

Just pointing out that the Biblical claim concerning existence of an invisible Deceiver is well supported by the sad facts of the Clergy Letter Project. Your inability understand is the only pathetic thing.

Ray

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 3:49:53 PM3/2/15
to
For example:

Revelation 20:10King James Version (KJV)

"And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever."

And:

https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/dictionary-of-bible-themes/4123-Satan-as-deceiver

The fact that you didn't know about this MAJOR Biblical claim is the only point here.

Ray

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 3:59:53 PM3/2/15
to
On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
>
> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
>
> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
>
>
> --
> God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
> ---Tom S.

I would bet that 99 percent of the 13,000 believe in the existence of an invisible Deceiver, just like the Bible says. And I would bet that all 13,000 believe they are exempt from being deceived----that they are God's favorite.

Ray (Protestant)

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 4:14:53 PM3/2/15
to
On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
>
> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
>
> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
>
>
> --
> God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
> ---Tom S.

So we have a very good explanation as to why 13,000 Christian clergy stand with Atheists, accept evolution, and reject the Biblical explanation of life.

Satan, the Deceiver, is real. These 13,000 Christian clergy see nothing amiss or wrong, at all, in standing with Atheists against the Biblical explanation of life.

Matthew 7:13-14 (KJV); Jesus speaking:

"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."

Ray

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 4:19:54 PM3/2/15
to
On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
>
> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
>
> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
>
>
> --
> God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
> ---Tom S.

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter."

--Adolf Hitler (1922)

As we can see, anyone can claim to be a Christian, including the 13,000 signatories.

Ray

Burkhard

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 4:19:54 PM3/2/15
to
And where does it say this devil is "invisible"? In fact, the context of
Revelation 20.10 indicates the opposite - it starts with the words "and
I saw" after all...

> And:
>
> https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/dictionary-of-bible-themes/4123-Satan-as-deceiver
>
> The fact that you didn't know about this MAJOR Biblical claim is the only point here.

Whenever you declare something to be a "major point", it is safe to
assume that is is just another of your idiosyncratic ideas that nobody
else shares.
>
> Ray
>

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 4:29:52 PM3/2/15
to
Satan is a supernatural being who possesses a spiritual body, not a physical body. He chooses to remain invisible. This means he could choose visibility, but then everyone would flee to God and ruin his objective.

The fact that you are challenging an undisputed claim (invisibility of Satan) is very good evidence of the strength of my points concerning the 13,000 deceived "Christian" clergy. Did you actually believe Christianity accepted a visible Devil?

>
> > And:
> >
> > https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/dictionary-of-bible-themes/4123-Satan-as-deceiver
> >
> > The fact that you didn't know about this MAJOR Biblical claim is the only point here.
>
> Whenever you declare something to be a "major point", it is safe to
> assume that is is just another of your idiosyncratic ideas that nobody
> else shares.
> >
> > Ray
> >

Ray

Burkhard

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 4:44:53 PM3/2/15
to
The fact that yet again you fail to provide a bible citation is very
good evidence of my claim that you made up your won religion here.

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 5:04:54 PM3/2/15
to
Nobody is obligated to support supernatural being as invisible. These debates presuppose a 101 knowledge. The claims of Bible and Christianity just aint your cup of tea. Friendly advice: stick to Atheism and evolution.

https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/dictionary-of-bible-themes/4123-Satan-as-deceiver

Ray (Protestant)

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 5:24:55 PM3/2/15
to

A Nony Mouse

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 5:34:53 PM3/2/15
to
In article <ba982104-08cf-4b04...@googlegroups.com>,
Ray Martinez <pyram...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Satan is a supernatural being who possesses a spiritual body, not a physical
> body. He chooses to remain invisible.

Only someone as evil as Satan could know what Satan would choose to do!

Burkhard

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 5:39:52 PM3/2/15
to
another term you tend to use if you make things up I noticed


> The claims of Bible and Christianity just aint your cup of tea.

Oh, as long as I know more about it than you, that would suffice for the
purpose of this discussion, and that is a easy as anything.

As it so happens, I've pretty good research collaborations with our
department of divinity, and worked closely with the Science and Society
Committee of the Church of Scotland, the Dominicans from the Albertus
Institute with whom I organized conferences, worked with followers of
the Vedic religions in India on Identity and Culture, and partly though
my research, partly though personal connections have friends amongst and
discussion with a large variety of scholars from numerous religious
traditions, from Greek reconstructionist churches to kopimi adherents.
And very much unlike you I've also managed to get some of this research
published. So I'm won't even break into a sweat.

Burkhard

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 5:44:54 PM3/2/15
to
No idea why you think what John wrote there is pertinent to the
discussion here. And I did not want a cite from John, whose authority in
all things cladistic I accept, but who would not be my first point of
call when the question is theology, but the Bible. Or are you suggesting
the two are the same thing?

Sneaky O. Possum

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 6:59:53 PM3/2/15
to
Burkhard <b.sc...@ed.ac.uk> wrote in news:md2jts$fa0$1...@dont-email.me:
Perhaps Ray means 'invincible', and is offering himself up as evidence
that someone can be invincibly deceived.
--
S.O.P.

czeba...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 7:04:52 PM3/2/15
to
What I understand now is that you will cling to any delusion to try and support the belief that some apparently invisible being(s) are doing mysterious things that you will never be able to explain.
I feel only sadness when I meet people like you, Ray. The only demons are inside you.

gregwrld

solar penguin

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 8:14:52 PM3/2/15
to
On Mon, 02 Mar 2015 13:11:04 -0800, Ray Martinez wrote:

>
> So we have a very good explanation as to why 13,000 Christian clergy
> stand with Atheists,

Standing with atheists? It would be more accurate to say that the 13,000
Christian clergy and the atheists are both _standing with the scientists_.

Still, you've never bothered too much about accuracy, have you?

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 8:39:53 PM3/2/15
to
A mind fully immersed in Materialism.

Ray

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 8:39:53 PM3/2/15
to
13,000 Christian clergy standing with the Atheists and their science. Since science accepts the assumptions of Atheism concerning reality, I had it right.

Ray

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 8:44:52 PM3/2/15
to
His four-word reply is most relevant.

Ray

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 10:29:52 PM3/2/15
to
Ray, he was talking about the "invisible" part. The Bible does not
claim an "invisible" deceiver. Please produce the verse where the
Bible says the deceiver is invisible.


DJT

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 10:34:52 PM3/2/15
to
You made the claim, Ray, that the Bible speaks of an invisible deceiver.
You are obligated to show that the Bible says this being is invisible.

> These debates presuppose a 101 knowledge.

Anyone discussing with you would be foolish to assume you have even a
basic level of knowledge, Ray. Asking you to support what you claim is
quite reasonable.




< The claims of Bible and Christianity just aint your cup of tea.
Friendly advice: stick to Atheism and evolution.

Ray, the Bible does not say Satan is invisible. That's your own
interpretation. You are making claims that aren't supported by a "plain
reading" of the Bible. How is that any different from those who
accept the Bible's creation stories aren't meant to be taken literally?


DJT

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 10:39:51 PM3/2/15
to
The Bible doesn't say that any deceiver is invisible, Ray. It's not a
Biblical claim, but your own.


In any case, you are the one who has been deceived, and you can't see
it. You are the one opposing Christians, and opposing God's work.


DJT

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 10:39:51 PM3/2/15
to
If so, even a mind "immersed" in materialism can see that you are the
one who has been deceived.

You fear shadows, Ray, and your hatred, fear, and bitterness leads you
astray.


DJT

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 10:39:51 PM3/2/15
to
His "four word reply" is most interesting. He used the phrase "speak of
the devil", a shortened form of the saying "speak of the devil and he
appears". Now, according to your own claims, "appear" presumes a
visible being, not an invisible one. So, by your own standards, John's
statement supports Burkhard's point, and refutes your own.


DJT


Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 10:44:52 PM3/2/15
to
On 3/2/15 1:55 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
> On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
>> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
>>
>> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
>>
>> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
>>
>>
>> --
>> God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
>> ---Tom S.
>
> I would bet that 99 percent of the 13,000 believe in the existence of an invisible Deceiver, just like the Bible says.

The Bible doesn't say the deceiver is invisible, Ray. That's your own
twisting of the Bible's meaning.

> And I would bet that all 13,000 believe they are exempt from being deceived----that they are God's favorite.

Here, Ray, who apparently imagines himself to be "God's favorite" is
assuming others do what he does himself. More evidence that Ray is the
one deceived.


DJT

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 10:49:51 PM3/2/15
to
On 3/2/15 6:36 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
> On Monday, March 2, 2015 at 5:14:52 PM UTC-8, solar penguin wrote:
>> On Mon, 02 Mar 2015 13:11:04 -0800, Ray Martinez wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> So we have a very good explanation as to why 13,000 Christian clergy
>>> stand with Atheists,
>>
>> Standing with atheists? It would be more accurate to say that the 13,000
>> Christian clergy and the atheists are both _standing with the scientists_.
>>
>> Still, you've never bothered too much about accuracy, have you?
>
> 13,000 Christian clergy standing with the Atheists and their science.

Science does not belong to atheists, Ray. People of all religious
faiths use science. Why do you fear knowledge and learning?



> Since science accepts the assumptions of Atheism concerning reality, I had it right.

Science does not accept assumptions of atheism. It makes no statement
about whether or not anything beyond the natural exists.

Face it, Ray. You were wrong again, and you stand with the deceived.


DJT

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 10:49:51 PM3/2/15
to
On 3/2/15 2:11 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
> On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
>> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
>>
>> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
>>
>> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
>>
>>
>> --
>> God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
>> ---Tom S.
>
> So we have a very good explanation as to why 13,000 Christian clergy stand with Atheists, accept evolution, and reject the Biblical explanation of life.

Those clergy do not "stand with atheists", Ray. You do. They believe
that God created through natural means. You apparently believe that God
is incapable of creating that way. The clergy who accept evolution are
not rejecting the Bible, or God's way of creating. They are rejecting
your own personal beliefs.

>
> Satan, the Deceiver, is real.

And Ray's been walking arm and arm with him for decades.



> These 13,000 Christian clergy see nothing amiss or wrong, at all, in standing with Atheists against the Biblical explanation of life.

The clergy who signed the letter aren't against the Biblical
explanation. They are against your personal interpretation, Ray. You
are the one who agrees with atheists that God can't create through
evolution.



>
> Matthew 7:13-14 (KJV); Jesus speaking:
>
> "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."
>

Ray, trying to claim that being objectively wrong, and rejecting the
intellect that God gave us gives you some kind of special status is more
than enough evidence to show you have abandoned God's ways.

It's not to late to reject hatred, fear, and ignorance. Those are the
way of the deceiver. You won't let yourself see yourself on the road
to destruction.

DJT

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 2, 2015, 10:54:51 PM3/2/15
to
You claim to be a Christian, Ray, but show no sign of understanding, or
accepting Christ's teachings. Anyone can claim to be a Christian. The
clergy who signed that statement live as Christians.


DJT

jillery

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 3:29:59 AM3/3/15
to
On Mon, 2 Mar 2015 12:37:17 -0800 (PST), Ray Martinez
<pyram...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 3:14:56 PM UTC-8, jillery wrote:
>> On Sun, 1 Mar 2015 14:37:24 -0800 (PST), Ray Martinez
>> <pyram...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 2:24:57 PM UTC-8, Ray Martinez wrote:
>> >> On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 2:14:56 PM UTC-8, Dana Tweedy wrote:
>> >> > On 3/1/15 3:01 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
>> >> > > On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 1:54:56 PM UTC-8, Ray Martinez wrote:
>> >> > >> On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
>> >> > >>> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>>
>> >> > >>> --
>> >> > >>> God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
>> >> > >>> ---Tom S.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> 13,000 traitors standing with Richard Dawkins.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> I can offer no better evidence supporting existence of an invisible Deceiver.
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> Ray (species immutabilist)
>> >> > >
>> >> > > COMMENT REVISED:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > 13,000 traitors standing with Richard Dawkins without any awareness of anything horribly wrong.
>> >> >
>> >> > Just like you don't have any awareness of your horrible ignorance....
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I can offer no better evidence supporting existence of an invisible Deceiver.
>> >> >
>> >> > Again, you are offering your own delusions as evidence of an "invisible
>> >> > deceiver". Who deceived you, Ray? Why do you continue to oppose
>> >> > honest, and learned men of God?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > DJT
>> >>
>> >
>> >CORRECTION INSERTED:
>> >
>> >Just pointing out that the Bible claims existence of an invisible Deceiver. If the claim is true the[n] we should find persons perceived as Christians standing with their enemies without any awareness of something horribly wrong. I offer the Clergy Letter Project as spectacular evidence supporting the Biblical claim about Satan.
>>
>>
>> The problem with that argument is, it's unprovable which claims are
>> from Satan and which are from God.
>>
>
>I'm only responding because I don't see what you're talking about.


Nothing new about that, especially when I make a point you can't
refute.

--
Intelligence is never insulting.

jillery

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 3:34:51 AM3/3/15
to
On Mon, 2 Mar 2015 12:55:49 -0800 (PST), Ray Martinez
<pyram...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
>> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
>>
>> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
>>
>> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
>>
>>
>> --
>> God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
>> ---Tom S.
>
>I would bet that 99 percent of the 13,000 believe in the existence of an invisible Deceiver, just like the Bible says. And I would bet that all 13,000 believe they are exempt from being deceived----that they are God's favorite.
>
>Ray (Protestant)


How do you know that *you* aren't deceived?

jillery

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 4:04:53 AM3/3/15
to
On Mon, 2 Mar 2015 13:17:17 -0800 (PST), Ray Martinez
<pyram...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
>> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
>>
>> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
>>
>> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
>>
>>
>> --
>> God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
>> ---Tom S.
>
>"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter."
>
>--Adolf Hitler (1922)
>
>As we can see, anyone can claim to be a Christian, including the 13,000 signatories.


...including yourself.

solar penguin

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 5:04:52 AM3/3/15
to
Although I'm an atheist, I believe in many unscientific things, such as
clairvoyance and reincarnation. Does science accept or believe in those?

TimR

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 8:24:53 AM3/3/15
to
On Monday, March 2, 2015 at 3:59:53 PM UTC-5, Ray Martinez wrote:
> I would bet that 99 percent of the 13,000 believe in the existence of an invisible Deceiver, just like the Bible says. And I would bet that all 13,000 believe they are exempt from being deceived----that they are God's favorite.
>
> Ray (Protestant)

You would lose that bet.

While the average parishioner snoozing in the pew probably believes in a Satan, all the surveys show that large percentages of clergy do not.

The clergy who sign the letter are likely to be in the less conservative camp, so probably not as likely to buy into the Satan thing.

The "American Christianity" version of Satan is really not biblical anyway; it was invented in the early days of the country and reinforced by a string of movies.

Bob Casanova

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 12:29:51 PM3/3/15
to
On Mon, 2 Mar 2015 12:55:49 -0800 (PST), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ray Martinez
<pyram...@yahoo.com>:

>On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
>> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
>>
>> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
>>
>> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
>>
>>
>> --
>> God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
>> ---Tom S.
>
>I would bet that 99 percent of the 13,000 believe in the existence of an invisible Deceiver, just like the Bible says. And I would bet that all 13,000 believe they are exempt from being deceived----that they are God's favorite.

And that makes them different from you...how?
--

Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov

Bob Casanova

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 12:29:51 PM3/3/15
to
On Mon, 02 Mar 2015 20:37:06 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Dana Tweedy
<reddf...@gmail.com>:

>On 3/2/15 1:39 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:

>> On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 3:49:55 PM UTC-8, czeba...@gmail.com wrote:

>>> So now you have to imagine demons to prop up your pathetic cause. You are one sad case Rayray...

>> Just pointing out that the Biblical claim concerning existence of an invisible Deceiver is well supported by the sad facts of the Clergy Letter Project. Your inability understand is the only pathetic thing.

>The Bible doesn't say that any deceiver is invisible, Ray. It's not a
>Biblical claim, but your own.

The difference is invisible to Ray, who, as you note below,
deceives himself.

>In any case, you are the one who has been deceived, and you can't see
>it. You are the one opposing Christians, and opposing God's work.

Bob Casanova

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 12:34:50 PM3/3/15
to
On Tue, 03 Mar 2015 03:29:52 -0500, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
He's "special".

jillery

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 1:04:50 PM3/3/15
to
On Tue, 03 Mar 2015 10:30:19 -0700, Bob Casanova <nos...@buzz.off>
wrote:

>On Tue, 03 Mar 2015 03:29:52 -0500, the following appeared
>in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
>
>>On Mon, 2 Mar 2015 12:55:49 -0800 (PST), Ray Martinez
>><pyram...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
>>>> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
>>>>
>>>> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
>>>> ---Tom S.
>>>
>>>I would bet that 99 percent of the 13,000 believe in the existence of an invisible Deceiver, just like the Bible says. And I would bet that all 13,000 believe they are exempt from being deceived----that they are God's favorite.
>>>
>>>Ray (Protestant)
>>
>>
>>How do you know that *you* aren't deceived?
>
>He's "special".


And immutable. Apparently that means he can't be muted.

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 5:39:50 PM3/3/15
to
Here we have a "Christian" (Dana Tweedy) suggesting the person of the devil is not invisible. Where did you obtain this idea?

Ray

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 5:49:49 PM3/3/15
to
I am DELIGHTED that you and other Evolutionists are demanding verses that say the devil is invisible. This indicates that you believe the devil is visible. Please, show us his image?

LOL!

The best part of all this is the fact that the Evolutionists are not the least bit ashamed of their ignorance. Any credibility that they might have had is completely dissolved. All one has to do is save these messages for future use, which I surely will.

Ray

broger...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 6:09:49 PM3/3/15
to
On Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 5:49:49 PM UTC-5, Ray Martinez wrote:

>
> I am DELIGHTED that you and other Evolutionists are demanding verses that say the devil is invisible. This indicates that you believe the devil is visible. Please, show us his image?
>
> LOL!

Ray, when someone demands Bible verses that say that the devil is invisible, they are only suggesting that the Bible does not say that the devil is invisible. They are not themselves making a claim about the devil's visibility or even existence.


>
> The best part of all this is the fact that the Evolutionists are not the least bit ashamed of their ignorance. Any credibility that they might have had is completely dissolved. All one has to do is save these messages for future use, which I surely will.

Sure, keep yourself a copy. In the meanwhile, you would magnify your victory by providing the verses which show that the Bible refers to the devil as invisible.

>
> Ray


Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 6:39:50 PM3/3/15
to
On Monday, March 2, 2015 at 7:39:51 PM UTC-8, Dana Tweedy wrote:
> On 3/2/15 1:39 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
> > On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 3:49:55 PM UTC-8, czeba...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> So now you have to imagine demons to prop up your pathetic cause. You are one sad case Rayray...
> >>
> >> gregwrld
> >
> > Just pointing out that the Biblical claim concerning existence of an invisible Deceiver is well supported by the sad facts of the Clergy Letter Project. Your inability understand is the only pathetic thing.
> >
> > Ray
> >
> The Bible doesn't say that any deceiver is invisible, Ray. It's not a
> Biblical claim, but your own.

Imagine that; suddenly the Bible makes no claims about the existence of Satan. I, Ray Martinez, originated the idea!

Here we have an EXCELLENT example of the brazen dishonesty of Evolutionists like Dana Tweedy and Burkhard. Every Atheist scholar in the world knows and agrees that the Bible makes CLAIMS about an invisible Deceiver known as Satan.

https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/dictionary-of-bible-themes/4123-Satan-as-deceiver

>
> In any case, you are the one who has been deceived, and you can't see
> it. You are the one opposing Christians, and opposing God's work.
>
>
> DJT

Suddenly evolution is "God's work" (Dana Tweedy). If that were true Atheists would not be Evolutionists.

Dana is enraged because I've identified the Clergy Letter Project as the best possible evidence supporting the Biblical claims about Satan. So what does Dana our Evolutionist do? He denies the premise! But everyone agrees with the premise. Everyone understands that the Bible advocates an invisible supernatural being known as a Satan who exists to deceive people.

The secular world rejects the existence of Satan BECAUSE they can't see him! The secular world makes fun of the Bible for postulating the existence of an invisible Devil! The secular world thinks we are crazy for believing in the existence of an invisible Deceiver! All of these secular beliefs presuppose the Biblical CLAIM of an invisible Deceiver. (Yet the secular world has no problem believing in a host of invisible things as well.)

Yet we have 13,000 "Christian" Ministers who claim to be following Christ and claim to speak for Christ in behalf of their congregations. Yet without any awareness of anything horribly wrong, or amiss, and without any conscience, these "Shepherds" stand with Atheists and reject the Biblical explanation of life.

Again, there exists no better evidence supporting the existence of an invisible Deceiver than the Clergy Letter Project.

Judas was an original Apostle who saw Jesus perform mind-boggling miracles. Yet in the Garden of Gethsemane he betrayed his Master to His enemies. HOW could Judas do such a thing?

Here is the answer:

LUKE 22 (KJV):

"Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover.

And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him; for they feared the people.

Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.

And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray him unto them.

And they were glad, and covenanted to give him money.

And he promised, and sought opportunity to betray him unto them in the absence of the multitude."

Except for a handful of Evolutionists here at Talk.Origins, everyone else understands that these verses say an invisible Deceiver possessed Judas----that's how and why Judas betrayed his Master. So with Satan inside of him Judas delivered the infamous "Judas kiss" on the face of Christ without any awareness of anything horribly wrong or amiss.

So no one is exempt from the possibility of being deceived, not Apostles, not Pastors and Shepherds, not ordinary Christians.

What happened when Satan was through with Judas and left his body?

He suddenly obtained a conscience, went out and hanged himself (verses available upon request).

I guess Satan isn't through with the 13,000 Ministers of the Clergy Letter Project.

Ray (Christian)

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 7:09:49 PM3/3/15
to
The Bible doesn't claim a visible Deceiver. If you still think otherwise then paste the verses?

See Bill run.

Ray


czeba...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 7:09:49 PM3/3/15
to
Compared to the fantasies your mind is immersed in I consider "materialist" a compliment...

gregwrld

czeba...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 7:14:49 PM3/3/15
to
You live on fairy tales. As a result you have no credibility.

gregwrld

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 7:39:53 PM3/3/15
to
On Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 9:29:51 AM UTC-8, Bob Casanova wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Mar 2015 12:55:49 -0800 (PST), the following
> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ray Martinez
> <pyram...@yahoo.com>:
>
> >On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
> >> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
> >>
> >> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
> >>
> >> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
> >> ---Tom S.
> >
> >I would bet that 99 percent of the 13,000 believe in the existence of an invisible Deceiver, just like the Bible says. And I would bet that all 13,000 believe they are exempt from being deceived----that they are God's favorite.
>
> And that makes them different from you...how?

The difference is that I fear God and His word. The CLP fears the secular world----that's the difference.

The CLP is just too stupid to see that evolution is based ENTIRELY on pro-Atheist assumptions about reality. This is seen and supported in the fact that almost all Atheists are fanatical Evolutionists. The stupidity of the CLP is therefore inexcusable blasphemy; directly comparable to the legal concept known as "constructive knowledge." This type of knowledge means the defendant "could have known, should have known." This is why God has delivered the CLP into the hands of Satan. This is how so called Christian Ministers can stand with the enemies of the Bible without any awareness of anything horribly wrong or amiss.

God doesn't want them to know their true status, as deceived, as judgment for committing blasphemy (as defined and explained above).

What's the point?

Fear God.

Proverbs 1 (NIV):

"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction."

Proverbs 9:10 (NIV):

"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding."

Ray

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 7:49:49 PM3/3/15
to
On Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 4:14:49 PM UTC-8, czeba...@gmail.com wrote:
> You live on fairy tales. As a result you have no credibility.
>
> gregwrld

Secular ideology.

Ray

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 7:54:49 PM3/3/15
to
On Monday, March 2, 2015 at 7:39:51 PM UTC-8, Dana Tweedy wrote:
I see nothing wrong with hating traitors (= CLP).

Ray (Christian)

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 8:04:50 PM3/3/15
to
I agree.

> He used the phrase "speak of
> the devil", a shortened form of the saying "speak of the devil and he
> appears".

The four word reply presupposes an invisible personage who manifests through a visible intermediary.

> Now, according to your own claims, "appear" presumes a
> visible being, not an invisible one. So, by your own standards, John's
> statement supports Burkhard's point, and refutes your own.
>
>
> DJT

Ray

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 8:14:49 PM3/3/15
to
You don't understand that Atheists accept, defend, and promote evolutionary theory with fanatical zeal because evolutionary theory says the first two chapters of the Bible are completely false; hence the text is man-made, Divine inspiration is false, the Deity doesn't exist?

Ray

[....]

broger...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 8:19:50 PM3/3/15
to
Matt 4:1-11

4 Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted[a] by the devil. 2 After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. 3 The tempter came to him and said, "If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread."

4 Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.'[b]"

5 Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. 6 "If you are the Son of God," he said, "throw yourself down. For it is written:

"'He will command his angels concerning you,
and they will lift you up in their hands,
so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.'[c]"

7 Jesus answered him, "It is also written: 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.'[d]"

8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. 9 "All this I will give you," he said, "if you will bow down and worship me."

10 Jesus said to him, "Away from me, Satan! For it is written: 'Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.'[e]"

11 Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.

Job 1:6-8

1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.

1:7 And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.

1:8 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?

Luke 10:18 I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 8:24:49 PM3/3/15
to
Imagine that; one IS following Christ when one accepts evolutionary theory, that is, the exact same life explanation theory that almost all Atheists rabidly accept and endorse.

And the 13,000 signees THINK of themselves as following Christ. Are we to believe that Christ approves of a theory that denies His Father any role IN biological production while disapproving the "theory" that says His Father causes all biological production?

Ray

[....]

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 8:24:49 PM3/3/15
to
Your bluff has been called.

Ray

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 8:34:49 PM3/3/15
to
I accept the Biblical explanation of life. Design is seen in nature abundantly. And I completely reject the Atheist explanation of life as delusional. Darwin got nothing right scientifically----nothing. He was completely deluded. So in this context this is how I know that I am not deceived, unlike the CLP, and unlike the YECs (who believe Darwin got some things right).

Ray (OEC)

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 8:39:49 PM3/3/15
to
I agree that the Bible says an invisible Deceiver exists, is real. Jesus encountered the Devil Himself, no doubt. And when Jesus saw Satan fall He was speaking about in the past, when both He and Lucifer were immaterial supernatural beings in heaven.

Ray

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 8:44:49 PM3/3/15
to
On Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 5:19:50 PM UTC-8, broger...@gmail.com wrote:

[....]

>
> Job 1:6-8
>
> 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.
>
> 1:7 And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.
>
> 1:8 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?
>

Mainstream Christianity understands the verses in Job as occurring in heaven (verse 6). For where else could this have happened? This is a rhetorical question.

Ray

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 8:49:49 PM3/3/15
to
In fact verse 7 rules out any place on Earth. The meeting between God and Satan occurred in heaven.

Ray

TimR

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 9:04:49 PM3/3/15
to
On Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 8:39:49 PM UTC-5, Ray Martinez wrote:
And when Jesus saw Satan fall He was speaking about in the past, when both He and Lucifer were immaterial supernatural beings in heaven.
>
> Ray

The fall you are speaking of is not in the Bible, but is in the book of Enoch which Ray does not accept as scripture.
Actually most of what Christians think they know about Satan and demons comes from Enoch, which they don't believe in.

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 9:44:51 PM3/3/15
to
On 3/3/15 3:44 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
> On Monday, March 2, 2015 at 7:34:52 PM UTC-8, Dana Tweedy wrote:
snip


>>>>> The fact that you are challenging an undisputed claim (invisibility of Satan) is very good evidence of the strength of my points concerning the 13,000 deceived "Christian" clergy. Did you actually believe Christianity accepted a visible Devil?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The fact that yet again you fail to provide a bible citation is very
>>>> good evidence of my claim that you made up your won religion here.
>>>
>>> Nobody is obligated to support supernatural being as invisible.
>>
>> You made the claim, Ray, that the Bible speaks of an invisible deceiver.
>> You are obligated to show that the Bible says this being is invisible.
>>
>>> These debates presuppose a 101 knowledge.
>>
>> Anyone discussing with you would be foolish to assume you have even a
>> basic level of knowledge, Ray. Asking you to support what you claim is
>> quite reasonable.


And as seen below, my statement proves to be correct.


>>
>>
>>
>>
>> < The claims of Bible and Christianity just aint your cup of tea.
>> Friendly advice: stick to Atheism and evolution.
>>
>> Ray, the Bible does not say Satan is invisible. That's your own
>> interpretation. You are making claims that aren't supported by a "plain
>> reading" of the Bible. How is that any different from those who
>> accept the Bible's creation stories aren't meant to be taken literally?
>>
>>
>> DJT
>
> I am DELIGHTED that you and other Evolutionists are demanding verses that say the devil is invisible.

Actually, Ray, instead of "delighted", you seem to be rather afraid.
I'm pointing out that your claim that the Bible says there is an
"invisible deceiver" is only your own rationalization. The actual
words the Bible uses don't support your claim. Instead of supporting
your claim, you instead try to deflect attention away from it.


> This indicates that you believe the devil is visible. Please, show us his image?

No, Ray. What it indicates is that you don't know what the Bible
actually says. No where in the Bible does it state the devil is
invisible. Your claim that the Bible says so is objectively wrong.


You could admit you were wrong, and that your claim is not what the
Bible says. Of course, you can't do that, because it would hurt your
ego.



>
> LOL!

Instead of admitting your error, or taking the opportunity to learn
something about the Bible, you just give a nervous chuckle.



>
> The best part of all this is the fact that the Evolutionists are not the least bit ashamed of their ignorance.

It's not the "evolutionists" who are showing ignorance, Ray. All your
opponents here have demonstrated clearly that you make claims about the
Bible based on your personal ignorance.


> Any credibility that they might have had is completely dissolved.

How so? None of the "evolutionists" have made a false claim about the
Bible here.


> All one has to do is save these messages for future use, which I surely will.

Feel free, Ray. If you want to keep the messages that show your
ignorance of the Bible, and your inability to admit to an error, no one
is going to stop you.


DJT

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 9:59:49 PM3/3/15
to
I accept the Book of Enoch.

Ray

broger...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 10:04:49 PM3/3/15
to
It might have been in heaven, but nothing in the verse implies Satan was invisible.

It also probably didn't escape anybody's notice that you snipped the two other passages I cited, one of which shows Satan visibly falling from heaven, and the other of which shows him meeting Jesus in the desert (on earth). They don't go away just because you snip them.

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 10:04:50 PM3/3/15
to
On Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 5:24:53 AM UTC-8, TimR wrote:
> On Monday, March 2, 2015 at 3:59:53 PM UTC-5, Ray Martinez wrote:
> > I would bet that 99 percent of the 13,000 believe in the existence of an invisible Deceiver, just like the Bible says. And I would bet that all 13,000 believe they are exempt from being deceived----that they are God's favorite.
> >
> > Ray (Protestant)
>
> You would lose that bet.

On second thought, probably. But only concerning the existence of a personal Diablos.

>
> While the average parishioner snoozing in the pew probably believes in a Satan, all the surveys show that large percentages of clergy do not.
>

Excellent evidence supporting the existence of Satan.

> The clergy who sign the letter are likely to be in the less conservative camp, so probably not as likely to buy into the Satan thing.
>

Probably true.

> The "American Christianity" version of Satan is really not biblical anyway; it was invented in the early days of the country and reinforced by a string of movies.
>

Depends on what you mean.

Ray

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 10:14:49 PM3/3/15
to
Actually, Ray, if you would actually read the Bible, instead of
worshiping it as an idol, you'd see the Bible never states the devil is
invisible. Ancient Hebrews tended to consider God, and other magical
beings in physical terms.

If you still think otherwise then paste the verses?

2nd Corinthians, 11:14 describes the Devil as an 'angel of light'


>
> See Bill run.

Not everyone acts like you, Ray.


DJT

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 10:19:50 PM3/3/15
to
They are interesting because they show you are wrong.


>
>> He used the phrase "speak of
>> the devil", a shortened form of the saying "speak of the devil and he
>> appears".
>
> The four word reply presupposes an invisible personage who manifests through a visible intermediary.

There is no such "presupposition". The adage refers to something
visible showing up. See how you avoided the part I wrote below.



>
>> Now, according to your own claims, "appear" presumes a
>> visible being, not an invisible one. So, by your own standards, John's
>> statement supports Burkhard's point, and refutes your own.
>>
>>
>> DJT
>
> Ray

Why not just admit you were wrong, Ray?


DJT

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 10:19:50 PM3/3/15
to
On 3/3/15 6:44 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 5:19:50 PM UTC-8, broger...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> [....]
>
>>
>> Job 1:6-8
>>
>> 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.
>>
>> 1:7 And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.
>>
>> 1:8 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?
>>
>
> Mainstream Christianity understands the verses in Job as occurring in heaven (verse 6).

Mainstream Christianity also accepts evolution.



> For where else could this have happened? This is a rhetorical question.

In any case, it still refers to a visible being.

Why not just admit you were wrong?


DJT

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 10:19:49 PM3/3/15
to
Which still doesn't make anyone invisible....

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 10:19:50 PM3/3/15
to
Those verses above don't say anything about an "invisible deceiver".

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 10:24:49 PM3/3/15
to
On 3/3/15 3:36 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
> On Monday, March 2, 2015 at 7:29:52 PM UTC-8, Dana Tweedy wrote:
>>> And:
>>>
>>> https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/dictionary-of-bible-themes/4123-Satan-as-deceiver
>>>
>>> The fact that you didn't know about this MAJOR Biblical claim is the only point here.
>>
>> Ray, he was talking about the "invisible" part. The Bible does not
>> claim an "invisible" deceiver. Please produce the verse where the
>> Bible says the deceiver is invisible.
>>
>>
>> DJT
>
> Here we have a "Christian" (Dana Tweedy) suggesting the person of the devil is not invisible.

What I'm saying is what the Bible says is not what you claimed. You
have applied a rationalization to make the Bible's words fit with your
own assumptions. You seem very reluctant to produce a verse indicating
an invisible devil.


> Where did you obtain this idea?

You are mistaken, I did not express an idea that the devil is either
visible, or not visible. I'm just pointing out the Bible does not claim
an "invisible deceiver".

Where did you get the idea the devil was invisible? It's not from the
Bible, but from some rationalization to make the "plain reading" of the
Bible fit your assumptions.

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 10:24:49 PM3/3/15
to
So, Ray, why not just admit you were wrong?

DJT

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 10:34:49 PM3/3/15
to
That's how one can tell you are the one deceived by the evil one.
Christ teaches us to love others, not hate them. Even people you
consider "traitors".

Of course, the learned clergy men and women are not traitors for
accepting well established science. They have excellent reasons for
accepting evolutionary theory. It remains the best scientific
explanation for the evidence.

You, on the other hand, Ray, agree with atheists that God can't have
used evolution to create. You agree with atheists that science and
religion are incompatible.

By setting up a false dichotomy between science and religion, you are
doing excellent service on behalf of the atheists, and intolerant
persons who reject God's works.

But I don't hate you, Ray. I'm sure none of the signers of the Clergy
Letter hate you. That you have given your life over to hate,
ignorance, and fear is evidence enough for anyone that you follow your
deceiver. It's not too late to turn back. You can reject your
delusion, and give up your hate filled life.

DJT

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 11:04:49 PM3/3/15
to
As if what occurred in heaven is visible to mankind. As if anyone is saying Satan is not visible in the passage. As if the passage renders Satan visible to mankind.

Here we have an Atheist (Bill Rogers) ignoring everything said in this post and other posts that plainly refutes everything he has said in this post and other posts while blatantly misrepresenting the Bible.

Nothing new here.

Ray (Christian)

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 11:09:48 PM3/3/15
to
Says Ray, whistling in the dark..


DJT

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 11:09:48 PM3/3/15
to
On 3/3/15 4:36 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
> On Monday, March 2, 2015 at 7:39:51 PM UTC-8, Dana Tweedy wrote:
>> On 3/2/15 1:39 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
>>> On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 3:49:55 PM UTC-8, czeba...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> So now you have to imagine demons to prop up your pathetic cause. You are one sad case Rayray...
>>>>
>>>> gregwrld
>>>
>>> Just pointing out that the Biblical claim concerning existence of an invisible Deceiver is well supported by the sad facts of the Clergy Letter Project. Your inability understand is the only pathetic thing.
>>>
>>> Ray
>>>
>> The Bible doesn't say that any deceiver is invisible, Ray. It's not a
>> Biblical claim, but your own.
>
> Imagine that; suddenly the Bible makes no claims about the existence of Satan.

that is not what I said, Ray. For someone who whines about being
"misrepresented", you certainly don't have any qualms about
misrepresenting others.

> I, Ray Martinez, originated the idea!


No, you seized on the idea of an "invisible deceiver", when the Bible
doesn't mention an invisible one. That is your own error.


>
> Here we have an EXCELLENT example of the brazen dishonesty of Evolutionists like Dana Tweedy and Burkhard.

Actually, Ray, you offer an excellent example of dishonesty above. My
statement, as well as Burkhard's statements were true, and honest.




> Every Atheist scholar in the world knows and agrees that the Bible makes CLAIMS about an invisible Deceiver known as Satan.

Would you please present a single "atheist scholar" who makes such a
claim?




>
> https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/dictionary-of-bible-themes/4123-Satan-as-deceiver

Ray, "bible gateway" is not an "atheist scholar", and it doesn't say
that Satan is invisible.


>
>>
>> In any case, you are the one who has been deceived, and you can't see
>> it. You are the one opposing Christians, and opposing God's work.
>>
>>
>> DJT
>
> Suddenly evolution is "God's work" (Dana Tweedy).

Of course evolution is God's work, Ray. All of nature is God's work,
and evolution is a big part of it. Why would it not be?

> If that were true Atheists would not be Evolutionists.

That doesn't follow, Ray. Atheists accept evolution because it's the
best scientific explanation for the evidence. That's the same reason
why Christians, and people of every religious belief also accept
evolution.

You seem to imagine that everyone is as irrational as yourself when
it comes to acceptance of evidence.



>
> Dana is enraged because I've identified the Clergy Letter Project as the best possible evidence supporting the Biblical claims about Satan.

Ray, you really bad at discerning people's moods through their writing.
I'm not "enraged". I am saddened that you are seemingly hell bent on
rejecting God's work, and you are fleeing as fast as you can toward the
side of evil, and hatred. You've turned your back of God and worship
ignorance, fear, and lies. I'm hoping you will turn back before it's
too late.


> So what does Dana our Evolutionist do?

I point out you are wrong, and that your hatred is evidence you reject
God.

> He denies the premise!

No, I point out where you are wrong. I don't deny the Bible talks
about a deceiver, but your insistence the being is invisible is
unsupported, and wrongheaded.


> But everyone agrees with the premise.

Ray, your "premise" is that the Bible makes a particular claim, when it
makes no such claim.


> Everyone understands that the Bible advocates an invisible supernatural being known as a Satan who exists to deceive people.

No, that's your own mistaken idea. You can't support it, and you won't
admit you are wrong. Therefore you keep trying to distract others from
your own error by spewing accusations.

It's a standard tactic you use whenever you get cornered, and it's quite
boring.


>
> The secular world rejects the existence of Satan BECAUSE they can't see him!

Actually, the "secular world" is not particularly interested in
religious claims without any verification. Whether or not Satan exists
has nothing to do with visibility.


> The secular world makes fun of the Bible for postulating the existence of an invisible Devil!

Actually, Ray, people make fun of you, because you claim something on
behalf of the Bible, that anyone who's even remotely familiar with the
book knows is not true. People who make outlandish claims about things
that they know little ,or nothing about tend to be seen as foolish, and
get teased about it.


> The secular world thinks we are crazy for believing in the existence of an invisible Deceiver!

Again, Ray, people think you are crazy, not for believing in an
"invisible deceiver", even though the Bible doesn't make any claim of
invisibility for that being. People mock you because you keep making
silly, unfounded claims, without a shred of evidence, and expect
everyone to just accept them as fact.




> All of these secular beliefs presuppose the Biblical CLAIM of an invisible Deceiver. (Yet the secular world has no problem believing in a host of invisible things as well.)

The point, you keep dancing around, Ray, is that the claim here is not
Biblical, it's your own claim. The Bible itself doesn't support your
assertion. You aren't capable of seeing the distinction between the
Bible referring to a deceiver, with your silly insistence the deceiver
being "invisible".




>
> Yet we have 13,000 "Christian" Ministers who claim to be following Christ and claim to speak for Christ in behalf of their congregations.

Those ministers have much more education, and training in understanding
the Bible, and the words of Christ than you do. You imagine yourself to
be "smarter" than them, simply because you reject a well established
scientific theory.




> Yet without any awareness of anything horribly wrong, or amiss, and without any conscience, these "Shepherds" stand with Atheists and reject the Biblical explanation of life.

In reality, those clergy members aren't aware that an uneducated, hate
filled, openly deluded internet stranger thinks they are wrong. Of
course they aren't going to have any conception they are doing wrong,
because they are not.

Opposing Ray Martinez's beliefs is not standing with atheists.
Rejecting a naive, and poorly thought out interpretation of the Bible is
not rejecting God's word. Seeing that God creates through natural laws
and processes is not rejecting the message that God created the
diversity of life.




>
> Again, there exists no better evidence supporting the existence of an invisible Deceiver than the Clergy Letter Project.

Yet it's Ray himself that supports the existence of a deceiver, as he is
so thoroughly deceived. He was deceived by false prophets, deceived by
liars, and deceived by his own ego. The clergy who accept evolution
are not deceived by those who deceived Ray. That is probably why Ray is
so resentful of those godly men and women.




>
> Judas was an original Apostle who saw Jesus perform mind-boggling miracles. Yet in the Garden of Gethsemane he betrayed his Master to His enemies. HOW could Judas do such a thing?


Probably for the same reason you have betrayed any Christian who opposes
your delusion.



>
> Here is the answer:
>
> LUKE 22 (KJV):
>
> "Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover.
>
> And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him; for they feared the people.
>
> Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.
>
> And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray him unto them.
>
> And they were glad, and covenanted to give him money.
>
> And he promised, and sought opportunity to betray him unto them in the absence of the multitude."
>
> Except for a handful of Evolutionists here at Talk.Origins, everyone else understands that these verses say an invisible Deceiver possessed Judas----that's how and why Judas betrayed his Master.

What is your excuse for betraying Christ, Ray?


> So with Satan inside of him Judas delivered the infamous "Judas kiss" on the face of Christ without any awareness of anything horribly wrong or amiss.

Just as you, Ray have no idea that you are betraying others.



>
> So no one is exempt from the possibility of being deceived, not Apostles, not Pastors and Shepherds, not ordinary Christians.

Somehow, Ray can't imagine himself to be deceived.... why is that?



>
> What happened when Satan was through with Judas and left his body?
>
> He suddenly obtained a conscience, went out and hanged himself (verses available upon request).
>
> I guess Satan isn't through with the 13,000 Ministers of the Clergy Letter Project.

The ministers of the Clergy Letter Project aren't the ones being used,
Ray. Look to the log in your own eye.


DJT

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 11:14:49 PM3/3/15
to
On 3/3/15 6:29 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 12:34:51 AM UTC-8, jillery wrote:
>> On Mon, 2 Mar 2015 12:55:49 -0800 (PST), Ray Martinez
>> <pyram...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
>>>> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
>>>>
>>>> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
>>>> ---Tom S.
>>>
>>> I would bet that 99 percent of the 13,000 believe in the existence of an invisible Deceiver, just like the Bible says. And I would bet that all 13,000 believe they are exempt from being deceived----that they are God's favorite.
>>>
>>> Ray (Protestant)
>>
>>
>> How do you know that *you* aren't deceived?
>>
>> --
>> Intelligence is never insulting.
>
> I accept the Biblical explanation of life.

No, you assume your own conclusions. You refuse to consider you might
have got your interpretation of the Bible wrong.


> Design is seen in nature abundantly.

You assume "design" without any way to tell if you are right, or wrong.
You can't see "design", only the resemblance to things designed.


> And I completely reject the Atheist explanation of life as delusional.

You only accept your own delusion. Evolution is not an atheist
explanation. It is a scientific one.


> Darwin got nothing right scientifically----nothing.

Darwin got some things wrong, but he got many things right. Denial of
reality does not support your case.


> He was completely deluded.

Yet he correctly identified at least part the mechanism by which genetic
change happens in populations. You claim he was deluded, but the
observations he made stand, and are confirmed by anyone who makes the
same observations.

That would indicate anyone claiming he got everything wrong is the one
deluded.


> So in this context this is how I know that I am not deceived, unlike the CLP,

You assume your own conclusion, again. You have nothing to support your
assumption that you aren't the one deceived.



> and unlike the YECs (who believe Darwin got some things right).

Darwin did indeed get some things right. Denying that obvious truth
shows just how deluded you are. You are just admitting the even the
YECs are more connected to reality than you are.


DJT

Ray Martinez

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 11:24:49 PM3/3/15
to
I'm DELIGHTED that you're arguing something SO stupid (Bible says we can see the Devil). It exposes you and a few other Evolutionists as brazen liars who can't refute anything that I've said: mainly the fact that I supported the existence of Satan using the Clergy Letter Project.

I stand on every preceding message of mine as wholly sufficient. Any and all fact checking will show that you, Bill Rogers, and Burkhard, are raving lunatics and liars, misrepresenting everything said while evading plain and undisputed facts seen in all of my previous posts. This is one reason why we are not Evolutionists. And the fact that other Evolutionists are remaining silent and not calling you guys liars is actually the best point of all. It shows that Evolutionists are not liars because they lie; rather, Evolutionists lie because they are liars.

That's why I won't admit I'm wrong.

Ray (Christian-Paleyan Creationist-species immutabilist)

Dana Tweedy

unread,
Mar 3, 2015, 11:29:49 PM3/3/15
to
On 3/3/15 5:38 PM, Ray Martinez wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 9:29:51 AM UTC-8, Bob Casanova wrote:
>> On Mon, 2 Mar 2015 12:55:49 -0800 (PST), the following
>> appeared in talk.origins, posted by Ray Martinez
>> <pyram...@yahoo.com>:
>>
>>> On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 5:49:57 AM UTC-8, TomS wrote:
>>>> Remember the Clergy Letter Project?
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.theclergyletterproject.org/>
>>>>
>>>> It's just passed 13,000 Christian clergy signatures.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> God is not a demiurge or a magician - Pope Francis
>>>> ---Tom S.
>>>
>>> I would bet that 99 percent of the 13,000 believe in the existence of an invisible Deceiver, just like the Bible says. And I would bet that all 13,000 believe they are exempt from being deceived----that they are God's favorite.
>>
>> And that makes them different from you...how?
>
> The difference is that I fear God and His word.

No, you fear the idea you might be wrong. That's why you refuse to test
your assumptions. Hiding your ignorance and calling it "fear of God" is
an insult to God, and his word.

> The CLP fears the secular world----that's the difference.

On what do you base that assertion? You, Ray seem to be more afraid of
the "secular world" than anyone in the Clergy Letter Project. Those
clergy members live in the world, they don't run from it, like you do.

>
> The CLP is just too stupid to see that evolution is based ENTIRELY on pro-Atheist assumptions about reality.

The clergy are more educated than you are, and understand there are no
"pro atheism" assumptions in science. You are afraid to face the truth,
that science does not assume there isn't a supernatural, because then
you'd have to face what the evidence indicates.


> This is seen and supported in the fact that almost all Atheists are fanatical Evolutionists.

Even if this were true,(and it is not) it's still not evidence there
are any "pro atheist" assumptions to science. Most atheists accept
evolution, for the same reason many Christians, and other religious
believers do. Because it's the best scientific explanation for the
evidence.

Until you come to grips with this fact, you will never understand why
people who believe in God don't reject evolution.




> The stupidity of the CLP is therefore inexcusable blasphemy; directly comparable to the legal concept known as "constructive knowledge."

All you are doing now, instead of showing why they are wrong, is tossing
around insults, in hopes no one will see how weak your position is.

> This type of knowledge means the defendant "could have known, should have known."

What you are really afraid of, is the knowledge that the members of the
clergy here do know, and that they are right. There's no blasphemy in
accepting God's work.


> This is why God has delivered the CLP into the hands of Satan. This is how so called Christian Ministers can stand with the enemies of the Bible without any awareness of anything horribly wrong or amiss.

Your assumption here is that these ministers "stand with" atheists, and
that atheists are "enemies" of the Bible. Both of those assumptions
are untrue.


>
> God doesn't want them to know their true status, as deceived, as judgment for committing blasphemy (as defined and explained above).

You are suggesting that God is the "invisible deceiver" here. If that
is not blasphemy, what is?



>
> What's the point?
>
> Fear God.

But you don't fear God. You fear "atheists" "secularists",
"evolutionists" Your fear brings you to hate, and that his how you
have been deceived. You are too afraid to face the possibility you
might be wrong, so you betray honest Christians.


>
> Proverbs 1 (NIV):
>
> "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction."

And you certainly despise wisdom, and instruction....



>
> Proverbs 9:10 (NIV):
>
> "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding."

Which is why you flee from wisdom, and understanding. Because you'd have
to acknowledge you have been wrong about God all along.


DJT

It is loading more messages.
0 new messages