Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: It's Duke vs. John Paul the Second -- you choose
5 views
Skip to first unread message
duke
May 10, 2013, 8:28:23 AM5/10/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 18:13:27 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>Andrew W wrote:
>>> "duke" wrote in message
>>> news:m18do8t1utjiiraum...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> On Sat, 04 May 2013 19:48:18 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 01 May 2013 13:37:02 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 06:11:41 -0700, linuxgal
>>>>> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> duke wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:50:09 -0700, linuxgal
>>>>>>> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And what did all those babies and calves in Egypt do against God?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All the animals on the ark were saved. Something was different.
>>>>>
>>>>>> They won the lottery.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, ALL the animals on the ARK were saved.
>>>>
>>>> Wasn't the story of Noah in the part of the OT that you said was
>>>> bullshit, Dook?
>>>
>>> The story of noah is valid for teaching.
>>>
>>
>> Teaching what exactly?
>
>That the Bible cannot be trusted as a history book.
Why can any book be trusted as historical?
The dukester, American - American
********************************************
Repeal Obama
You simply can't fix stupid.
********************************************
>Andrew W wrote:
>>> "duke" wrote in message
>>> news:m18do8t1utjiiraum...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> On Sat, 04 May 2013 19:48:18 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 01 May 2013 13:37:02 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 06:11:41 -0700, linuxgal
>>>>> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> duke wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:50:09 -0700, linuxgal
>>>>>>> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And what did all those babies and calves in Egypt do against God?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All the animals on the ark were saved. Something was different.
>>>>>
>>>>>> They won the lottery.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, ALL the animals on the ARK were saved.
>>>>
>>>> Wasn't the story of Noah in the part of the OT that you said was
>>>> bullshit, Dook?
>>>
>>> The story of noah is valid for teaching.
>>>
>>
>> Teaching what exactly?
>
>That the Bible cannot be trusted as a history book.
Why can any book be trusted as historical?
The dukester, American - American
********************************************
Repeal Obama
You simply can't fix stupid.
********************************************
duke
May 10, 2013, 8:31:34 AM5/10/13
to
On Fri, 10 May 2013 08:30:56 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:
>>"duke" wrote in message news:j66no8lhu7qk7p6i3...@4ax.com...
>>
>>On Thu, 9 May 2013 13:08:02 +1000, "Andrew W"
>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>>And that's only if that story was even true.
>>
>>All the world's animals at the time.
>Lol!
>That's not how the story goes. It was two of every kind (in that area). Noah
>could hardly travel to every continent.
It was all one landmass.
>Looks like 'God's' not so powerful after all if a lowly human had to do all
>the work.
God always works thru people. That's why you're in so much trouble. Believe it
or not, tits on a bull has a purpose, but not you.
wrote:
>>"duke" wrote in message news:j66no8lhu7qk7p6i3...@4ax.com...
>>
>>On Thu, 9 May 2013 13:08:02 +1000, "Andrew W"
>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>>news:oldvn8912kdggp3ld...@4ax.com...
>>
>>>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:50:09 -0700, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>duke wrote:
>>>>All the animals on the ark were saved. Something was different.
>>
>>>A piddly few. And not by God.
>>>>On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:50:09 -0700, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>duke wrote:
>>>>All the animals on the ark were saved. Something was different.
>>
>>>And that's only if that story was even true.
>>
>>All the world's animals at the time.
>Lol!
>That's not how the story goes. It was two of every kind (in that area). Noah
>could hardly travel to every continent.
It was all one landmass.
>Looks like 'God's' not so powerful after all if a lowly human had to do all
>the work.
God always works thru people. That's why you're in so much trouble. Believe it
or not, tits on a bull has a purpose, but not you.
duke
May 10, 2013, 8:32:35 AM5/10/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 13:18:12 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>In article <d7fno81sfmog1jrcl...@4ax.com>, duke
><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 08 May 2013 05:29:08 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>>
>> >In article <sidko8p8adrdhqatc...@4ax.com>, duke
>> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, 07 May 2013 06:54:44 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >In article <jnrho8d187sgpoo3n...@4ax.com>, duke
>> >> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Mon, 06 May 2013 08:16:12 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >In article <458fo8tc85c4kgl1n...@4ax.com>, duke
>> >> >> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> On Sun, 05 May 2013 11:56:24 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >So if Jesus atoned for the murderer's murder in his own blood,
>> >> >why do
>> >> >> >> >> >> >you still require that murderer to atone in his own
>blood, ala
>> >> >> >> >> >> >Leviticus? Especially since you claim to be all about the New
>> >> >> >Covenant?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Say what??
>> >> >> >> >> >� She explained it well Duke.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Sounds like you're not any more familiar with OT vs NT than
>she is.
>> >> >> >> >� Playing for time?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I know what the sacrifice is.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >� Jesus said his dad did not want sacrifice. The RCC has sacrifice
>> >> >> >based doctrine.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Name that sacrifice in 10 musical notes or less.
>> >> >>
>> >> >� Jesus' crucifixion.
>> >>
>> >> It is????
>> >>
>> >� Yea verily. Your Church has taught this paganesque take-off since the
>> >4th Century. After 380CE, this made Catholicism more acceptable to
>> >members of pagan churches who were interested in converting to Catholicism
>> >so that they would not be crucified by the Roman government.
>>
>> You still haven't figured out the why.
>>
>� Why the crucifixon or why the decision to incorporate a ritual into
>Christianity in 394CE?
Well before 4BC.
>In article <d7fno81sfmog1jrcl...@4ax.com>, duke
><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 08 May 2013 05:29:08 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>>
>> >In article <sidko8p8adrdhqatc...@4ax.com>, duke
>> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, 07 May 2013 06:54:44 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >In article <jnrho8d187sgpoo3n...@4ax.com>, duke
>> >> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Mon, 06 May 2013 08:16:12 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >In article <458fo8tc85c4kgl1n...@4ax.com>, duke
>> >> >> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> On Sun, 05 May 2013 11:56:24 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >So if Jesus atoned for the murderer's murder in his own blood,
>> >> >why do
>> >> >> >> >> >> >you still require that murderer to atone in his own
>blood, ala
>> >> >> >> >> >> >Leviticus? Especially since you claim to be all about the New
>> >> >> >Covenant?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Say what??
>> >> >> >> >> >� She explained it well Duke.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Sounds like you're not any more familiar with OT vs NT than
>she is.
>> >> >> >> >� Playing for time?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I know what the sacrifice is.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >� Jesus said his dad did not want sacrifice. The RCC has sacrifice
>> >> >> >based doctrine.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Name that sacrifice in 10 musical notes or less.
>> >> >>
>> >> >� Jesus' crucifixion.
>> >>
>> >> It is????
>> >>
>> >� Yea verily. Your Church has taught this paganesque take-off since the
>> >4th Century. After 380CE, this made Catholicism more acceptable to
>> >members of pagan churches who were interested in converting to Catholicism
>> >so that they would not be crucified by the Roman government.
>>
>> You still haven't figured out the why.
>>
>� Why the crucifixon or why the decision to incorporate a ritual into
>Christianity in 394CE?
Well before 4BC.
�RLMeasures
May 10, 2013, 8:49:46 AM5/10/13
to
In article <cPWdnZ-I5vxQ_hHM...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> �RLMeasures wrote:
> > *** Duke's idea of a perfect God would be one who drops dark chocolate
> > with almonds instead of manna.
>
> Goddess drops chocolate. The male warrior-king God it's just manna and
> beer.
� Does Duke drink beer?
<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> �RLMeasures wrote:
> > *** Duke's idea of a perfect God would be one who drops dark chocolate
> > with almonds instead of manna.
>
> Goddess drops chocolate. The male warrior-king God it's just manna and
> beer.
� Does Duke drink beer?
•RLMeasures
May 10, 2013, 8:51:49 AM5/10/13
to
In article <kmhv5o$8a4$1...@dont-email.me>, "Andrew W"
<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >"duke" wrote in message news:12l4o898624lvffiq...@4ax.com...
> >
> >On Wed, 1 May 2013 21:16:17 -0700 (PDT), nature bats last
> ><seqk...@gmail.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>On May 1, 11:38 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 07:18:21 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
> >>>
> >>
> >> ;
> >>> >> The blood on the door crossarm saved so many.
> >>;
> >>> If we believe Jewish storytellers.
> >>
> >>;
> >>> They got it on film also.
> >>
> >>Is it just me, or is Dook slowly turning into
> >>The Poster Currently Known As '%' ?
> >
> >No way.
> >
> >But silly rl comments deserve an appropriate response.
> >
>
> You see it all as silly only because you've been so heavily conditioned and
> programmed by your religion.
• Indeed Andrew.
<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >"duke" wrote in message news:12l4o898624lvffiq...@4ax.com...
> >
> >On Wed, 1 May 2013 21:16:17 -0700 (PDT), nature bats last
> ><seqk...@gmail.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>On May 1, 11:38 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 07:18:21 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
> >>>
> >>
> >> ;
> >>> >> The blood on the door crossarm saved so many.
> >>;
> >>> If we believe Jewish storytellers.
> >>
> >>;
> >>> They got it on film also.
> >>
> >>Is it just me, or is Dook slowly turning into
> >>The Poster Currently Known As '%' ?
> >
> >No way.
> >
> >But silly rl comments deserve an appropriate response.
> >
>
> You see it all as silly only because you've been so heavily conditioned and
> programmed by your religion.
• Indeed Andrew.
linuxgal
May 10, 2013, 9:54:05 AM5/10/13
to
duke wrote:
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 18:13:27 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >Andrew W wrote:
>>>> >>>"duke" wrote in message
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 18:13:27 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >Andrew W wrote:
>>>> >>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>> >>>The story of noah is valid for teaching.
>>> >>Teaching what exactly?
>> >That the Bible cannot be trusted as a history book.
> Why can any book be trusted as historical?
I have a book that says Nixon tried to get the CIA to tell the FBI to
>>> >>Teaching what exactly?
>> >That the Bible cannot be trusted as a history book.
> Why can any book be trusted as historical?
back off on their investigation of Liddy, McCord, Sturgis, Martinez,
Barker, and Gonzales because it was part of a covert operation related
to national security. This is corroborated by the "smoking gun" tape
which existed because Nixon bugged his own office. The story of Noah,
however, fails because of a number of absurdities embedded in it. A
wind cannot evaporate 1.1 billion cubic miles of water in a few weeks,
for one.
--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0
linuxgal
May 10, 2013, 9:57:22 AM5/10/13
to
duke wrote:
> You can't see, touch, smell, hear, or taste electricity, but you still believe
> in it. Why?
Ever test a 9V battery on your tongue? Electricity does indeed have a
taste.
> You can't see, touch, smell, hear, or taste electricity, but you still believe
> in it. Why?
Ever test a 9V battery on your tongue? Electricity does indeed have a
taste.
•RLMeasures
May 10, 2013, 8:58:18 AM5/10/13
to
In article <25ppo8ttg6io0nsmm...@4ax.com>, duke
<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 08:33:07 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
> d have listened.
>
> >> If I gave up 2-3 dark chocolate nuggets with almonds, that would be a
> >permanent
> >> loss.
>
> >• Eating Hershey's Nuggets® produces feces - which are useful for growing
> >food = so there is no permanent loss.
>
> Not if I gave them up. That would be a permanent loss.
• what if the Nuggets® were returned to you 3 days later?
>
> >> >
<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 08:33:07 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
> d have listened.
>
> >> If I gave up 2-3 dark chocolate nuggets with almonds, that would be a
> >permanent
> >> loss.
>
> >• Eating Hershey's Nuggets® produces feces - which are useful for growing
> >food = so there is no permanent loss.
>
> Not if I gave them up. That would be a permanent loss.
• what if the Nuggets® were returned to you 3 days later?
>
> >> >
•RLMeasures
May 10, 2013, 9:02:52 AM5/10/13
to
In article <f6qpo85agkr89iobl...@4ax.com>, duke
• So Jesus was crucified before he was born? RCC doctrine is seemingly
more holey than holy.
more holey than holy.
linuxgal
May 10, 2013, 10:14:22 AM5/10/13
to
�RLMeasures wrote:
> In article<cPWdnZ-I5vxQ_hHM...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
> In article<cPWdnZ-I5vxQ_hHM...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >�RLMeasures wrote:
>>> > >*** Duke's idea of a perfect God would be one who drops dark chocolate
>>> > >with almonds instead of manna.
>> >
>> >Goddess drops chocolate. The male warrior-king God it's just manna and
>> >beer.
> � Does Duke drink beer?
>>> > >*** Duke's idea of a perfect God would be one who drops dark chocolate
>>> > >with almonds instead of manna.
>> >
>> >Goddess drops chocolate. The male warrior-king God it's just manna and
>> >beer.
Its the only explanation for why he giggles more than a little girl.
linuxgal
May 10, 2013, 10:40:59 AM5/10/13
to
duke wrote:
> On Mon, 06 May 2013 02:45:42 -0400,Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> >On Sun, 5 May 2013 14:38:13 -0400, Pabro<Pa...@ChurchOffice23.org>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>>> >>On Sun, 05 May 2013 11:33:13 -0800, linuxgal wrote:
>>>> >>>Why would you set one half of the Word of God against the other half?
>>> >>You're precisely correct, linux gal. The Word of God does not contradict
>>> >>Itself.
>> >
>> >Except when it does.
> Name one time.
2 Kings 8:26 Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to
reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
2 Chronicles 22:2 Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to
reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
> On Mon, 06 May 2013 02:45:42 -0400,Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>> >On Sun, 5 May 2013 14:38:13 -0400, Pabro<Pa...@ChurchOffice23.org>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>>> >>On Sun, 05 May 2013 11:33:13 -0800, linuxgal wrote:
>>>> >>>Why would you set one half of the Word of God against the other half?
>>> >>You're precisely correct, linux gal. The Word of God does not contradict
>>> >>Itself.
>> >
>> >Except when it does.
> Name one time.
2 Kings 8:26 Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to
reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
2 Chronicles 22:2 Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to
reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
linuxgal
May 10, 2013, 10:51:32 AM5/10/13
to
duke wrote:
> On Sun, 05 May 2013 11:33:57 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >Teaching that the Bible is fiction.
> It's your funeral, backslider.
Paulie Walnuts: "I don't wanna kick this twenty K upstairs to Ton'."
Chris Moltisanti: "It's your funeral, backslider."
> On Sun, 05 May 2013 11:33:57 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >Teaching that the Bible is fiction.
> It's your funeral, backslider.
Paulie Walnuts: "I don't wanna kick this twenty K upstairs to Ton'."
Chris Moltisanti: "It's your funeral, backslider."
�RLMeasures
May 10, 2013, 12:36:27 PM5/10/13
to
In article <CbednS94cpk1bxHM...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> �RLMeasures wrote:
> > In article<cPWdnZ-I5vxQ_hHM...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
> > <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >
> >> >�RLMeasures wrote:
> >>> > >*** Duke's idea of a perfect God would be one who drops dark chocolate
> >>> > >with almonds instead of manna.
> >> >
> >> >Goddess drops chocolate. The male warrior-king God it's just manna and
> >> >beer.
> > � Does Duke drink beer?
<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> �RLMeasures wrote:
> > In article<cPWdnZ-I5vxQ_hHM...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
> > <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >
> >> >�RLMeasures wrote:
> >>> > >*** Duke's idea of a perfect God would be one who drops dark chocolate
> >>> > >with almonds instead of manna.
> >> >
> >> >Goddess drops chocolate. The male warrior-king God it's just manna and
> >> >beer.
>
> Its the only explanation for why he giggles more than a little girl.
� There's another explanation. Need I explain LG?
> Its the only explanation for why he giggles more than a little girl.
Jeanne Douglas
May 10, 2013, 3:21:06 PM5/10/13
to
In article <51qpo85c3h8nvk3na...@4ax.com>,
millions of years ago.
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 08:30:56 +1000, "Andrew W"
> <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> >>"duke" wrote in message news:j66no8lhu7qk7p6i3...@4ax.com...
> >>
> >>On Thu, 9 May 2013 13:08:02 +1000, "Andrew W"
> >><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>>>"duke" wrote in message
> >>>>news:oldvn8912kdggp3ld...@4ax.com...
> >>>>
> >>>>On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:50:09 -0700, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
> >>>>wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>duke wrote:
> >>>>All the animals on the ark were saved. Something was different.
> >>
> >>>A piddly few. And not by God.
> >>>And that's only if that story was even true.
> >>
> >>All the world's animals at the time.
>
> >Lol!
> >That's not how the story goes. It was two of every kind (in that area). Noah
> >could hardly travel to every continent.
>
> It was all one landmass.
Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 08:30:56 +1000, "Andrew W"
> <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> >>"duke" wrote in message news:j66no8lhu7qk7p6i3...@4ax.com...
> >>
> >>On Thu, 9 May 2013 13:08:02 +1000, "Andrew W"
> >><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>>>"duke" wrote in message
> >>>>news:oldvn8912kdggp3ld...@4ax.com...
> >>>>
> >>>>On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:50:09 -0700, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
> >>>>wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>duke wrote:
> >>>>All the animals on the ark were saved. Something was different.
> >>
> >>>A piddly few. And not by God.
> >>>And that's only if that story was even true.
> >>
> >>All the world's animals at the time.
>
> >Lol!
> >That's not how the story goes. It was two of every kind (in that area). Noah
> >could hardly travel to every continent.
>
> It was all one landmass.
millions of years ago.
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Jeanne Douglas
May 10, 2013, 3:22:01 PM5/10/13
to
In article <fuppo81f303dp9l3o...@4ax.com>,
Actual, objective, VERIFIABLE evidence.
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 18:13:27 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
> >Andrew W wrote:
> >>> "duke" wrote in message
> >>> news:m18do8t1utjiiraum...@4ax.com...
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, 04 May 2013 19:48:18 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Wed, 01 May 2013 13:37:02 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 06:11:41 -0700, linuxgal
> >>>>> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> duke wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:50:09 -0700, linuxgal
> >>>>>>> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> And what did all those babies and calves in Egypt do against God?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> All the animals on the ark were saved. Something was different.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> They won the lottery.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No, ALL the animals on the ARK were saved.
> >>>>
> >>>> Wasn't the story of Noah in the part of the OT that you said was
> >>>> bullshit, Dook?
> >>>
> >>> The story of noah is valid for teaching.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Teaching what exactly?
> >
> >That the Bible cannot be trusted as a history book.
>
> Why can any book be trusted as historical?
Because they have EVIDENCE to back them up.
> On Thu, 09 May 2013 18:13:27 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
> >Andrew W wrote:
> >>> "duke" wrote in message
> >>> news:m18do8t1utjiiraum...@4ax.com...
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, 04 May 2013 19:48:18 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Wed, 01 May 2013 13:37:02 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 06:11:41 -0700, linuxgal
> >>>>> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> duke wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:50:09 -0700, linuxgal
> >>>>>>> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> And what did all those babies and calves in Egypt do against God?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> All the animals on the ark were saved. Something was different.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> They won the lottery.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No, ALL the animals on the ARK were saved.
> >>>>
> >>>> Wasn't the story of Noah in the part of the OT that you said was
> >>>> bullshit, Dook?
> >>>
> >>> The story of noah is valid for teaching.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Teaching what exactly?
> >
> >That the Bible cannot be trusted as a history book.
>
> Why can any book be trusted as historical?
Actual, objective, VERIFIABLE evidence.
Jeanne Douglas
May 10, 2013, 3:23:15 PM5/10/13
to
In article <3fppo8t6kvtfksqr4...@4ax.com>,
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 22:34:06 -0700 (PDT), SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >> Its almost impossible to provide objective, verifiable evidence on
> >> metaphysics, especially over usenet.
> >> You should know that.
>
> >It's equally impossible in real life. I know - I've been asking the
> >same question of theists since before the internet was invented.
>
> >So: there's no evidence of anything "metaphysical," yet you goobers
> >persist in believing in it.
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 22:34:06 -0700 (PDT), SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >> Its almost impossible to provide objective, verifiable evidence on
> >> metaphysics, especially over usenet.
> >> You should know that.
>
> >It's equally impossible in real life. I know - I've been asking the
> >same question of theists since before the internet was invented.
>
> >So: there's no evidence of anything "metaphysical," yet you goobers
> >persist in believing in it.
>
> You can't see, touch, smell, hear, or taste electricity, but you still believe
> in it. Why?
Because we have EVIDENCE that it does. Real, objective, VERIFIABLE
> You can't see, touch, smell, hear, or taste electricity, but you still believe
> in it. Why?
linuxgal
May 10, 2013, 4:52:12 PM5/10/13
to
Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
> millions of years ago.
2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
> Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
> millions of years ago.
http://www.cleanposts.com/index.php/Age
•RLMeasures
May 10, 2013, 5:25:26 PM5/10/13
to
In article <hlwdjsd2-0CF1B1...@news.giganews.com>, Jeanne
• Maybe Duke thinks the Flintstones was a docudrama JD?
•RLMeasures
May 10, 2013, 5:27:41 PM5/10/13
to
In article <nc-dndYMdqR30hDM...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
> > millions of years ago.
>
> 2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
>
> http://www.cleanposts.com/index.php/Age
• the oldest human remains are >2,000,000 years old.
> Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> > Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
> > millions of years ago.
>
> 2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
>
> http://www.cleanposts.com/index.php/Age
linuxgal
May 10, 2013, 6:48:49 PM5/10/13
to
�RLMeasures wrote:
> � Maybe Duke thinks the Flintstones was a docudrama JD?
And Joe Rockhead was a sage.
> � Maybe Duke thinks the Flintstones was a docudrama JD?
And Joe Rockhead was a sage.
�RLMeasures
May 10, 2013, 6:06:51 PM5/10/13
to
In article <D8adnfjdQpvd9hDM...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> �RLMeasures wrote:
> > � Maybe Duke thinks the Flintstones was a docudrama JD?
He probably does not understand
<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> �RLMeasures wrote:
> > � Maybe Duke thinks the Flintstones was a docudrama JD?
>
> And Joe Rockhead was a sage.
� God only know what goes on in his head and there are some things even
> And Joe Rockhead was a sage.
He probably does not understand
Andrew W
May 10, 2013, 7:04:11 PM5/10/13
to
>"duke" wrote in message news:29ppo8l1h0v0hphue...@4ax.com...
>
>On Fri, 10 May 2013 07:27:24 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>>news:206no8lontfjr5h05...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Thu, 9 May 2013 12:14:20 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>>>>news:thdko81dq12sl2pgb...@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 07 May 2013 06:53:42 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>In article <plrho8lliqhdfudug...@4ax.com>, duke
>>>>>><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 06 May 2013 08:14:18 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >In article <fc7fo8l901o8b9dki...@4ax.com>, duke
>>>>>>> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >> On Sun, 05 May 2013 11:55:02 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
>>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> >> I gave the report.
>>>>>>> >> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> >• some reports have an agenda. Caveat emptor.
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> Yep, you should have listened.
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >• I listened to your dodges, deceptions and derisions. thanks
>>>>>>> >> >Duke.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> You also heard a whole lot of truths.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >• What were they?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Openly available to all that look.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>• The truth is that Jesus said his dad did not want sacrifice, yet
>>>>>>RCC
>>>>>>doctrine has been sacrifice-based since 325.
>>>>>
>>>>>What sacrifice?
>
>>>>From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
>>>>http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a4p2.htm
>>>>
>>>>606 "The sacrifice of Jesus "for the sins of the whole world"
>>>>
>>>>611 The Eucharist that Christ institutes at that moment will be the
>>>>memorial
>>>>of his sacrifice.
>>>>
>>>>Christ's death is the unique and definitive sacrifice
>>>>613 Christ's death is both the Paschal sacrifice that accomplishes the
>>>>definitive redemption of men, , through "the Lamb of God, who takes away
>>>>the
>>>>sin of the world",439 and the sacrifice of the New Covenant, which
>>>>restores
>>>>man to communion with God by reconciling him to God through the "blood
>>>>of
>>>>the covenant, which was poured out for many for the forgiveness of
>>>>sins".
>>>>
>>>>614 This sacrifice of Christ is unique; it completes and surpasses all
>>>>other
>>>>sacrifices.
>>>>
>>>>618 The cross is the unique sacrifice of Christ, the "one mediator
>>>>between
>>>>God and men".
>>>
>>>What is the sacrifice?
>
>>Exactly. See how stupid the Christian/Catholic religion is?
>>
>>Basically religious sacrifice is just the offering of a dead thing to a
>>god,
>>any innocent life really.
>
>You're even more ignorant than I thought.
>
Well so far you haven't come up with any rational purpose or rebut for
sacrifices which is well documented and supported by your religion as quoted
above, so I think you just tried to cover up your own ignorance.
--
Forcing someone to either worship or burn is called tyranny.
My motto: Never follow any leader who gives lifelong (or eternal) torture in
a fire as one of your 'free' choices, because that is a despot.
Religions breed hypocrisy, ignorance and self-righteousness.
>
>On Fri, 10 May 2013 07:27:24 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>>news:206no8lontfjr5h05...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Thu, 9 May 2013 12:14:20 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>>>>news:thdko81dq12sl2pgb...@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 07 May 2013 06:53:42 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>In article <plrho8lliqhdfudug...@4ax.com>, duke
>>>>>><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 06 May 2013 08:14:18 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >In article <fc7fo8l901o8b9dki...@4ax.com>, duke
>>>>>>> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >> On Sun, 05 May 2013 11:55:02 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
>>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> >> I gave the report.
>>>>>>> >> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> >• some reports have an agenda. Caveat emptor.
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >> Yep, you should have listened.
>>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>>> >> >• I listened to your dodges, deceptions and derisions. thanks
>>>>>>> >> >Duke.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> You also heard a whole lot of truths.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >• What were they?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Openly available to all that look.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>• The truth is that Jesus said his dad did not want sacrifice, yet
>>>>>>RCC
>>>>>>doctrine has been sacrifice-based since 325.
>>>>>
>>>>>What sacrifice?
>
>>>>From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
>>>>http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a4p2.htm
>>>>
>>>>606 "The sacrifice of Jesus "for the sins of the whole world"
>>>>
>>>>611 The Eucharist that Christ institutes at that moment will be the
>>>>memorial
>>>>of his sacrifice.
>>>>
>>>>Christ's death is the unique and definitive sacrifice
>>>>613 Christ's death is both the Paschal sacrifice that accomplishes the
>>>>definitive redemption of men, , through "the Lamb of God, who takes away
>>>>the
>>>>sin of the world",439 and the sacrifice of the New Covenant, which
>>>>restores
>>>>man to communion with God by reconciling him to God through the "blood
>>>>of
>>>>the covenant, which was poured out for many for the forgiveness of
>>>>sins".
>>>>
>>>>614 This sacrifice of Christ is unique; it completes and surpasses all
>>>>other
>>>>sacrifices.
>>>>
>>>>618 The cross is the unique sacrifice of Christ, the "one mediator
>>>>between
>>>>God and men".
>>>
>>>What is the sacrifice?
>
>>Exactly. See how stupid the Christian/Catholic religion is?
>>
>>Basically religious sacrifice is just the offering of a dead thing to a
>>god,
>>any innocent life really.
>
>You're even more ignorant than I thought.
>
Well so far you haven't come up with any rational purpose or rebut for
sacrifices which is well documented and supported by your religion as quoted
above, so I think you just tried to cover up your own ignorance.
--
Forcing someone to either worship or burn is called tyranny.
My motto: Never follow any leader who gives lifelong (or eternal) torture in
a fire as one of your 'free' choices, because that is a despot.
Religions breed hypocrisy, ignorance and self-righteousness.
Andrew W
May 10, 2013, 7:06:18 PM5/10/13
to
>"duke" wrote in message news:2lppo8t4pig88jaha...@4ax.com...
>
>On Fri, 10 May 2013 07:32:46 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>>>Moses was saved by God. It had to do with his personal integrity.
>>>>Did you just make that up?
>>>No, it's clearly revealed in the book, the bible, that you know nothing
>>>about.
>
>>I know plenty about it. Often more than you.
>
>You have yet to demonstrate that.
>
I have plenty of times. But you can't handle what I say because it doesn't
line up with your Catholic indoctrination.
>
>On Fri, 10 May 2013 07:32:46 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>>>Moses was saved by God. It had to do with his personal integrity.
>>>>Did you just make that up?
>>>No, it's clearly revealed in the book, the bible, that you know nothing
>>>about.
>
>>I know plenty about it. Often more than you.
>
>You have yet to demonstrate that.
>
I have plenty of times. But you can't handle what I say because it doesn't
line up with your Catholic indoctrination.
linuxgal
May 10, 2013, 8:14:06 PM5/10/13
to
�RLMeasures wrote:
> In article <60l4o8lf79bh8i2tr...@4ax.com>, duke
> <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 01 May 2013 16:50:40 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>>> You, on the other hand, claimed Mary's sin was -removed-.
>>>>>> Sounds like you are still lying about what JPII said.
>>>> I gave you the report.
>>> You LIED, Dook.
>>
>> I gave you the report.
>>
> � the Duke shuffle.
>
He's never played with a full deck.
> In article <60l4o8lf79bh8i2tr...@4ax.com>, duke
> <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 01 May 2013 16:50:40 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>>> You, on the other hand, claimed Mary's sin was -removed-.
>>>>>> Sounds like you are still lying about what JPII said.
>>>> I gave you the report.
>>> You LIED, Dook.
>>
>> I gave you the report.
>>
> � the Duke shuffle.
>
He's never played with a full deck.
Andrew W
May 10, 2013, 7:28:01 PM5/10/13
to
>"duke" wrote in message news:apppo89icciptla30...@4ax.com...
>
>On Fri, 10 May 2013 07:46:12 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>news:936no85u7e3d69ca3...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Thu, 9 May 2013 12:53:23 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>>>news:67dvn8luhtme00c84...@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:51:32 +0200, "thomas p." <gud...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> God in the New Testament just advocates a lot of murder. And
>>>>>>>> promises
>>>>>>>> hell if you don't comply with that kind of thing.
>>>>>>>> Nice guy you're sucking up to.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is where silly dukie will call you silly for not realizing that
>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>> that is just allegory, completely forgetting all the times he said
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> exact opposite. Does he really think nobody notices?
>>>>>
>>>>>No NT man see's God calling for killing others. The NT man knows that
>>>>>God
>>>>>is
>>>>>all love.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>So who inspired the OT? The devil?
>>>
>>>God.
>>>
>>
>>The false old Judeo/Hebrew blood sacrificing god.
>>The NT is a 'nicer' update of that work, but still somewhat based on it.
>
>Somewhat??? Haahaahaa.
>
Yes dope, somewhat.
>
>On Fri, 10 May 2013 07:46:12 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>news:936no85u7e3d69ca3...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Thu, 9 May 2013 12:53:23 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>>>news:67dvn8luhtme00c84...@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:51:32 +0200, "thomas p." <gud...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> God in the New Testament just advocates a lot of murder. And
>>>>>>>> promises
>>>>>>>> hell if you don't comply with that kind of thing.
>>>>>>>> Nice guy you're sucking up to.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is where silly dukie will call you silly for not realizing that
>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>> that is just allegory, completely forgetting all the times he said
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> exact opposite. Does he really think nobody notices?
>>>>>
>>>>>No NT man see's God calling for killing others. The NT man knows that
>>>>>God
>>>>>is
>>>>>all love.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>So who inspired the OT? The devil?
>>>
>>>God.
>>>
>>
>>The false old Judeo/Hebrew blood sacrificing god.
>>The NT is a 'nicer' update of that work, but still somewhat based on it.
>
>Somewhat??? Haahaahaa.
>
Yes dope, somewhat.
�RLMeasures
May 10, 2013, 7:29:14 PM5/10/13
to
In article <f5GdnWO0A_3d4hDM...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> �RLMeasures wrote:
> > In article <60l4o8lf79bh8i2tr...@4ax.com>, duke
> > <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 01 May 2013 16:50:40 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> You, on the other hand, claimed Mary's sin was -removed-.
> >>>>>> Sounds like you are still lying about what JPII said.
> >>>> I gave you the report.
> >>> You LIED, Dook.
> >>
> >> I gave you the report.
> >>
> > � the Duke shuffle.
<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> �RLMeasures wrote:
> > In article <60l4o8lf79bh8i2tr...@4ax.com>, duke
> > <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 01 May 2013 16:50:40 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> You, on the other hand, claimed Mary's sin was -removed-.
> >>>>>> Sounds like you are still lying about what JPII said.
> >>>> I gave you the report.
> >>> You LIED, Dook.
> >>
> >> I gave you the report.
> >>
> >
> He's never played with a full deck.
� He had the misfortune of being born into a family of TBRCs
> He's never played with a full deck.
Andrew W
May 10, 2013, 7:30:20 PM5/10/13
to
>"duke" wrote in message news:qqppo8tpked4urqi0...@4ax.com...
>
>On Fri, 10 May 2013 08:13:38 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>>news:646no8d8m5vit88nh...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 13:01:27 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
>>><dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>And yet you've talked to him. Directly, no less. So you've been
>>>>pretending all this time. Can't say as I'm surprised, liar.
>
>>>I talk to God every day.
>
>>I talk to my computer and mobile phone every day.
>>And I get far more useful information than you do.
>
>Really!! So tell me something your "phone" told you.
>
It told me the weather, which is far more relevant and true than an old
Hebrew god figure that demanded total obedience.
>
>On Fri, 10 May 2013 08:13:38 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>>news:646no8d8m5vit88nh...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 13:01:27 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
>>><dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>And yet you've talked to him. Directly, no less. So you've been
>>>>pretending all this time. Can't say as I'm surprised, liar.
>
>>>I talk to God every day.
>
>>I talk to my computer and mobile phone every day.
>>And I get far more useful information than you do.
>
>Really!! So tell me something your "phone" told you.
>
It told me the weather, which is far more relevant and true than an old
Hebrew god figure that demanded total obedience.
Andrew W
May 10, 2013, 7:42:14 PM5/10/13
to
>"duke" wrote in message news:1sppo8doetvlfbaib...@4ax.com...
>
>On Fri, 10 May 2013 08:16:53 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>
>>>A major part?? It is THE part. Rather than defy his Father, he
>>>willingly
>>>went to the cross instead.
>
>>And what ultimate purpose can that serve?
>
>It's what YOU don't do.
>
Your response makes it clear that you don't even know the purpose.
Why do you put such strong belief in something that you don't even know the
reason for?
Why would a loving creator demand so much obedience that he asks his son (or
himself) to die horribly on a cross?
What was the purpose?
Its so sick and mafia like. In fact even the mafia or Hitler didn't make
people do monstrous things like that.
>
>On Fri, 10 May 2013 08:16:53 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>
>>>A major part?? It is THE part. Rather than defy his Father, he
>>>willingly
>>>went to the cross instead.
>
>>And what ultimate purpose can that serve?
>
>It's what YOU don't do.
>
Your response makes it clear that you don't even know the purpose.
Why do you put such strong belief in something that you don't even know the
reason for?
Why would a loving creator demand so much obedience that he asks his son (or
himself) to die horribly on a cross?
What was the purpose?
Its so sick and mafia like. In fact even the mafia or Hitler didn't make
people do monstrous things like that.
Andrew W
May 10, 2013, 7:48:48 PM5/10/13
to
>"duke" wrote in message news:51qpo85c3h8nvk3na...@4ax.com...
>
>On Fri, 10 May 2013 08:30:56 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>news:j66no8lhu7qk7p6i3...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Thu, 9 May 2013 13:08:02 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>>"duke" wrote in message
That was billions of years ago.
Why do you say so many dumb things?
>
>>Looks like 'God's' not so powerful after all if a lowly human had to do
>>all
>>the work.
>
>God always works thru people.
>
Because he has no power of his own?
>
> That's why you're in so much trouble.
>
Say what?
>
> Believe it
>or not, tits on a bull has a purpose, but not you.
>
Whatever, dope.
>
>On Fri, 10 May 2013 08:30:56 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>news:j66no8lhu7qk7p6i3...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Thu, 9 May 2013 13:08:02 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>>>news:oldvn8912kdggp3ld...@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:50:09 -0700, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>duke wrote:
>>>>>All the animals on the ark were saved. Something was different.
>>>
>>>>A piddly few. And not by God.
>>>>And that's only if that story was even true.
>>>
>>>All the world's animals at the time.
>
>>Lol!
>>That's not how the story goes. It was two of every kind (in that area).
>>Noah
>>could hardly travel to every continent.
>
>It was all one landmass.
>
Wrong, dope. Humans didn't exist yet when the world was just one land mass.
>>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 17:50:09 -0700, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>duke wrote:
>>>>>All the animals on the ark were saved. Something was different.
>>>
>>>>A piddly few. And not by God.
>>>>And that's only if that story was even true.
>>>
>>>All the world's animals at the time.
>
>>Lol!
>>That's not how the story goes. It was two of every kind (in that area).
>>Noah
>>could hardly travel to every continent.
>
>It was all one landmass.
>
That was billions of years ago.
Why do you say so many dumb things?
>
>>Looks like 'God's' not so powerful after all if a lowly human had to do
>>all
>>the work.
>
>God always works thru people.
>
Because he has no power of his own?
>
> That's why you're in so much trouble.
>
Say what?
>
> Believe it
>or not, tits on a bull has a purpose, but not you.
>
Whatever, dope.
Andrew W
May 10, 2013, 7:55:05 PM5/10/13
to
>"duke" wrote in message news:2hkqn8hlj7l731f5r...@4ax.com...
>
>On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 16:32:13 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 14:04:59 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 06:49:39 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 14:43:36 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 11:44:28 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>John 13:34.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Where does this love fit into the part where the RCC condones
>>>>>>torturing and killing people, as it does, Dook?
>>>>>
>>>>>Doesn't. Never did.
>>>
>>>>Oh.
>>>>So, that bit in the Bible about love must be another one of those
>>>>things that doesn't really mean what it sounds like it means.
>>>
>>>You're your normal slow today.
>>On my worst day I'm still quicker than you, Dook.
>
>I've already circled around behind you.
>
No, you just go around in circles. There's a big difference.
>
>>>There is no love in torture and killing.
>>I know.
>>That's why I'm confused.
>
>Haahaahaa. I think you finally got something going there.
>
You're not even aware of your confusion.
Its called cognitive dissonance.
>
>On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 16:32:13 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 14:04:59 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 06:49:39 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 14:43:36 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 11:44:28 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>John 13:34.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Where does this love fit into the part where the RCC condones
>>>>>>torturing and killing people, as it does, Dook?
>>>>>
>>>>>Doesn't. Never did.
>>>
>>>>Oh.
>>>>So, that bit in the Bible about love must be another one of those
>>>>things that doesn't really mean what it sounds like it means.
>>>
>>>You're your normal slow today.
>>On my worst day I'm still quicker than you, Dook.
>
>I've already circled around behind you.
>
No, you just go around in circles. There's a big difference.
>
>>>There is no love in torture and killing.
>>I know.
>>That's why I'm confused.
>
>Haahaahaa. I think you finally got something going there.
>
You're not even aware of your confusion.
Its called cognitive dissonance.
nature bats last
May 10, 2013, 10:04:20 PM5/10/13
to
On May 9, 5:36 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 12:39:20 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_ajwer...@optusnet.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>"duke" wrote in messagenews:0vcvn81catdv7qom0...@4ax.com...
>
> >>On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 18:37:22 -0700 (PDT), nature bats last
> >><seqkl...@gmail.com>
> >>wrote:
>
> >>>On Apr 29, 1:21 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>> On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 13:29:00 -0700 (PDT), elizabeth
> >>>> <elizabethfran...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
>
> >>>> >On Apr 28, 10:30 am, linuxgal <linux...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >>>> >> duke wrote:
> >>>> >> > On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 14:53:07 -0500, Free
> >>>> >> > Lunch<lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>
> >>>> >> >> >So the god you preach has no love.
> >>>> >> > Strawman. God never tortured or killed anyone.
>
> >>>> >> On the contrary, it is written (Exodus 13:15) "And it came to pass,
> >>>> >> when
> >>>> >> Pharaoh would hardly let us go, that the LORD slew all the firstborn
> >>>> >> in
> >>>> >> the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man, and the firstborn of
> >>>> >> beast..."
> >>>> >And then Moses told his soldiers to kill all pregnant Midianite women,
> >>>> >those who might be preggers, all Midianite male children . .. think of
> >>>> >what it was like to chop up women and children with a dull copper
> >>>> >sword.
>
> >>>> Moses is not God.
>
;
Good. We gots yer "integrity" right here:
And Moses sent them to the war, a thousand of every
tribe, them and Phinehas the son of Eleazar the
priest, to the war, with the holy instruments, and
the trumpets to blow in his hand.
And they warred against the Midianites, as the Lord
commanded Moses; and they slew all the males.
And they slew the kings of Midian, beside the rest of
them that were slain; namely, Evi, and Rekem, and
Zur, and Hur, and Reba, five kings of Midian: Balaam
also the son of Beor they slew with the sword.
And the children of Israel took all the women of
Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the
spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and
all their goods.
And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt,
and all their goodly castles, with fire.
.
.
.
[but still not good enough: Moses "was wroth" that the
Hebrews had not slaughtered everyone they had been told
to murder. So Moses orders a repeat engagement]:
Now therefore kill every male among the little ones,
and kill every woman that hath known man by lying
with him.
But all the women children, that have not known a man
by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
Abortion: bad.
Kill every male among the little ones: good.
No wonder Dook's god was Moses' number one fan.
"Saved" by virtue of his "personal integrity"?
Nonsense. This murderous man was perfect
for this murderous god just as he was.
NBL
>
> The dukester, American - American
>
> ********************************************
> Repeal Obama
> You simply can't fix stupid.
> ********************************************
> On Thu, 9 May 2013 12:39:20 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_ajwer...@optusnet.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>"duke" wrote in messagenews:0vcvn81catdv7qom0...@4ax.com...
>
> >>On Mon, 29 Apr 2013 18:37:22 -0700 (PDT), nature bats last
> >><seqkl...@gmail.com>
> >>wrote:
>
> >>>On Apr 29, 1:21 pm, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>> On Sun, 28 Apr 2013 13:29:00 -0700 (PDT), elizabeth
> >>>> <elizabethfran...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
>
> >>>> >On Apr 28, 10:30 am, linuxgal <linux...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >>>> >> duke wrote:
> >>>> >> > On Sat, 27 Apr 2013 14:53:07 -0500, Free
> >>>> >> > Lunch<lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>
> >>>> >> >> >So the god you preach has no love.
> >>>> >> > Strawman. God never tortured or killed anyone.
>
> >>>> >> On the contrary, it is written (Exodus 13:15) "And it came to pass,
> >>>> >> when
> >>>> >> Pharaoh would hardly let us go, that the LORD slew all the firstborn
> >>>> >> in
> >>>> >> the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man, and the firstborn of
> >>>> >> beast..."
>
> >>>> >> --
> >>>> >> Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0
>
> >>>;
> >>>> >> --
> >>>> >> Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0
>
> >>>> >And then Moses told his soldiers to kill all pregnant Midianite women,
> >>>> >those who might be preggers, all Midianite male children . .. think of
> >>>> >what it was like to chop up women and children with a dull copper
> >>>> >sword.
>
> >>>> Moses is not God.
>
;
> >>Moses was saved by God. It had to do with his personal integrity.
;
> >Did you just make that up?
;
> No, it's clearly revealed in the book, the bible, that you know nothing about.
You mean this Bible?
;
> >Did you just make that up?
;
> No, it's clearly revealed in the book, the bible, that you know nothing about.
Good. We gots yer "integrity" right here:
And Moses sent them to the war, a thousand of every
tribe, them and Phinehas the son of Eleazar the
priest, to the war, with the holy instruments, and
the trumpets to blow in his hand.
And they warred against the Midianites, as the Lord
commanded Moses; and they slew all the males.
And they slew the kings of Midian, beside the rest of
them that were slain; namely, Evi, and Rekem, and
Zur, and Hur, and Reba, five kings of Midian: Balaam
also the son of Beor they slew with the sword.
And the children of Israel took all the women of
Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the
spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and
all their goods.
And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt,
and all their goodly castles, with fire.
.
.
.
[but still not good enough: Moses "was wroth" that the
Hebrews had not slaughtered everyone they had been told
to murder. So Moses orders a repeat engagement]:
Now therefore kill every male among the little ones,
and kill every woman that hath known man by lying
with him.
But all the women children, that have not known a man
by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
Abortion: bad.
Kill every male among the little ones: good.
No wonder Dook's god was Moses' number one fan.
"Saved" by virtue of his "personal integrity"?
Nonsense. This murderous man was perfect
for this murderous god just as he was.
NBL
>
> The dukester, American - American
>
> ********************************************
> Repeal Obama
> You simply can't fix stupid.
> ********************************************
duke
May 11, 2013, 7:54:36 AM5/11/13
to
duke
May 11, 2013, 7:56:04 AM5/11/13
to
>> You can't see, touch, smell, hear, or taste electricity, but you still believe
>> in it. Why?
>
>Ever test a 9V battery on your tongue? Electricity does indeed have a
>> in it. Why?
>
>taste.
More evidence for that which can't be seen. God and electricity are like a pair
of identical twins.
duke
May 11, 2013, 8:07:29 AM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:04:11 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:
>>>>What is the sacrifice?
>>>Exactly. See how stupid the Christian/Catholic religion is?
>>>Basically religious sacrifice is just the offering of a dead thing to a
>>>god,
>>>any innocent life really.
>>You're even more ignorant than I thought.
>Well so far you haven't come up with any rational purpose or rebut for
>sacrifices which is well documented and supported by your religion as quoted
>above, so I think you just tried to cover up your own ignorance.
I asked you to id a sacrifice. You failed.
wrote:
>>>>What is the sacrifice?
>>>Exactly. See how stupid the Christian/Catholic religion is?
>>>Basically religious sacrifice is just the offering of a dead thing to a
>>>god,
>>>any innocent life really.
>>You're even more ignorant than I thought.
>Well so far you haven't come up with any rational purpose or rebut for
>sacrifices which is well documented and supported by your religion as quoted
>above, so I think you just tried to cover up your own ignorance.
duke
May 11, 2013, 8:09:01 AM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:06:18 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
You are now a total waste of my time. If you don't wish to discuss issues with
me, fine. Please go away.
wrote:
>>"duke" wrote in message news:2lppo8t4pig88jaha...@4ax.com...
>>
>>On Fri, 10 May 2013 07:32:46 +1000, "Andrew W"
>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>>>>Moses was saved by God. It had to do with his personal integrity.
>>>>>Did you just make that up?
>>>>No, it's clearly revealed in the book, the bible, that you know nothing
>>>>about.
>>
>>>I know plenty about it. Often more than you.
>>
>>You have yet to demonstrate that.
>I have plenty of times. But you can't handle what I say because it doesn't
>line up with your Catholic indoctrination.
Right, and because what you say lines up with satan.
>>"duke" wrote in message news:2lppo8t4pig88jaha...@4ax.com...
>>
>>On Fri, 10 May 2013 07:32:46 +1000, "Andrew W"
>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>>>>Moses was saved by God. It had to do with his personal integrity.
>>>>>Did you just make that up?
>>>>No, it's clearly revealed in the book, the bible, that you know nothing
>>>>about.
>>
>>>I know plenty about it. Often more than you.
>>
>>You have yet to demonstrate that.
>I have plenty of times. But you can't handle what I say because it doesn't
>line up with your Catholic indoctrination.
You are now a total waste of my time. If you don't wish to discuss issues with
me, fine. Please go away.
duke
May 11, 2013, 8:18:00 AM5/11/13
to
On Fri, 10 May 2013 19:04:20 -0700 (PDT), nature bats last <seqk...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> >>Moses was saved by God. It had to do with his personal integrity.
>> >Did you just make that up?
>> No, it's clearly revealed in the book, the bible, that you know nothing about.
>You mean this Bible?
>Good. We gots yer "integrity" right here:
> And Moses sent them to the war, a thousand of every
> tribe, them and Phinehas the son of Eleazar the
> priest, to the war, with the holy instruments, and
> the trumpets to blow in his hand.
>
> And they warred against the Midianites, as the Lord
> commanded Moses; and they slew all the males.
>
> And they slew the kings of Midian, beside the rest of
> them that were slain; namely, Evi, and Rekem, and
> Zur, and Hur, and Reba, five kings of Midian: Balaam
> also the son of Beor they slew with the sword.
>
> And the children of Israel took all the women of
> Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the
> spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and
> all their goods.
>
> And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt,
> and all their goodly castles, with fire.
I got your integrity right here:
Matthew 17:1-3 (New International Version)
Matthew 17
The Transfiguration
1 After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of
James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. 2 There he was
transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as
white as the light. 3 Just then there appeared before them Moses and Elijah,
talking with Jesus.
wrote:
>> >>Moses was saved by God. It had to do with his personal integrity.
>> >Did you just make that up?
>> No, it's clearly revealed in the book, the bible, that you know nothing about.
>You mean this Bible?
>Good. We gots yer "integrity" right here:
> And Moses sent them to the war, a thousand of every
> tribe, them and Phinehas the son of Eleazar the
> priest, to the war, with the holy instruments, and
> the trumpets to blow in his hand.
>
> And they warred against the Midianites, as the Lord
> commanded Moses; and they slew all the males.
>
> And they slew the kings of Midian, beside the rest of
> them that were slain; namely, Evi, and Rekem, and
> Zur, and Hur, and Reba, five kings of Midian: Balaam
> also the son of Beor they slew with the sword.
>
> And the children of Israel took all the women of
> Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the
> spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and
> all their goods.
>
> And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt,
> and all their goodly castles, with fire.
Matthew 17:1-3 (New International Version)
Matthew 17
The Transfiguration
1 After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of
James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. 2 There he was
transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as
white as the light. 3 Just then there appeared before them Moses and Elijah,
talking with Jesus.
duke
May 11, 2013, 8:19:21 AM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:28:01 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:
>>>>>So who inspired the OT? The devil?
>>>>God.
>>>The false old Judeo/Hebrew blood sacrificing god.
>>>The NT is a 'nicer' update of that work, but still somewhat based on it.
>>Somewhat??? Haahaahaa.
>Yes dope, somewhat.
No, dope, the New Way.
wrote:
>>>>>So who inspired the OT? The devil?
>>>>God.
>>>The false old Judeo/Hebrew blood sacrificing god.
>>>The NT is a 'nicer' update of that work, but still somewhat based on it.
>>Somewhat??? Haahaahaa.
>Yes dope, somewhat.
duke
May 11, 2013, 8:21:35 AM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:30:20 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:
>>>I talk to my computer and mobile phone every day.
>>>And I get far more useful information than you do.
>>Really!! So tell me something your "phone" told you.
>It told me the weather, which is far more relevant and true than an old
>Hebrew god figure that demanded total obedience.
It did? So when you interrupted it with a question, did it thank you for the
question?
wrote:
>>>I talk to my computer and mobile phone every day.
>>>And I get far more useful information than you do.
>>Really!! So tell me something your "phone" told you.
>It told me the weather, which is far more relevant and true than an old
>Hebrew god figure that demanded total obedience.
question?
duke
May 11, 2013, 8:26:40 AM5/11/13
to
>>> >Andrew W wrote:
>>>>> >>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>>> >>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>>> >>>The story of noah is valid for teaching.
>>>> >>Teaching what exactly?
>>> >That the Bible cannot be trusted as a history book.
>> Why can any book be trusted as historical?
>
>I have a book that says Nixon tried to get the CIA to tell the FBI to
>>>> >>Teaching what exactly?
>>> >That the Bible cannot be trusted as a history book.
>> Why can any book be trusted as historical?
>
>back off on their investigation of Liddy, McCord, Sturgis, Martinez,
>Barker, and Gonzales because it was part of a covert operation related
>to national security. This is corroborated by the "smoking gun" tape
>which existed because Nixon bugged his own office. The story of Noah,
>however, fails because of a number of absurdities embedded in it. A
>wind cannot evaporate 1.1 billion cubic miles of water in a few weeks,
>for one.
Why not as fast as it gave it up?
duke
May 11, 2013, 8:30:33 AM5/11/13
to
On Fri, 10 May 2013 12:22:01 -0700, Jeanne Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com>
wrote:
>> >That the Bible cannot be trusted as a history book.
>> Why can any book be trusted as historical?
>Because they have EVIDENCE to back them up.
>Actual, objective, VERIFIABLE evidence.
Ok, so how do you know that Sam Adams signed the Declaration of Independence
rather than his farm foreman?
wrote:
>> >That the Bible cannot be trusted as a history book.
>> Why can any book be trusted as historical?
>Because they have EVIDENCE to back them up.
>Actual, objective, VERIFIABLE evidence.
rather than his farm foreman?
duke
May 11, 2013, 8:32:15 AM5/11/13
to
On Fri, 10 May 2013 12:52:12 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
>> millions of years ago.
>2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
Who saw it? Once a dumbass, always a jdyke.
>Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>> Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
>> millions of years ago.
>2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
>http://www.cleanposts.com/index.php/Age
duke
May 11, 2013, 8:33:18 AM5/11/13
to
but it is damaging.
duke
May 11, 2013, 8:34:24 AM5/11/13
to
On Fri, 10 May 2013 06:02:52 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>In article <f6qpo85agkr89iobl...@4ax.com>, duke
><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 09 May 2013 13:18:12 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>>
>> >In article <d7fno81sfmog1jrcl...@4ax.com>, duke
>> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Wed, 08 May 2013 05:29:08 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >In article <sidko8p8adrdhqatc...@4ax.com>, duke
>> >> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Tue, 07 May 2013 06:54:44 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >In article <jnrho8d187sgpoo3n...@4ax.com>, duke
>> >> >> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> On Mon, 06 May 2013 08:16:12 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >In article <458fo8tc85c4kgl1n...@4ax.com>, duke
>> >> >> >> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> On Sun, 05 May 2013 11:56:24 -0700, r...@somis.org
>(•RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >So if Jesus atoned for the murderer's murder in his
>own blood,
>> >> >> >why do
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >you still require that murderer to atone in his own
>> >blood, ala
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Leviticus? Especially since you claim to be all
>about the New
>> >> >> >> >Covenant?
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Say what??
>> >> >> >> >> >> >• She explained it well Duke.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Sounds like you're not any more familiar with OT vs NT than
>> >she is.
>> >> >> >> >> >• Playing for time?
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> I know what the sacrifice is.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >• Jesus said his dad did not want sacrifice. The RCC has
>sacrifice
>> >> >> >> >based doctrine.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Name that sacrifice in 10 musical notes or less.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >• Jesus' crucifixion.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It is????
>> >> >>
>> >> >• Yea verily. Your Church has taught this paganesque take-off since the
>> >> >4th Century. After 380CE, this made Catholicism more acceptable to
>> >> >members of pagan churches who were interested in converting to Catholicism
>> >> >so that they would not be crucified by the Roman government.
>> >>
>> >> You still haven't figured out the why.
>> >>
>> >• Why the crucifixon or why the decision to incorporate a ritual into
>> >Christianity in 394CE?
>>
>> Well before 4BC.
>>
>• So Jesus was crucified before he was born? RCC doctrine is seemingly
>more holey than holy.
You're the one insisting on 4BC, not me.
>In article <f6qpo85agkr89iobl...@4ax.com>, duke
><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 09 May 2013 13:18:12 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>>
>> >In article <d7fno81sfmog1jrcl...@4ax.com>, duke
>> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Wed, 08 May 2013 05:29:08 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >In article <sidko8p8adrdhqatc...@4ax.com>, duke
>> >> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Tue, 07 May 2013 06:54:44 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >In article <jnrho8d187sgpoo3n...@4ax.com>, duke
>> >> >> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> On Mon, 06 May 2013 08:16:12 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >In article <458fo8tc85c4kgl1n...@4ax.com>, duke
>> >> >> >> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> On Sun, 05 May 2013 11:56:24 -0700, r...@somis.org
>(•RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >So if Jesus atoned for the murderer's murder in his
>own blood,
>> >> >> >why do
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >you still require that murderer to atone in his own
>> >blood, ala
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >Leviticus? Especially since you claim to be all
>about the New
>> >> >> >> >Covenant?
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Say what??
>> >> >> >> >> >> >• She explained it well Duke.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Sounds like you're not any more familiar with OT vs NT than
>> >she is.
>> >> >> >> >> >• Playing for time?
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> I know what the sacrifice is.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >• Jesus said his dad did not want sacrifice. The RCC has
>sacrifice
>> >> >> >> >based doctrine.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Name that sacrifice in 10 musical notes or less.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >• Jesus' crucifixion.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It is????
>> >> >>
>> >> >• Yea verily. Your Church has taught this paganesque take-off since the
>> >> >4th Century. After 380CE, this made Catholicism more acceptable to
>> >> >members of pagan churches who were interested in converting to Catholicism
>> >> >so that they would not be crucified by the Roman government.
>> >>
>> >> You still haven't figured out the why.
>> >>
>> >• Why the crucifixon or why the decision to incorporate a ritual into
>> >Christianity in 394CE?
>>
>> Well before 4BC.
>>
>• So Jesus was crucified before he was born? RCC doctrine is seemingly
>more holey than holy.
You're the one insisting on 4BC, not me.
duke
May 11, 2013, 8:36:17 AM5/11/13
to
On Fri, 10 May 2013 06:40:59 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>duke wrote:
>> On Mon, 06 May 2013 02:45:42 -0400,Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> >On Sun, 5 May 2013 14:38:13 -0400, Pabro<Pa...@ChurchOffice23.org>
>>> >wrote:
>>> >
>>>> >>On Sun, 05 May 2013 11:33:13 -0800, linuxgal wrote:
>>>>> >>>Why would you set one half of the Word of God against the other half?
>>>> >>You're precisely correct, linux gal. The Word of God does not contradict
>>>> >>Itself.
>>> >
>>> >Except when it does.
>> Name one time.
>
>2 Kings 8:26 Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to
>reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
>
>2 Chronicles 22:2 Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to
>reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
His correct age has exactly nothing to do with nothing that God said.
>duke wrote:
>> On Mon, 06 May 2013 02:45:42 -0400,Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> >On Sun, 5 May 2013 14:38:13 -0400, Pabro<Pa...@ChurchOffice23.org>
>>> >wrote:
>>> >
>>>> >>On Sun, 05 May 2013 11:33:13 -0800, linuxgal wrote:
>>>>> >>>Why would you set one half of the Word of God against the other half?
>>>> >>You're precisely correct, linux gal. The Word of God does not contradict
>>>> >>Itself.
>>> >
>>> >Except when it does.
>> Name one time.
>
>2 Kings 8:26 Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to
>reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
>
>2 Chronicles 22:2 Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to
>reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
His correct age has exactly nothing to do with nothing that God said.
linuxgal
May 11, 2013, 8:48:15 AM5/11/13
to
duke wrote:
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 06:40:59 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> >>On Mon, 06 May 2013 02:45:42 -0400,Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> >>
>>>>> >>> >On Sun, 5 May 2013 14:38:13 -0400, Pabro<Pa...@ChurchOffice23.org>
>>>>> >>> >wrote:
>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>>> >>>> >>On Sun, 05 May 2013 11:33:13 -0800, linuxgal wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>Why would you set one half of the Word of God against the other half?
>>>>>>> >>>> >>You're precisely correct, linux gal. The Word of God does not contradict
>>>>>>> >>>> >>Itself.
>>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>> >Except when it does.
>>> >>Name one time.
>> >
>> >2 Kings 8:26 Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to
>> >reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
>> >
>> >2 Chronicles 22:2 Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to
>> >reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
> His correct age has exactly nothing to do with nothing that God said.
2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 06:40:59 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> >>On Mon, 06 May 2013 02:45:42 -0400,Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> >>
>>>>> >>> >On Sun, 5 May 2013 14:38:13 -0400, Pabro<Pa...@ChurchOffice23.org>
>>>>> >>> >wrote:
>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>>> >>>> >>On Sun, 05 May 2013 11:33:13 -0800, linuxgal wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>Why would you set one half of the Word of God against the other half?
>>>>>>> >>>> >>You're precisely correct, linux gal. The Word of God does not contradict
>>>>>>> >>>> >>Itself.
>>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>> >Except when it does.
>>> >>Name one time.
>> >
>> >2 Kings 8:26 Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to
>> >reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
>> >
>> >2 Chronicles 22:2 Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to
>> >reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
> His correct age has exactly nothing to do with nothing that God said.
profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in
righteousness
linuxgal
May 11, 2013, 8:51:14 AM5/11/13
to
duke wrote:
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 12:52:12 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>> Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
>>> millions of years ago.
>
>> 2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
>
> Who saw it? Once a dumbass, always a jdyke.
>
>> http://www.cleanposts.com/index.php/Age
>
That report gives cross-references to your own scripture for
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 12:52:12 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>> Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
>>> millions of years ago.
>
>> 2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
>
> Who saw it? Once a dumbass, always a jdyke.
>
>> http://www.cleanposts.com/index.php/Age
>
verification. If you believe your Bible, then you must believe in a
2,507 BCE date for the Flood.
linuxgal
May 11, 2013, 8:55:34 AM5/11/13
to
duke wrote:
> Ok, so how do you know that Sam Adams signed the Declaration of Independence
> rather than his farm foreman?
Because John Hancock would have said something, no?
> Ok, so how do you know that Sam Adams signed the Declaration of Independence
> rather than his farm foreman?
linuxgal
May 11, 2013, 9:00:40 AM5/11/13
to
duke wrote:
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 05:54:05 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> >>On Thu, 09 May 2013 18:13:27 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>>>> >>> >Andrew W wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>The story of noah is valid for teaching.
>>>>>>> >>>> >>Teaching what exactly?
>>>>> >>> >That the Bible cannot be trusted as a history book.
>>> >>Why can any book be trusted as historical?
>> >
>> >I have a book that says Nixon tried to get the CIA to tell the FBI to
>> >back off on their investigation of Liddy, McCord, Sturgis, Martinez,
>> >Barker, and Gonzales because it was part of a covert operation related
>> >to national security. This is corroborated by the "smoking gun" tape
>> >which existed because Nixon bugged his own office. The story of Noah,
>> >however, fails because of a number of absurdities embedded in it. A
>> >wind cannot evaporate 1.1 billion cubic miles of water in a few weeks,
>> >for one.
> Why not as fast as it gave it up?
We now know that the atmosphere can hold only about an inch of rainwater
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 05:54:05 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> >>On Thu, 09 May 2013 18:13:27 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>>>> >>> >Andrew W wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>The story of noah is valid for teaching.
>>>>>>> >>>> >>Teaching what exactly?
>>>>> >>> >That the Bible cannot be trusted as a history book.
>>> >>Why can any book be trusted as historical?
>> >
>> >I have a book that says Nixon tried to get the CIA to tell the FBI to
>> >back off on their investigation of Liddy, McCord, Sturgis, Martinez,
>> >Barker, and Gonzales because it was part of a covert operation related
>> >to national security. This is corroborated by the "smoking gun" tape
>> >which existed because Nixon bugged his own office. The story of Noah,
>> >however, fails because of a number of absurdities embedded in it. A
>> >wind cannot evaporate 1.1 billion cubic miles of water in a few weeks,
>> >for one.
> Why not as fast as it gave it up?
suspended as vapor. If it rains more than an inch in a short period of
time, this is always the result of moving air-masses coming in and
dumping their load, such as the Pineapple Express between Molokai and
Seattle. But if you're talking about a global flood, you can't have
precipitation/evaporation events that exceed that one inch, obviously,
since all the source and target air masses are accounted for.
linuxgal
May 11, 2013, 9:02:22 AM5/11/13
to
duke wrote:
> On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:28:01 +1000, "Andrew W"<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>>>>>> >>>>>So who inspired the OT? The devil?
>>>>> >>>>God.
>>>> >>>The false old Judeo/Hebrew blood sacrificing god.
>>>> >>>The NT is a 'nicer' update of that work, but still somewhat based on it.
>>> >>Somewhat??? Haahaahaa.
>> >Yes dope, somewhat.
> No, dope, the New Way.
New way, instead of stoning people for picking up sticks on Saturday,
> On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:28:01 +1000, "Andrew W"<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>>>>>> >>>>>So who inspired the OT? The devil?
>>>>> >>>>God.
>>>> >>>The false old Judeo/Hebrew blood sacrificing god.
>>>> >>>The NT is a 'nicer' update of that work, but still somewhat based on it.
>>> >>Somewhat??? Haahaahaa.
>> >Yes dope, somewhat.
> No, dope, the New Way.
they are burned at the stake for missing Mass on Sunday.
duke
May 11, 2013, 9:05:00 AM5/11/13
to
>> In article <60l4o8lf79bh8i2tr...@4ax.com>, duke
>> <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 01 May 2013 16:50:40 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> You, on the other hand, claimed Mary's sin was -removed-.
>>>>>>> Sounds like you are still lying about what JPII said.
>>>>> I gave you the report.
>>>> You LIED, Dook.
>>>
>>> I gave you the report.
>>>
>> � the Duke shuffle.
>>
>He's never played with a full deck.
I still gave him the report to look up
>>
>>> On Wed, 01 May 2013 16:50:40 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> You, on the other hand, claimed Mary's sin was -removed-.
>>>>>>> Sounds like you are still lying about what JPII said.
>>>>> I gave you the report.
>>>> You LIED, Dook.
>>>
>>> I gave you the report.
>>>
>> � the Duke shuffle.
>>
>He's never played with a full deck.
linuxgal
May 11, 2013, 9:05:55 AM5/11/13
to
duke wrote:
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 05:57:22 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> >>You can't see, touch, smell, hear, or taste electricity, but you still believe
>>> >>in it. Why?
>> >
>> >Ever test a 9V battery on your tongue? Electricity does indeed have a
>> >taste.
> More evidence for that which can't be seen. God and electricity are like a pair
> of identical twins.
Ah, that explains why the church with no lightning rods, protected by
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 05:57:22 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> >>You can't see, touch, smell, hear, or taste electricity, but you still believe
>>> >>in it. Why?
>> >
>> >Ever test a 9V battery on your tongue? Electricity does indeed have a
>> >taste.
> More evidence for that which can't be seen. God and electricity are like a pair
> of identical twins.
the prayers of the faithful, burned to the ground while the "faithless"
cathouse across town remained unzapped.
linuxgal
May 11, 2013, 11:02:20 AM5/11/13
to
�RLMeasures wrote:
> In article
> <6ae3933c-3b47-4d2e...@j2g2000pbx.googlegroups.com>, nature
> bats last<seqk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >On May 1, 11:38=A0am, duke<duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> > >On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 07:18:21 -0700,r...@somis.org (=95RLMeasures) wrote:
>>> > >
>> >
>> > ;
>>>>> > > >>The blood on the door crossarm saved so many.
>> >;
>>> > >If we believe Jewish storytellers.
>> >
>> >;
>>> > >They got it on film also.
>> >
>> >Is it just me, or is Dook slowly turning into
>> >The Poster Currently Known As '%' ?
>> >
> *** Some of Duke's posts are definitely puzzling.
Naw, I figured them out. He's got macros, and just presses function
keys to post.
F1 - Genesis 1-11 isn't scientific. Heehee.
F2 - Everest was only ten feet high back then. Teehee.
F3 - I worship the God of truth, jdyke. Heeheehee.
F4 - President Buckwheat was too busy shooting hoops and eating
watermelon. Teeheehee.
F5 - Strawman. Heeheehee.
> In article
> <6ae3933c-3b47-4d2e...@j2g2000pbx.googlegroups.com>, nature
> bats last<seqk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >On May 1, 11:38=A0am, duke<duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> > >On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 07:18:21 -0700,r...@somis.org (=95RLMeasures) wrote:
>>> > >
>> >
>> > ;
>>>>> > > >>The blood on the door crossarm saved so many.
>> >;
>>> > >If we believe Jewish storytellers.
>> >
>> >;
>>> > >They got it on film also.
>> >
>> >Is it just me, or is Dook slowly turning into
>> >The Poster Currently Known As '%' ?
>> >
> *** Some of Duke's posts are definitely puzzling.
Naw, I figured them out. He's got macros, and just presses function
keys to post.
F1 - Genesis 1-11 isn't scientific. Heehee.
F2 - Everest was only ten feet high back then. Teehee.
F3 - I worship the God of truth, jdyke. Heeheehee.
F4 - President Buckwheat was too busy shooting hoops and eating
watermelon. Teeheehee.
F5 - Strawman. Heeheehee.
�RLMeasures
May 11, 2013, 10:33:49 AM5/11/13
to
In article <f7cso8ds5rp617hls...@4ax.com>, duke
before God even had a chance to Save them.
<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 05:58:18 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >In article <25ppo8ttg6io0nsmm...@4ax.com>, duke
> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 09 May 2013 08:33:07 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
> >> d have listened.
> >>
> >> >> If I gave up 2-3 dark chocolate nuggets with almonds, that would be a
> >> >permanent
> >> >> loss.
> >>
> >> >� Eating Hershey's Nuggets� produces feces - which are useful for growing
> >> >food = so there is no permanent loss.
> >>
> >> Not if I gave them up. That would be a permanent loss.
> >
> >� what if the Nuggets� were returned to you 3 days later?
>
> Like Jesus' return, that would be a true miracle by God.
>
� True because odds are you would likely have chomped every Nugget�
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 05:58:18 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >In article <25ppo8ttg6io0nsmm...@4ax.com>, duke
> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 09 May 2013 08:33:07 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
> >> d have listened.
> >>
> >> >> If I gave up 2-3 dark chocolate nuggets with almonds, that would be a
> >> >permanent
> >> >> loss.
> >>
> >> >� Eating Hershey's Nuggets� produces feces - which are useful for growing
> >> >food = so there is no permanent loss.
> >>
> >> Not if I gave them up. That would be a permanent loss.
> >
> >� what if the Nuggets� were returned to you 3 days later?
>
> Like Jesus' return, that would be a true miracle by God.
>
before God even had a chance to Save them.
�RLMeasures
May 11, 2013, 10:35:51 AM5/11/13
to
In article <sieso8peo11rp2og9...@4ax.com>, duke
<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 14:27:41 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >In article <nc-dndYMdqR30hDM...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
> ><linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> > Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
> >> > millions of years ago.
> >>
> >> 2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
> >>
> >> http://www.cleanposts.com/index.php/Age
> >
> >� the oldest human remains are >2,000,000 years old.
>
> RL.............STOP that. You're going to blow their minds. Which
isn't much,
> but it is damaging.
>
� Bringers of the truth rile the uncouth.
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 14:27:41 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >In article <nc-dndYMdqR30hDM...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
> ><linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Jeanne Douglas wrote:
> >> > Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
> >> > millions of years ago.
> >>
> >> 2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
> >>
> >> http://www.cleanposts.com/index.php/Age
> >
> >� the oldest human remains are >2,000,000 years old.
>
> RL.............STOP that. You're going to blow their minds. Which
isn't much,
> but it is damaging.
>
�RLMeasures
May 11, 2013, 10:41:21 AM5/11/13
to
In article <oleso8dtbciqkkj55...@4ax.com>, duke
� advocating that he was born c. 4BCE is not in dispute. I seriously
doubt that Jesus was crucified well before the year in which he was
born. I'm left wondering where Duke got this cockamamie idea?
doubt that Jesus was crucified well before the year in which he was
born. I'm left wondering where Duke got this cockamamie idea?
•RLMeasures
May 11, 2013, 10:43:43 AM5/11/13
to
In article <PfSdnUD5We7l0hPM...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
• tnx for the nice chortles LG.
<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
duke
May 11, 2013, 1:41:35 PM5/11/13
to
duke
May 11, 2013, 1:42:36 PM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 05:05:55 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>duke wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 May 2013 05:57:22 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> >duke wrote:
>>>> >>You can't see, touch, smell, hear, or taste electricity, but you still believe
>>>> >>in it. Why?
>>> >
>>> >Ever test a 9V battery on your tongue? Electricity does indeed have a
>>> >taste.
>> More evidence for that which can't be seen. God and electricity are like a pair
>> of identical twins.
>
>Ah, that explains why the church with no lightning rods, protected by
>the prayers of the faithful, burned to the ground while the "faithless"
>cathouse across town remained unzapped.
Well, I know you steer clear of Church, so you must speak as experience for the
>duke wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 May 2013 05:57:22 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> >duke wrote:
>>>> >>You can't see, touch, smell, hear, or taste electricity, but you still believe
>>>> >>in it. Why?
>>> >
>>> >Ever test a 9V battery on your tongue? Electricity does indeed have a
>>> >taste.
>> More evidence for that which can't be seen. God and electricity are like a pair
>> of identical twins.
>
>Ah, that explains why the church with no lightning rods, protected by
>the prayers of the faithful, burned to the ground while the "faithless"
>cathouse across town remained unzapped.
cathouse.
duke
May 11, 2013, 1:43:15 PM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 05:02:22 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>duke wrote:
>> On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:28:01 +1000, "Andrew W"<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>So who inspired the OT? The devil?
>>>>>> >>>>God.
>>>>> >>>The false old Judeo/Hebrew blood sacrificing god.
>>>>> >>>The NT is a 'nicer' update of that work, but still somewhat based on it.
>>>> >>Somewhat??? Haahaahaa.
>>> >Yes dope, somewhat.
>> No, dope, the New Way.
>New way, instead of stoning people for picking up sticks on Saturday,
>they are burned at the stake for missing Mass on Sunday.
Only God makes that call.
>duke wrote:
>> On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:28:01 +1000, "Andrew W"<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>So who inspired the OT? The devil?
>>>>>> >>>>God.
>>>>> >>>The false old Judeo/Hebrew blood sacrificing god.
>>>>> >>>The NT is a 'nicer' update of that work, but still somewhat based on it.
>>>> >>Somewhat??? Haahaahaa.
>>> >Yes dope, somewhat.
>> No, dope, the New Way.
>New way, instead of stoning people for picking up sticks on Saturday,
>they are burned at the stake for missing Mass on Sunday.
duke
May 11, 2013, 1:43:57 PM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:42:14 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:
>>"duke" wrote in message news:1sppo8doetvlfbaib...@4ax.com...
>>
>>On Fri, 10 May 2013 08:16:53 +1000, "Andrew W"
>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>A major part?? It is THE part. Rather than defy his Father, he
>>>>willingly
>>>>went to the cross instead.
>>
>>>And what ultimate purpose can that serve?
>>
>>It's what YOU don't do.
>>
>
>Your response makes it clear that you don't even know the purpose.
>Why do you put such strong belief in something that you don't even know the
>reason for?
It's all over scripture, numbnuts.
wrote:
>>"duke" wrote in message news:1sppo8doetvlfbaib...@4ax.com...
>>
>>On Fri, 10 May 2013 08:16:53 +1000, "Andrew W"
>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>A major part?? It is THE part. Rather than defy his Father, he
>>>>willingly
>>>>went to the cross instead.
>>
>>>And what ultimate purpose can that serve?
>>
>>It's what YOU don't do.
>>
>
>Your response makes it clear that you don't even know the purpose.
>Why do you put such strong belief in something that you don't even know the
>reason for?
It's all over scripture, numbnuts.
duke
May 11, 2013, 1:45:15 PM5/11/13
to
duke
May 11, 2013, 1:45:44 PM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 04:55:34 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>duke wrote:
>> Ok, so how do you know that Sam Adams signed the Declaration of Independence
>> rather than his farm foreman?
>
>Because John Hancock would have said something, no?
Did JH sign for himself?
>duke wrote:
>> Ok, so how do you know that Sam Adams signed the Declaration of Independence
>> rather than his farm foreman?
>
>Because John Hancock would have said something, no?
duke
May 11, 2013, 1:46:42 PM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 04:51:14 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>duke wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 May 2013 12:52:12 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>>> Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
>>>> millions of years ago.
>>
>>> 2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
>>
>> Who saw it? Once a dumbass, always a jdyke.
>>
>>> http://www.cleanposts.com/index.php/Age
>>
>
>That report gives cross-references to your own scripture for
>verification. If you believe your Bible, then you must believe in a
>2,507 BCE date for the Flood.
The bible is 100% silent about 2507, or a 6000 year old earth put another way.
>duke wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 May 2013 12:52:12 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>>> Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
>>>> millions of years ago.
>>
>>> 2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
>>
>> Who saw it? Once a dumbass, always a jdyke.
>>
>>> http://www.cleanposts.com/index.php/Age
>>
>
>That report gives cross-references to your own scripture for
>verification. If you believe your Bible, then you must believe in a
>2,507 BCE date for the Flood.
duke
May 11, 2013, 1:48:28 PM5/11/13
to
> I'm left wondering where Duke got this cockamamie idea?
duke
May 11, 2013, 1:49:24 PM5/11/13
to
linuxgal
May 11, 2013, 3:55:07 PM5/11/13
to
duke wrote:
> On Sat, 11 May 2013 04:48:15 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> >>On Fri, 10 May 2013 06:40:59 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>>>> >>> >duke wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>> >>On Mon, 06 May 2013 02:45:42 -0400,Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >On Sun, 5 May 2013 14:38:13 -0400, Pabro<Pa...@ChurchOffice23.org>
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>On Sun, 05 May 2013 11:33:13 -0800, linuxgal wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>Why would you set one half of the Word of God against the other half?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>You're precisely correct, linux gal. The Word of God does not contradict
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>Itself.
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >Except when it does.
>>>>>>> >>>> >>Name one time.
>>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>> >2 Kings 8:26 Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to
>>>>> >>> >reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
>>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>> >2 Chronicles 22:2 Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to
>>>>> >>> >reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
>>> >>His correct age has exactly nothing to do with nothing that God said.
>> >
>> >2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is
>> >profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in
>> >righteousness
> Exactly.
Which which age did God inspire them to write, 42 or 22?
> On Sat, 11 May 2013 04:48:15 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> >>On Fri, 10 May 2013 06:40:59 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>>>> >>> >duke wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>> >>On Mon, 06 May 2013 02:45:42 -0400,Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >On Sun, 5 May 2013 14:38:13 -0400, Pabro<Pa...@ChurchOffice23.org>
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>On Sun, 05 May 2013 11:33:13 -0800, linuxgal wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>Why would you set one half of the Word of God against the other half?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>You're precisely correct, linux gal. The Word of God does not contradict
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>Itself.
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >Except when it does.
>>>>>>> >>>> >>Name one time.
>>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>> >2 Kings 8:26 Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to
>>>>> >>> >reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
>>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>> >2 Chronicles 22:2 Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to
>>>>> >>> >reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
>>> >>His correct age has exactly nothing to do with nothing that God said.
>> >
>> >2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is
>> >profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in
>> >righteousness
> Exactly.
linuxgal
May 11, 2013, 3:55:59 PM5/11/13
to
duke wrote:
> On Sat, 11 May 2013 04:51:14 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> >>On Fri, 10 May 2013 12:52:12 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>>> >>>Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>>>> >>>>Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
>>>>> >>>>millions of years ago.
>>> >>
>>>> >>>2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
>>> >>
>>> >>Who saw it? Once a dumbass, always a jdyke.
>>> >>
>>>> >>>http://www.cleanposts.com/index.php/Age
>>> >>
>> >
>> >That report gives cross-references to your own scripture for
>> >verification. If you believe your Bible, then you must believe in a
>> >2,507 BCE date for the Flood.
> The bible is 100% silent about 2507, or a 6000 year old earth put another way.
Only if you ignore my data.
> On Sat, 11 May 2013 04:51:14 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> >>On Fri, 10 May 2013 12:52:12 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>>> >>>Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>>>> >>>>Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
>>>>> >>>>millions of years ago.
>>> >>
>>>> >>>2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
>>> >>
>>> >>Who saw it? Once a dumbass, always a jdyke.
>>> >>
>>>> >>>http://www.cleanposts.com/index.php/Age
>>> >>
>> >
>> >That report gives cross-references to your own scripture for
>> >verification. If you believe your Bible, then you must believe in a
>> >2,507 BCE date for the Flood.
> The bible is 100% silent about 2507, or a 6000 year old earth put another way.
linuxgal
May 11, 2013, 3:56:41 PM5/11/13
to
duke wrote:
> On Sat, 11 May 2013 04:55:34 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> >>Ok, so how do you know that Sam Adams signed the Declaration of Independence
>>> >>rather than his farm foreman?
>> >
>> >Because John Hancock would have said something, no?
> Did JH sign for himself?
Sure, but even Sam Adams put his John Hancock on there.
> On Sat, 11 May 2013 04:55:34 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> >>Ok, so how do you know that Sam Adams signed the Declaration of Independence
>>> >>rather than his farm foreman?
>> >
>> >Because John Hancock would have said something, no?
> Did JH sign for himself?
linuxgal
May 11, 2013, 3:57:26 PM5/11/13
to
linuxgal
May 11, 2013, 3:58:04 PM5/11/13
to
duke wrote:
> On Sat, 11 May 2013 05:02:22 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> >>On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:28:01 +1000, "Andrew W"<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>> >>wrote:
>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>So who inspired the OT? The devil?
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>God.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>The false old Judeo/Hebrew blood sacrificing god.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>The NT is a 'nicer' update of that work, but still somewhat based on it.
>>>>>>> >>>> >>Somewhat??? Haahaahaa.
>>>>> >>> >Yes dope, somewhat.
>>> >>No, dope, the New Way.
>> >New way, instead of stoning people for picking up sticks on Saturday,
>> >they are burned at the stake for missing Mass on Sunday.
> Only God makes that call.
He sure made that call often before the 1st Amendment came around.
> On Sat, 11 May 2013 05:02:22 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> >>On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:28:01 +1000, "Andrew W"<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>> >>wrote:
>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>So who inspired the OT? The devil?
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>God.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>The false old Judeo/Hebrew blood sacrificing god.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>The NT is a 'nicer' update of that work, but still somewhat based on it.
>>>>>>> >>>> >>Somewhat??? Haahaahaa.
>>>>> >>> >Yes dope, somewhat.
>>> >>No, dope, the New Way.
>> >New way, instead of stoning people for picking up sticks on Saturday,
>> >they are burned at the stake for missing Mass on Sunday.
> Only God makes that call.
�RLMeasures
May 11, 2013, 5:24:10 PM5/11/13
to
In article <0m0to85vthvhj7rss...@4ax.com>, duke
<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 11 May 2013 07:33:49 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >In article <f7cso8ds5rp617hls...@4ax.com>, duke
> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 10 May 2013 05:58:18 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <25ppo8ttg6io0nsmm...@4ax.com>, duke
> >> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Thu, 09 May 2013 08:33:07 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
> >> >> d have listened.
> >> >>
> >> >> >> If I gave up 2-3 dark chocolate nuggets with almonds, that would be a
> >> >> >permanent
> >> >> >> loss.
> >> >>
> >> >> >� Eating Hershey's Nuggets� produces feces - which are useful
for growing
> >> >> >food = so there is no permanent loss.
> >> >>
> >> >> Not if I gave them up. That would be a permanent loss.
> >> >
> >> >� what if the Nuggets� were returned to you 3 days later?
> >>
> >> Like Jesus' return, that would be a true miracle by God.
> >>
> >� True because odds are you would likely have chomped every Nugget�
> >before God even had a chance to Save them.
>
> I can never thwart God.
>
� but you for damn sure can eat Nuggets�.
> On Sat, 11 May 2013 07:33:49 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>
> >In article <f7cso8ds5rp617hls...@4ax.com>, duke
> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 10 May 2013 05:58:18 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <25ppo8ttg6io0nsmm...@4ax.com>, duke
> >> ><duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Thu, 09 May 2013 08:33:07 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
> >> >> d have listened.
> >> >>
> >> >> >> If I gave up 2-3 dark chocolate nuggets with almonds, that would be a
> >> >> >permanent
> >> >> >> loss.
> >> >>
> >> >> >� Eating Hershey's Nuggets� produces feces - which are useful
for growing
> >> >> >food = so there is no permanent loss.
> >> >>
> >> >> Not if I gave them up. That would be a permanent loss.
> >> >
> >> >� what if the Nuggets� were returned to you 3 days later?
> >>
> >> Like Jesus' return, that would be a true miracle by God.
> >>
> >� True because odds are you would likely have chomped every Nugget�
> >before God even had a chance to Save them.
>
> I can never thwart God.
>
�RLMeasures
May 11, 2013, 5:25:37 PM5/11/13
to
Andrew W
May 11, 2013, 6:20:52 PM5/11/13
to
>"duke" wrote in message news:c2dso8hqlv5id7sr3...@4ax.com...
>
>On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:04:11 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>>>What is the sacrifice?
>>>>Exactly. See how stupid the Christian/Catholic religion is?
>>>>Basically religious sacrifice is just the offering of a dead thing to a
>>>>god,
>>>>any innocent life really.
>>>You're even more ignorant than I thought.
>
>>Well so far you haven't come up with any rational purpose or rebut for
>>sacrifices which is well documented and supported by your religion as
>>quoted
>>above, so I think you just tried to cover up your own ignorance.
>
>I asked you to id a sacrifice. You failed.
>
I did, duke! Here it is again for the blind and numb of mind.
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a4p2.htm
606 "The sacrifice of Jesus "for the sins of the whole world"
611 The Eucharist that Christ institutes at that moment will be the memorial
of his sacrifice.
Christ's death is the unique and definitive sacrifice
613 Christ's death is both the Paschal sacrifice that accomplishes the
definitive redemption of men, , through "the Lamb of God, who takes away the
sin of the world",439 and the sacrifice of the New Covenant, which restores
man to communion with God by reconciling him to God through the "blood of
the covenant, which was poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins".
614 This sacrifice of Christ is unique; it completes and surpasses all other
sacrifices.
618 The cross is the unique sacrifice of Christ, the "one mediator between
God and men".
--
Forcing someone to either worship or burn is called tyranny.
My motto: Never follow any leader who gives lifelong (or eternal) torture in
a fire as one of your 'free' choices, because that is a despot.
Religions breed hypocrisy, ignorance and self-righteousness.
>
>On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:04:11 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>>>What is the sacrifice?
>>>>Exactly. See how stupid the Christian/Catholic religion is?
>>>>Basically religious sacrifice is just the offering of a dead thing to a
>>>>god,
>>>>any innocent life really.
>>>You're even more ignorant than I thought.
>
>>Well so far you haven't come up with any rational purpose or rebut for
>>sacrifices which is well documented and supported by your religion as
>>quoted
>>above, so I think you just tried to cover up your own ignorance.
>
>I asked you to id a sacrifice. You failed.
>
I did, duke! Here it is again for the blind and numb of mind.
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a4p2.htm
606 "The sacrifice of Jesus "for the sins of the whole world"
611 The Eucharist that Christ institutes at that moment will be the memorial
of his sacrifice.
Christ's death is the unique and definitive sacrifice
613 Christ's death is both the Paschal sacrifice that accomplishes the
definitive redemption of men, , through "the Lamb of God, who takes away the
sin of the world",439 and the sacrifice of the New Covenant, which restores
man to communion with God by reconciling him to God through the "blood of
the covenant, which was poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins".
614 This sacrifice of Christ is unique; it completes and surpasses all other
sacrifices.
618 The cross is the unique sacrifice of Christ, the "one mediator between
God and men".
--
Forcing someone to either worship or burn is called tyranny.
My motto: Never follow any leader who gives lifelong (or eternal) torture in
a fire as one of your 'free' choices, because that is a despot.
Religions breed hypocrisy, ignorance and self-righteousness.
Andrew W
May 11, 2013, 6:32:46 PM5/11/13
to
>"duke" wrote in message news:c4dso81iv2o71grtd...@4ax.com...
>
>On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:06:18 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>news:2lppo8t4pig88jaha...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Fri, 10 May 2013 07:32:46 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>Moses was saved by God. It had to do with his personal integrity.
>>>>>>Did you just make that up?
>>>>>No, it's clearly revealed in the book, the bible, that you know nothing
>>>>>about.
>>>
>>>>I know plenty about it. Often more than you.
>>>
>>>You have yet to demonstrate that.
>
>>I have plenty of times. But you can't handle what I say because it doesn't
>>line up with your Catholic indoctrination.
>
>Right, and because what you say lines up with satan.
>
Where do you think you got the idea of satan?
Same indoctrination.
>
>You are now a total waste of my time. If you don't wish to discuss issues
>with
>me, fine. Please go away.
>
I'm trying to help you overcome your insidious fear based indoctrination.
Satan uses fear to control people.
Your church also uses fear to control sheep like you.
Are we getting a clue yet?
>
>On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:06:18 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>news:2lppo8t4pig88jaha...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Fri, 10 May 2013 07:32:46 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>Moses was saved by God. It had to do with his personal integrity.
>>>>>>Did you just make that up?
>>>>>No, it's clearly revealed in the book, the bible, that you know nothing
>>>>>about.
>>>
>>>>I know plenty about it. Often more than you.
>>>
>>>You have yet to demonstrate that.
>
>>I have plenty of times. But you can't handle what I say because it doesn't
>>line up with your Catholic indoctrination.
>
>Right, and because what you say lines up with satan.
>
Where do you think you got the idea of satan?
Same indoctrination.
>
>You are now a total waste of my time. If you don't wish to discuss issues
>with
>me, fine. Please go away.
>
I'm trying to help you overcome your insidious fear based indoctrination.
Satan uses fear to control people.
Your church also uses fear to control sheep like you.
Are we getting a clue yet?
Andrew W
May 11, 2013, 6:39:56 PM5/11/13
to
>"duke" wrote in message news:3p0to8tnqi2uch94u...@4ax.com...
practices were made up by God?
>
>On Sat, 11 May 2013 05:02:22 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
>wrote:
>
>>duke wrote:
>>> On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:28:01 +1000, "Andrew
>>> W"<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>So who inspired the OT? The devil?
>>>>>>> >>>>God.
>>>>>> >>>The false old Judeo/Hebrew blood sacrificing god.
>>>>>> >>>The NT is a 'nicer' update of that work, but still somewhat based
>>>>>> >>>on it.
>>>>> >>Somewhat??? Haahaahaa.
>>>> >Yes dope, somewhat.
>>> No, dope, the New Way.
>
>>New way, instead of stoning people for picking up sticks on Saturday,
>>they are burned at the stake for missing Mass on Sunday.
>
>Only God makes that call.
>
Are you really dumb enough to believe that all those awful rules and
>On Sat, 11 May 2013 05:02:22 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
>wrote:
>
>>duke wrote:
>>> On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:28:01 +1000, "Andrew
>>> W"<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>So who inspired the OT? The devil?
>>>>>>> >>>>God.
>>>>>> >>>The false old Judeo/Hebrew blood sacrificing god.
>>>>>> >>>The NT is a 'nicer' update of that work, but still somewhat based
>>>>>> >>>on it.
>>>>> >>Somewhat??? Haahaahaa.
>>>> >Yes dope, somewhat.
>>> No, dope, the New Way.
>
>>New way, instead of stoning people for picking up sticks on Saturday,
>>they are burned at the stake for missing Mass on Sunday.
>
>Only God makes that call.
>
practices were made up by God?
Andrew W
May 11, 2013, 6:52:43 PM5/11/13
to
>"duke" wrote in message news:7q0to85na3mks1652...@4ax.com...
And wrong, its not "all over scripture", because then you and others would
simply be able to answer the question, but you can't.
I've read through scripture. It says nothing about why 'God' would require
obedience so badly that its even more important than life itself. That's
just silly.
Its clearly a fear and control game, and you're just one of the many dumb
suckers who bought right into it.
>
>On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:42:14 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>news:1sppo8doetvlfbaib...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Fri, 10 May 2013 08:16:53 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>A major part?? It is THE part. Rather than defy his Father, he
>>>>>willingly
>>>>>went to the cross instead.
>>>
>>>>And what ultimate purpose can that serve?
>>>
>>>It's what YOU don't do.
>>>
>>
>>Your response makes it clear that you don't even know the purpose.
>>Why do you put such strong belief in something that you don't even know
>>the
>>reason for?
>
>It's all over scripture, numbnuts.
>
Translation: I don't know.
>On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:42:14 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>"duke" wrote in message
>>>news:1sppo8doetvlfbaib...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>On Fri, 10 May 2013 08:16:53 +1000, "Andrew W"
>>><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>A major part?? It is THE part. Rather than defy his Father, he
>>>>>willingly
>>>>>went to the cross instead.
>>>
>>>>And what ultimate purpose can that serve?
>>>
>>>It's what YOU don't do.
>>>
>>
>>Your response makes it clear that you don't even know the purpose.
>>Why do you put such strong belief in something that you don't even know
>>the
>>reason for?
>
>It's all over scripture, numbnuts.
>
And wrong, its not "all over scripture", because then you and others would
simply be able to answer the question, but you can't.
I've read through scripture. It says nothing about why 'God' would require
obedience so badly that its even more important than life itself. That's
just silly.
Its clearly a fear and control game, and you're just one of the many dumb
suckers who bought right into it.
Silen...@hotmail.com
May 11, 2013, 10:18:00 PM5/11/13
to
On Fri, 10 May 2013 07:22:07 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 9 May 2013 22:34:06 -0700 (PDT), SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>> Its almost impossible to provide objective, verifiable evidence on
>>> metaphysics, especially over usenet.
>>> You should know that.
>
>>It's equally impossible in real life. I know - I've been asking the
>>same question of theists since before the internet was invented.
>
>>So: there's no evidence of anything "metaphysical," yet you goobers
>>persist in believing in it.
and we can do so with a high degree of precision.
Now... We can detects God's interaction with the universe....
How exactly?
Oh... Wait... We can't.
See the difference, Dook?
Heh heh...
Lying racist rightard socialists....
Batshit crazy and dogshit stupid, every single last one of you.
>On Thu, 9 May 2013 22:34:06 -0700 (PDT), SkyEyes <skye...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>> Its almost impossible to provide objective, verifiable evidence on
>>> metaphysics, especially over usenet.
>>> You should know that.
>
>>It's equally impossible in real life. I know - I've been asking the
>>same question of theists since before the internet was invented.
>
>>So: there's no evidence of anything "metaphysical," yet you goobers
>>persist in believing in it.
>
>You can't see, touch, smell, hear, or taste electricity, but you still believe
>in it. Why?
Because we can detect and measure it's interaction with the universe,
>You can't see, touch, smell, hear, or taste electricity, but you still believe
>in it. Why?
and we can do so with a high degree of precision.
Now... We can detects God's interaction with the universe....
How exactly?
Oh... Wait... We can't.
See the difference, Dook?
Heh heh...
Lying racist rightard socialists....
Batshit crazy and dogshit stupid, every single last one of you.
linuxgal
May 11, 2013, 11:54:55 PM5/11/13
to
duke wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 20:39:10 -0700 (PDT), nature bats last<seqk...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> >>Didn't you know that the parting of the waters for moses thus saving the Jews is
>>> >>prophetic language of water baptism saving humankind after the cross?
>> >Didn't you know what you just said had nothing at all
>> >to do with your silly claim that the LORD slaughtering
>> >all the firstborn infants of Egypt was "a fore-telling
>> >of hell"?
>> >Actually, I'm quite confident you did know that.
>> >That's why you did it.
> Correct in concept, but backwards. The righteous were saved.
Romans 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one.
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013 20:39:10 -0700 (PDT), nature bats last<seqk...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> >>Didn't you know that the parting of the waters for moses thus saving the Jews is
>>> >>prophetic language of water baptism saving humankind after the cross?
>> >Didn't you know what you just said had nothing at all
>> >to do with your silly claim that the LORD slaughtering
>> >all the firstborn infants of Egypt was "a fore-telling
>> >of hell"?
>> >Actually, I'm quite confident you did know that.
>> >That's why you did it.
> Correct in concept, but backwards. The righteous were saved.
Romans 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one.
duke
May 12, 2013, 9:43:36 AM5/12/13
to
duke
May 12, 2013, 9:44:32 AM5/12/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 22:18:00 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>You can't see, touch, smell, hear, or taste electricity, but you still believe
>>in it. Why?
>Because we can detect and measure it's interaction with the universe,
>and we can do so with a high degree of precision.
>Now... We can detects God's interaction with the universe....
Exactly like you can experience electricity.
>>You can't see, touch, smell, hear, or taste electricity, but you still believe
>>in it. Why?
>Because we can detect and measure it's interaction with the universe,
>and we can do so with a high degree of precision.
>Now... We can detects God's interaction with the universe....
duke
May 12, 2013, 9:45:17 AM5/12/13
to
On Sun, 12 May 2013 08:20:52 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:
>>I asked you to id a sacrifice. You failed.
>I did, duke! Here it is again for the blind and numb of mind.
You still failed below.
>From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
>http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a4p2.htm
>
>606 "The sacrifice of Jesus "for the sins of the whole world"
>
>611 The Eucharist that Christ institutes at that moment will be the memorial
>of his sacrifice.
>
>Christ's death is the unique and definitive sacrifice
>613 Christ's death is both the Paschal sacrifice that accomplishes the
>definitive redemption of men, , through "the Lamb of God, who takes away the
>sin of the world",439 and the sacrifice of the New Covenant, which restores
>man to communion with God by reconciling him to God through the "blood of
>the covenant, which was poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins".
>
>614 This sacrifice of Christ is unique; it completes and surpasses all other
>sacrifices.
>
>618 The cross is the unique sacrifice of Christ, the "one mediator between
>God and men".
wrote:
>>I asked you to id a sacrifice. You failed.
>I did, duke! Here it is again for the blind and numb of mind.
>From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
>http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a4p2.htm
>
>606 "The sacrifice of Jesus "for the sins of the whole world"
>
>611 The Eucharist that Christ institutes at that moment will be the memorial
>of his sacrifice.
>
>Christ's death is the unique and definitive sacrifice
>613 Christ's death is both the Paschal sacrifice that accomplishes the
>definitive redemption of men, , through "the Lamb of God, who takes away the
>sin of the world",439 and the sacrifice of the New Covenant, which restores
>man to communion with God by reconciling him to God through the "blood of
>the covenant, which was poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins".
>
>614 This sacrifice of Christ is unique; it completes and surpasses all other
>sacrifices.
>
>618 The cross is the unique sacrifice of Christ, the "one mediator between
>God and men".
duke
May 12, 2013, 9:46:26 AM5/12/13
to
On Sun, 12 May 2013 08:32:46 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:
>Where do you think you got the idea of satan?
>Same indoctrination.
Evil people don't deserve to spend eternity with God.
wrote:
>Where do you think you got the idea of satan?
>Same indoctrination.
duke
May 12, 2013, 9:47:21 AM5/12/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 11:58:04 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>duke wrote:
>> On Sat, 11 May 2013 05:02:22 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> >duke wrote:
>>>> >>On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:28:01 +1000, "Andrew W"<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>>> >>wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>So who inspired the OT? The devil?
>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>God.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>The false old Judeo/Hebrew blood sacrificing god.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>The NT is a 'nicer' update of that work, but still somewhat based on it.
>>>>>>>> >>>> >>Somewhat??? Haahaahaa.
>>>>>> >>> >Yes dope, somewhat.
>>>> >>No, dope, the New Way.
>>> >New way, instead of stoning people for picking up sticks on Saturday,
>>> >they are burned at the stake for missing Mass on Sunday.
>> Only God makes that call.
>
>He sure made that call often before the 1st Amendment came around.
God still has final call over the 1st Amendment.
>duke wrote:
>> On Sat, 11 May 2013 05:02:22 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> >duke wrote:
>>>> >>On Sat, 11 May 2013 09:28:01 +1000, "Andrew W"<spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>>>> >>wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>So who inspired the OT? The devil?
>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>God.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>The false old Judeo/Hebrew blood sacrificing god.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>The NT is a 'nicer' update of that work, but still somewhat based on it.
>>>>>>>> >>>> >>Somewhat??? Haahaahaa.
>>>>>> >>> >Yes dope, somewhat.
>>>> >>No, dope, the New Way.
>>> >New way, instead of stoning people for picking up sticks on Saturday,
>>> >they are burned at the stake for missing Mass on Sunday.
>> Only God makes that call.
>
>He sure made that call often before the 1st Amendment came around.
duke
May 12, 2013, 9:48:25 AM5/12/13
to
On Sun, 12 May 2013 08:52:43 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:
>>>>>>A major part?? It is THE part. Rather than defy his Father, he
>>>>>>willingly went to the cross instead.
>>>>>And what ultimate purpose can that serve?
>>>>It's what YOU don't do.
>>>Your response makes it clear that you don't even know the purpose.
>>>Why do you put such strong belief in something that you don't even know
>>>the reason for?
>>It's all over scripture, numbnuts.
>Translation: I don't know.
I do, you don't.
>>>>>>A major part?? It is THE part. Rather than defy his Father, he
>>>>>>willingly went to the cross instead.
>>>>>And what ultimate purpose can that serve?
>>>>It's what YOU don't do.
>>>Your response makes it clear that you don't even know the purpose.
>>>Why do you put such strong belief in something that you don't even know
>>>the reason for?
>>It's all over scripture, numbnuts.
>Translation: I don't know.
duke
May 12, 2013, 9:49:19 AM5/12/13
to
duke
May 12, 2013, 9:49:42 AM5/12/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 11:56:41 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>duke wrote:
>> On Sat, 11 May 2013 04:55:34 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> >duke wrote:
>>>> >>Ok, so how do you know that Sam Adams signed the Declaration of Independence
>>>> >>rather than his farm foreman?
>>> >
>>> >Because John Hancock would have said something, no?
>> Did JH sign for himself?
>
>Sure, but even Sam Adams put his John Hancock on there.
Or his farm foreman.
>duke wrote:
>> On Sat, 11 May 2013 04:55:34 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> >duke wrote:
>>>> >>Ok, so how do you know that Sam Adams signed the Declaration of Independence
>>>> >>rather than his farm foreman?
>>> >
>>> >Because John Hancock would have said something, no?
>> Did JH sign for himself?
>
>Sure, but even Sam Adams put his John Hancock on there.
duke
May 12, 2013, 9:51:30 AM5/12/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 11:55:59 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>duke wrote:
>> On Sat, 11 May 2013 04:51:14 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> >duke wrote:
>>>> >>On Fri, 10 May 2013 12:52:12 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
>>>>>> >>>>millions of years ago.
>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>Who saw it? Once a dumbass, always a jdyke.
>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>http://www.cleanposts.com/index.php/Age
>>> >That report gives cross-references to your own scripture for
>>> >verification. If you believe your Bible, then you must believe in a
>>> >2,507 BCE date for the Flood.
>> The bible is 100% silent about 2507, or a 6000 year old earth put another way.
>
>Only if you ignore my data.
The bible doesn't say it. It's a wag at best.
>duke wrote:
>> On Sat, 11 May 2013 04:51:14 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>
>>> >duke wrote:
>>>> >>On Fri, 10 May 2013 12:52:12 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
>>>>>> >>>>millions of years ago.
>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>Who saw it? Once a dumbass, always a jdyke.
>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>http://www.cleanposts.com/index.php/Age
>>> >That report gives cross-references to your own scripture for
>>> >verification. If you believe your Bible, then you must believe in a
>>> >2,507 BCE date for the Flood.
>> The bible is 100% silent about 2507, or a 6000 year old earth put another way.
>
>Only if you ignore my data.
duke
May 12, 2013, 9:54:33 AM5/12/13
to
duke
May 12, 2013, 9:57:08 AM5/12/13
to
"was NOT crucified before he was born"? Am I understanding your words right?
duke
May 12, 2013, 9:57:57 AM5/12/13
to
�RLMeasures
May 12, 2013, 10:21:59 AM5/12/13
to
�RLMeasures
May 12, 2013, 10:32:50 AM5/12/13
to
In article <sp7vo81l894gvacv8...@4ax.com>, duke
� No. Secular history provided the date of Herod's death -- i.e.,
4BCE. Herod's campaign against newborn males was before Herod's death.
Secular logic tells us the rest.
4BCE. Herod's campaign against newborn males was before Herod's death.
Secular logic tells us the rest.
duke
May 12, 2013, 11:17:46 AM5/12/13
to
On Sun, 12 May 2013 08:39:56 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
wrote:
>>>New way, instead of stoning people for picking up sticks on Saturday,
>>>they are burned at the stake for missing Mass on Sunday.
>>Only God makes that call.
>Are you really dumb enough to believe that all those awful rules and
>practices were made up by God?
Awful? Welcome to your flaming future.
wrote:
>>>New way, instead of stoning people for picking up sticks on Saturday,
>>>they are burned at the stake for missing Mass on Sunday.
>>Only God makes that call.
>Are you really dumb enough to believe that all those awful rules and
>practices were made up by God?
linuxgal
May 12, 2013, 12:17:36 PM5/12/13
to
duke wrote:
> On Sat, 11 May 2013 11:55:59 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> >>On Sat, 11 May 2013 04:51:14 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>>>> >>> >duke wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>> >>On Fri, 10 May 2013 12:52:12 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>millions of years ago.
>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>>> >>Who saw it? Once a dumbass, always a jdyke.
>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>http://www.cleanposts.com/index.php/Age
>>>>> >>> >That report gives cross-references to your own scripture for
>>>>> >>> >verification. If you believe your Bible, then you must believe in a
>>>>> >>> >2,507 BCE date for the Flood.
>>> >>The bible is 100% silent about 2507, or a 6000 year old earth put another way.
>> >
>> >Only if you ignore my data.
> The bible doesn't say it. It's a wag at best.
My data is taken directly from the Bible.
> On Sat, 11 May 2013 11:55:59 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
>> >duke wrote:
>>> >>On Sat, 11 May 2013 04:51:14 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>>>> >>> >duke wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>> >>On Fri, 10 May 2013 12:52:12 -0800, linuxgal<linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>Jeanne Douglas wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>Oh, dear, dukie's once again claiming that Noah (and humanity) lived
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>millions of years ago.
>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>2507 BCE, no two ways around it.
>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>>> >>Who saw it? Once a dumbass, always a jdyke.
>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>http://www.cleanposts.com/index.php/Age
>>>>> >>> >That report gives cross-references to your own scripture for
>>>>> >>> >verification. If you believe your Bible, then you must believe in a
>>>>> >>> >2,507 BCE date for the Flood.
>>> >>The bible is 100% silent about 2507, or a 6000 year old earth put another way.
>> >
>> >Only if you ignore my data.
> The bible doesn't say it. It's a wag at best.
•RLMeasures
May 12, 2013, 12:28:06 PM5/12/13
to
In article <rjcvo8l3me4ege9uc...@4ax.com>, duke
<duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 12 May 2013 08:39:56 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> >>>New way, instead of stoning people for picking up sticks on Saturday,
> >>>they are burned at the stake for missing Mass on Sunday.
> >>Only God makes that call.
>
> >Are you really dumb enough to believe that all those awful rules and
> >practices were made up by God?
>
> Awful? Welcome to your flaming future.
>
• Duke: eternal torture in hellfire, obedience and a bag of Nuggets®.
> On Sun, 12 May 2013 08:39:56 +1000, "Andrew W" <spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
> wrote:
>
> >>>New way, instead of stoning people for picking up sticks on Saturday,
> >>>they are burned at the stake for missing Mass on Sunday.
> >>Only God makes that call.
>
> >Are you really dumb enough to believe that all those awful rules and
> >practices were made up by God?
>
> Awful? Welcome to your flaming future.
>
Silen...@hotmail.com
May 12, 2013, 4:37:42 PM5/12/13
to
On Sun, 12 May 2013 08:44:32 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>On Sat, 11 May 2013 22:18:00 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>>You can't see, touch, smell, hear, or taste electricity, but you still believe
>>>in it. Why?
>>Because we can detect and measure it's interaction with the universe,
>>and we can do so with a high degree of precision.
>>Now... We can detects God's interaction with the universe....
>
>Exactly like you can experience electricity.
I see.
>On Sat, 11 May 2013 22:18:00 -0400, Silen...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>>You can't see, touch, smell, hear, or taste electricity, but you still believe
>>>in it. Why?
>>Because we can detect and measure it's interaction with the universe,
>>and we can do so with a high degree of precision.
>>Now... We can detects God's interaction with the universe....
>
>Exactly like you can experience electricity.
I can get an electrical meter down at the local hardware store that
will provide me with very precise information about the electricity
I'm measuring.
Where can I get a "God meter", and what would I hook it up to?
Heh heh...
Lying racist rightard socialists...
Batshit crazy and dogshit stupid, every single last one of you.
>
>
Andrew W
May 12, 2013, 5:10:32 PM5/12/13
to
>"duke" wrote in message news:b67vo8lfdphqaah9c...@4ax.com...
Its in plain black and white from the Vatican archives.
You are in denial mode.
The RCC and the rest of Christianity believes that Christ sacrificed himself
to save us from God's wrath.
>
>>From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
>>http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a4p2.htm
>>
>>606 "The sacrifice of Jesus "for the sins of the whole world"
>>
>>611 The Eucharist that Christ institutes at that moment will be the
>>memorial
>>of his sacrifice.
>>
>>Christ's death is the unique and definitive sacrifice
>>613 Christ's death is both the Paschal sacrifice that accomplishes the
>>definitive redemption of men, , through "the Lamb of God, who takes away
>>the
>>sin of the world",439 and the sacrifice of the New Covenant, which
>>restores
>>man to communion with God by reconciling him to God through the "blood of
>>the covenant, which was poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins".
>>
>>614 This sacrifice of Christ is unique; it completes and surpasses all
>>other
>>sacrifices.
>>
>>618 The cross is the unique sacrifice of Christ, the "one mediator between
>>God and men".
>
>
>On Sun, 12 May 2013 08:20:52 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>I asked you to id a sacrifice. You failed.
>>I did, duke! Here it is again for the blind and numb of mind.
>
>You still failed below.
>
No I didn't.
>On Sun, 12 May 2013 08:20:52 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>I asked you to id a sacrifice. You failed.
>>I did, duke! Here it is again for the blind and numb of mind.
>
>You still failed below.
>
Its in plain black and white from the Vatican archives.
You are in denial mode.
The RCC and the rest of Christianity believes that Christ sacrificed himself
to save us from God's wrath.
>
>>From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
>>http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a4p2.htm
>>
>>606 "The sacrifice of Jesus "for the sins of the whole world"
>>
>>611 The Eucharist that Christ institutes at that moment will be the
>>memorial
>>of his sacrifice.
>>
>>Christ's death is the unique and definitive sacrifice
>>613 Christ's death is both the Paschal sacrifice that accomplishes the
>>definitive redemption of men, , through "the Lamb of God, who takes away
>>the
>>sin of the world",439 and the sacrifice of the New Covenant, which
>>restores
>>man to communion with God by reconciling him to God through the "blood of
>>the covenant, which was poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins".
>>
>>614 This sacrifice of Christ is unique; it completes and surpasses all
>>other
>>sacrifices.
>>
>>618 The cross is the unique sacrifice of Christ, the "one mediator between
>>God and men".
>
Andrew W
May 12, 2013, 5:15:26 PM5/12/13
to
>"duke" wrote in message news:t77vo8p35ta7lsj34...@4ax.com...
'God' is not a humanoid individual. That was yet another distortion by your
church.
>
>On Sun, 12 May 2013 08:32:46 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>Where do you think you got the idea of satan?
>>Same indoctrination.
>
>Evil people don't deserve to spend eternity with God.
>
We already are with 'God'. 'God' is everywhere.
>On Sun, 12 May 2013 08:32:46 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>Where do you think you got the idea of satan?
>>Same indoctrination.
>
>Evil people don't deserve to spend eternity with God.
>
'God' is not a humanoid individual. That was yet another distortion by your
church.
Andrew W
May 12, 2013, 5:20:53 PM5/12/13
to
>"duke" wrote in message news:rjcvo8l3me4ege9uc...@4ax.com...
Get a brain.
You still can't see the control, tyranny and terrorism in your beliefs?
>
>On Sun, 12 May 2013 08:39:56 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>>New way, instead of stoning people for picking up sticks on Saturday,
>>>>they are burned at the stake for missing Mass on Sunday.
>>>Only God makes that call.
>
>>Are you really dumb enough to believe that all those awful rules and
>>practices were made up by God?
>
>Awful? Welcome to your flaming future.
>
Cut out all this stupid "Welcome to your flaming future" crap.
>On Sun, 12 May 2013 08:39:56 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>>New way, instead of stoning people for picking up sticks on Saturday,
>>>>they are burned at the stake for missing Mass on Sunday.
>>>Only God makes that call.
>
>>Are you really dumb enough to believe that all those awful rules and
>>practices were made up by God?
>
>Awful? Welcome to your flaming future.
>
Get a brain.
You still can't see the control, tyranny and terrorism in your beliefs?
Andrew W
May 12, 2013, 5:22:51 PM5/12/13
to
>"duke" wrote in message news:tb7vo89mo0k9uns02...@4ax.com...
How hard can it be?
>
>On Sun, 12 May 2013 08:52:43 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>>>>>A major part?? It is THE part. Rather than defy his Father, he
>>>>>>>willingly went to the cross instead.
>>>>>>And what ultimate purpose can that serve?
>>>>>It's what YOU don't do.
>
>>>>Your response makes it clear that you don't even know the purpose.
>>>>Why do you put such strong belief in something that you don't even know
>>>>the reason for?
>
>>>It's all over scripture, numbnuts.
>
>>Translation: I don't know.
>
>I do, you don't.
>
Then simply state it.
>On Sun, 12 May 2013 08:52:43 +1000, "Andrew W"
><spam_a...@optusnet.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>>>>>>A major part?? It is THE part. Rather than defy his Father, he
>>>>>>>willingly went to the cross instead.
>>>>>>And what ultimate purpose can that serve?
>>>>>It's what YOU don't do.
>
>>>>Your response makes it clear that you don't even know the purpose.
>>>>Why do you put such strong belief in something that you don't even know
>>>>the reason for?
>
>>>It's all over scripture, numbnuts.
>
>>Translation: I don't know.
>
>I do, you don't.
>
How hard can it be?
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages