Who was in the Garden of Eden?

[Astero...@yahoo.com]

According to the Old Testament an angel (ANOINTED CHERUB) was there. It was called a covering angel. Note that the Ark of the Covenant is a replica of the one in heaven and there are covering angels above it. So this "king" of Tyrus was in the Garden of Eden and was an angel that got corrupted.



Ezekiel 28:12-18

12 Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord God; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty.

13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.

14 Thou art the ANOINTED CHERUB that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.

15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

16 By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.

17 Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.

18 Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee.

[Robert Carnegie]

Well, the spelling is abominable. I assume you
meant "propane"?

Christmas cards on show in the supermarket today.
If I had radio-controlled drones, I'd smuggle them
in to hang a banner saying "Jesus is Coming"
while the store is closed. Then I dress as a
solo mariachi singer...

If you wondered what I want for Christmas, it may
be that. Or, you know, a number of particular
people to drop dead. Not that I'm asking for that...
but I want it.

[Atlatl Axolotl]

And God didn't see that coming?


AA

[Cloud Hobbit]

Atlatl, there seems to be lot of stuff that took God by surprise.

Very odd for an alleged omniscient being don't ya think?

He should have known Adam would eat the Apple.
He shouldn't have been surprised that men became wicked so he would have to kill them all.

Puss poor deity IMO.

[Yap Honghor]

See how a donkey brain takes the con tales as true.....

[Astero...@yahoo.com]

What donkey brain?

[Yap Honghor]

You....

[Cloud Hobbit]

On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 12:19:50 PM UTC-7, Astero...@yahoo.com wrote:

The garden of Eden is a story. Nothing more.

[Astero...@yahoo.com]

You have quite the imagination about who you talk to. I guess it livens your experience on the web.

[Davej]

On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 2:19:50 PM UTC-5, Astero...@yahoo.com wrote:
> [...]

Grass-eating lions, tigers, and bears, and all the diseases.

[Atlatl Axolotl]

On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 9:12:11 AM UTC-7, Davej wrote:
> On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 2:19:50 PM UTC-5, Astero...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > [...]
>

.> Grass-eating lions, tigers, and bears, and all the diseases.

I've always been curious what all the obligate parasites
like tapeworms and trichina and trypanosomes, which
can only live inside your body, were doing back then.


a2

[Andrew]

"Cloud Hobbit" wrote in message news:ea58b2f6-3181-4ffe...@googlegroups.com...

I note that atheists like to talk a lot about ~God~

And they even surmise that they would be more
holy than God if ''they'' were God, instead of the
God who is God.

[John Locke]

..considering that your god is a fabrication by humans,
reflecting, for the most part, the ignorance and barbaric
characteristics of ancient morons, it is safe to assume that
just about any reasonable, rational person today would be far superior
in intelligence and integrity then your imaginary, psychopathic
monster.

[Cloud Hobbit]

On Saturday, September 23, 2017 at 12:19:50 PM UTC-7, Astero...@yahoo.com wrote:

A lovely fable for the ignorant, but in no way the truth.

[Cloud Hobbit]

First prove God. Without evidence of a God, there is no reason to believe in one. The Bible is the worst possible source for evidence since it has been repeatedly demonstrated to be fiction.

[Yap Honghor]

Why do you want to go against the truth?

[Atlatl Axolotl]

On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 3:11:56 PM UTC-7, Andrew wrote:

> "Cloud Hobbit" wrote in message news:ea58b2f6-3181-4ffe...@googlegroups.com...
>
> > Atlatl, there seems to be lot of stuff that took God by surprise.
> >
> > Very odd for an alleged omniscient being don't ya think?
> >
> > He should have known Adam would eat the Apple.
> > He shouldn't have been surprised that men became
> > wicked so he would have to kill them all.
> >
> > Puss poor deity IMO.
>

.> I note that atheists like to talk a lot about ~God~

And how often do you note atheists talking about God
but not in response to something a theist has posted
here?


AtlAxo

[Ted]

God eats shit, Andrew. It's in the Bible.

[hypatiab7]

No, we just show you the errors and weaknesses in your myth, Andyroo.
None of us wants to be a deity. Deities, even wisdom gods and goddesses
make the stupidest mistakes. And their believers make excuses for them.

[Jeanne Douglas]

This is how brain-damaging the childhood brainwashing was--they cannot make the connection. It's just impossible.




--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post

[Kit]

On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 6:11:56 PM UTC-4, Andrew wrote:

> "Cloud Hobbit" wrote in message news:ea58b2f6-3181-4ffe...@googlegroups.com...
>
> > Atlatl, there seems to be lot of stuff that took God by surprise.
> >
> > Very odd for an alleged omniscient being don't ya think?
> >
> > He should have known Adam would eat the Apple.
> > He shouldn't have been surprised that men became
> > wicked so he would have to kill them all.
> >
> > Puss poor deity IMO.
>
> I note that atheists like to talk a lot about ~God~
>

Actually, they don't. Every time *you* post, you bring the subject up.

> And they even surmise that they would be more
> holy than God if ''they'' were God, instead of the
> God who is God.

They would be more just, which really wouldn't be as hard as you might think.

-- Kit

[hypatiab7]

John Monkeyboi has always feared the truth. He needs a myth to wrap around himself, so he doesn't have to think for himself. And to support his silly primitive myth, he has to attack modern knowledge. The creationist websites should charge him he repeats their blarny so often.

[Atlatl Axolotl]

On Sunday, September 24, 2017 at 3:11:56 PM UTC-7, Andrew wrote:

> "Cloud Hobbit" wrote in message news:ea58b2f6-3181-4ffe...@googlegroups.com...
>
> > Atlatl, there seems to be lot of stuff that took God by surprise.
> >
> > Very odd for an alleged omniscient being don't ya think?
> >
> > He should have known Adam would eat the Apple.
> > He shouldn't have been surprised that men became
> > wicked so he would have to kill them all.
> >
> > Puss poor deity IMO.
>
> I note that atheists like to talk a lot about ~God~

.
.> And they even surmise that they would be more
.> holy than God if ''they'' were God, instead of the
.> God who is God.

Well, if I were God, I wouldn't curse all the world's
animals and all the humans yet to be born for what
one naive young couple did wrong. Particularly
if I had prevented that innocent pair from knowing
right from wrong in the first place.

And I most certainly would not drown all the toddlers
and babes in arms and babies in the womb because their
parents turned out as I had designed them.
After "regretting myself" that I had done so.

Atlatl Axoltl

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 21:47:23 -0500, "Jeanne Douglas"
<hlwd...@NOSPAMgoogle.com> wrote:

>
>On 23 Sep 2017 06:04 PM ,Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Atlatl, there seems to be lot of stuff that took God by surprise.
>>
>> Very odd for an alleged omniscient being don't ya think?
>>
>> He should have known Adam would eat the Apple.
>> He shouldn't have been surprised that men became wicked so he
>> would have to kill them all.
>>
>> Puss poor deity IMO.

Meow.

>This is how brain-damaging the childhood brainwashing was--they
>cannot make the connection. It's just impossible.

Christianity induces cognitive dissonance, which blocks out that sort
of thinking,

The fundies believe the Bible is literally true, in spite of the
internal and external contradiction.

The only way to achieve this, is to make whichever contradictory part
they're not looking at, at the moment, vanish as if it weren't there.

The stress of holding two opposite positions at the same time, makes
their brains hurt - and the pain is subconsciously resolved by making
one disappear.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrCPIrs90eg

It's the same mechanism that makes explanations which might cause
doubt, to vanish.

[Andrew]

"Atlatl Axolotl" wrote in message news:a68c8679-6863-412d...@googlegroups.com...
> Andrew wrote:

>> "Cloud Hobbit" wrote:
>>
>> > Atlatl, there seems to be lot of stuff that took God by surprise.
>> >
>> > Very odd for an alleged omniscient being don't ya think?
>> >
>> > He should have known Adam would eat the Apple.
>> > He shouldn't have been surprised that men became
>> > wicked so he would have to kill them all.
>> >
>> > Puss poor deity IMO.
>>
>> I note that atheists like to talk a lot about ~God~
> .
> .> And they even surmise that they would be more
> .> holy than God if ''they'' were God, instead of the
> .> God who is God.
>
> Well, if I were God, I wouldn't curse all the world's
> animals and all the humans yet to be born for what
> one naive young couple did wrong. Particularly
> if I had prevented that innocent pair from knowing
> right from wrong in the first place.
>
> And I most certainly would not drown all the toddlers
> and babes in arms and babies in the womb because their
> parents turned out as I had designed them. > After
> "regretting myself" that I had done so.
>
> Atlatl Axoltl

Folks, do you see here what I mean? They surmise that
they would be more holy than God if ''they'' were God,
instead of the God who actually is-->God.

[duke]

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 00:17:39 -0700 (PDT), Cloud Hobbit
<youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:

>The garden of Eden is a story. Nothing more.

That's like saying a hobbit is just a cloud.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[Atlatl Axolotl]

On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 3:03:04 AM UTC-7, Andrew wrote:
> "Atlatl Axolotl" wrote in message news:a68c8679-6863-412d...@googlegroups.com...
> > Andrew wrote:
> >> "Cloud Hobbit" wrote:
> >>
> >> > Atlatl, there seems to be lot of stuff that took God by surprise.
> >> >
> >> > Very odd for an alleged omniscient being don't ya think?
> >> >
> >> > He should have known Adam would eat the Apple.
> >> > He shouldn't have been surprised that men became
> >> > wicked so he would have to kill them all.
> >> >
> >> > Puss poor deity IMO.
> >>
> >> I note that atheists like to talk a lot about ~God~
> > .

,> > .> And they even surmise that they would be more
,> > .> holy than God if ''they'' were God, instead of the
,> > .> God who is God.
> >
,> > Well, if I were God, I wouldn't curse all the world's
,> > animals and all the humans yet to be born for what
,> > one naive young couple did wrong. Particularly
,> > if I had prevented that innocent pair from knowing
,> > right from wrong in the first place.
> >
,> > And I most certainly would not drown all the toddlers
,> > and babes in arms and babies in the womb because their
,> > parents turned out as I had designed them. > After
,> > "regretting myself" that I had done so.
> >
,> > Atlatl Axoltl
>
,> Folks, do you see here what I mean? They surmise that
,> they would be more holy than God if ''they'' were God,
,> instead of the God who actually is-->God.

Oooh, does this mean you are, at long last, finally willing
to discuss the two instances of your God's actions
I refer to, above? This could be most portentious, given that
you have shut up right smartly whenever I brought them up in the past ...
either refused to discuss them, or simply snipped out my entire
question.

Here's one such example:

In any event: yes, I am quite familiar with the third
chapter of Genesis. That's the one where the naive
young couple, who have been prevented by God from understanding
the difference between right and wrong -- kind of the
whole point there -- who cannot tell right from wrong
proceed to do something wrong, whereupon God inexplicably
throws a gigantic tantrum and, instead of gently reproaching
his hapless young children, curses them. Curses them to
pain, toil, suffering, and death. And for good measure, figures
that same curse should apply to every human being who
will ever be born. Not a one of those yet-to-be-borns
were there at the time, of course, and had nothing to
do with this minor slip-up, but then when you're a hot tempered
grudge bearing and capricious God, so what? curse them all too.

And hey: let's curse all the innocent animals as well, while we're at it.
Doesn't matter that not a single sparrow or sloth or marmoset
or raccoon had a thing to do with what the humans did -- curse them all
too. Curse them to become prey and predator, eater and eaten,
Was the lion lying down with the lamb back then? Well, the lion
will still lie down with the lamb -- lying down is the lion's
preferred position for devouring its fallen prey. Often ripping its
guts out of its still living body.

So you have no problem declaring a God who acted so monstrously
as "Holy"?

Tell us, how do you just even begin to justify such actions?
Not a rhetorical question -- please, do tell us.












Atlatl Axolotl

[Andrew]

"Atlatl Axolotl" wrote in message news:3a6c0957-eaa8-4249...@googlegroups.com...
> Andrew wrote:

Have you prayed about it yet?

If you would humbly ask Him, He will help you understand your question.

"If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally
and without reproach, and it will be given to him. But let him ask in faith,
with no doubting, for he who doubts is like a wave of the sea driven and
tossed by the wind. For let not that man suppose that he will receive any
thing from the Lord; he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways."
~ James 1:5-8

[Atlatl Axolotl]

.> Have you prayed about it yet?
>
.> If you would humbly ask Him, He will help you understand your question.

No, I'm asking you.

And I can only assume that, given your non-responsive attempt at
deflecting my question, that you too can see no way to justify these acts of God as
anything other than what they clearly seem: monstrously unforgivably evil.

But if you think there is some conceivable justification, then why don't you
pray to receive it, and then come back here and put me in my place.

After all, did not Jesus promise that such prayers will always be granted?

Ball's in your court. Still.



Atlatl

[Andrew]

"Atlatl Axolotl" wrote in message news:352605c1-dd1e-470b...@googlegroups.com...

I suggest you follow my advise if you sincerely want to know.

> And I can only assume that, given your non-responsive attempt at
> deflecting my question, that you too can see no way to justify these acts of God as
> anything other than what they clearly seem: monstrously unforgivably evil.

Wait a minute. You previously said that you didn't even believe it happened.

> But if you think there is some conceivable justification, then why don't you
> pray to receive it, and then come back here and put me in my place.
>
> After all, did not Jesus promise that such prayers will always be granted?

Then do it.

> Ball's in your court. Still.

It's your question.

>
> Atlatl
>
>
>>
>> "If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally
>> and without reproach, and it will be given to him. But let him ask in faith,
>> with no doubting, for he who doubts is like a wave of the sea driven and
>> tossed by the wind. For let not that man suppose that he will receive any
>> thing from the Lord; he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways."
>> ~ James 1:5-8

Just do it!

[Atlatl Axolotl]

.> > No, I'm asking you.
>
.> I suggest you follow my advise if you sincerely want to know.

And thus we see that you have no answer.

Heck, I'll put that even more sweepingly: ---> no answer.

>
.> > And I can only assume that, given your non-responsive attempt at
.> > deflecting my question, that you too can see no way to justify these acts of God as
.> > anything other than what they clearly seem: monstrously unforgivably evil.
>
.> Wait a minute. You previously said that you didn't even believe it happened.

Still don't. But you do, and in spite of it you're still pitching this God of
yours at us So I demand you explain how you can regard such monstrous actions
on the part of the God you shill for as anything other than evil, let alone "Holy".

And clearly, you can't find any way to.

Otherwise you'd be proclaiming it.

A2

>
> > But if you think there is some conceivable justification, then why don't you
> > pray to receive it, and then come back here and put me in my place.
> >
> > After all, did not Jesus promise that such prayers will always be granted?
>
> Then do it.
>
> > Ball's in your court. Still.
>
> It's your question


>
> >

[Ted]

Andrew:

That's beside the point, you fuckwitted moron. Either address it or
admit defeat.

>
>> But if you think there is some conceivable justification, then why
>> don't you
>> pray to receive it, and then come back here and put me in my place.
>>
>> After all, did not Jesus promise that such prayers will always be
>> granted?
>
> Then do it.
>
>> Ball's in your court. Still.
>
> It's your question.
>
>>
>> Atlatl
>>
>>
>>>
>>> "If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all
>>> liberally
>>> and without reproach, and it will be given to him. But let him ask in
>>> faith, with no doubting, for he who doubts is like a wave of the sea
>>> driven and tossed by the wind. For let not that man suppose that he
>>> will receive any
>>> thing from the Lord; he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his
>>> ways."
>>> ~ James 1:5-8
>
> Just do it!
>

So Andrew admits defeat (in his own dishonest way).

[Andrew]

"Atlatl Axolotl" wrote in message news:7e4fd321-b2b1-4a92...@googlegroups.com...

Yet you're the only one worked up by the question.

> But you do, and in spite of it you're still pitching
> this God of yours at us

I'm simply saying that the evidence clearly points
to a most awesome Creator, and it surely does.

> So I demand you explain how you can regard such
> monstrous actions on the part of the God you shill
> for as anything other than evil, let alone "Holy".

Perhaps professional psychiatric intervention could
help you.

You're worked up about a "God" you say does not
exist, and events you say that never happened either.

> And clearly, you can't find any way to.

That's why you need professional help.

[Ted]

Why not address his objections, Andrew?

[Atlatl Axolotl]

.> I'm simply saying

You're simply avoiding any and all discussions of
the way Genesis clearly portrays this God you keep
pitching at us.

If Genesis did not so clearly portray a monstrous
genocidal divinity, you could easily defend him
and point out my errors.

Instead you're trying every dance step you can
think of to avoid addressing my question.

As you will continue to do so. Because we both
know the God pictured there is indefensible.

> that the evidence clearly points
> to a most awesome Creator, and it surely does.
>
> > So I demand you explain how you can regard such
> > monstrous actions on the part of the God you shill
> > for as anything other than evil, let alone "Holy".
>
.> Perhaps professional psychiatric intervention could

.> help you.

I'm fairly certain that "sardonic amusement" doesn't
have an entry in the DSM-5.

So, now, what will your next avoidance be?


A2a

[Atlatl Axolotl]

Never has, never will.

I think the reason why is obvious.


AA

[Ted]

Of course, but there are Christians who would try. Andrew's just a
sniveling little coward.

[Yap Honghor]

He was working on your foolish presumption.....

>
> > But you do, and in spite of it you're still pitching
> > this God of yours at us
>
> I'm simply saying that the evidence clearly points
> to a most awesome Creator, and it surely does.

While you have nothing to show????

>
> > So I demand you explain how you can regard such
> > monstrous actions on the part of the God you shill
> > for as anything other than evil, let alone "Holy".
>
> Perhaps professional psychiatric intervention could
> help you.

That should be your priority to treat your mind!

>
> You're worked up about a "God" you say does not
> exist, and events you say that never happened either.

Worked up by your insanity!
Wouldn't you worked up by a street corner preacher?????

>
> > And clearly, you can't find any way to.
>
> That's why you need professional help.

You have many professionals in your evil organization, yet there is nothing from you to convince us ...

[Jeanne Douglas]

On 25 Sep 2017 06:54 PM ,Yap Honghor <hhya...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 5:21:56 AM UTC+8, Andrew wrote:
> > "Atlatl Axolotl" wrote in message news:7e4fd321-b2b1-4a92...@googlegroups.com...

> > I'm simply saying that the evidence clearly points
> > to a most awesome Creator, and it surely does.

You keep saying that but then you never give us the evidence so we have no choice but to assume you're either lying or you're completely delusional.

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 22:13:49 -0500, "Jeanne Douglas"
<hlwd...@NOSPAMgoogle.com> wrote:

>
>On 25 Sep 2017 06:54 PM ,Yap Honghor <hhya...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 5:21:56 AM UTC+8, Andrew wrote:
>> > "Atlatl Axolotl" wrote in message news:7e4fd321-b2b1-4a92...@googlegroups.com...
>
>> > I'm simply saying that the evidence clearly points
>> > to a most awesome Creator, and it surely does.
>
>
>You keep saying that but then you never give us the evidence so we
>have no choice but to assume you're either lying or you're completely
>delusional.

Both. But then his obsession with posting this unsolicited nonsense
many times a day for so many years, shows that he is seriously
mentally ill - whether or not he believes it.

[Andrew]

"Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message news:u5adnQnijsZwWFTE...@giganews.com...

>Yap Honghor wrote:
>> Andrew wrote:

>> > "Atlatl Axolotl" wrote:
>
>> > I'm simply saying that the evidence clearly points
>> > to a most awesome Creator, and it surely does.
>
> You keep saying that but then you never give us the
> evidence so we have no choice but to assume you're
> either lying or you're completely delusional.

The evidence for our most awesome Creator is all
over the place. In fact, the entire created Universe
stands as evidence. Therefore you have no excuse.

[Atlatl Axolotl]

I've looked at a ton of Hubble images. I've yet
to see one showing a "PROPERTY OF YHWH" stamped
on the universe.

Explain why your "evidence" is not equally evidence
for Brahma or Ahura Mazda or Anansi or Gitche Manitou
or Izanagi and Izanami:






I'm quite confident if you happened to be born in
one of those other cultures and indoctrinated into their
awesome Creator, you'd be here pitching that one.

For such gullibility you have no excuse.


aa

[TheRealMccoy]

On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 9:27:38 AM UTC-5, Atlatl Axolotl wrote:

> I've looked at a ton of Hubble images. I've yet
> to see one showing a "PROPERTY OF YHWH" stamped
> on the universe.

Again you demonstrate your massive error.
It is stamped on earth.
Focus on that before you start eyeing everything else ...

[Tim]

On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 10:30:00 AM UTC-4, TheRealMccoy wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 9:27:38 AM UTC-5, Atlatl Axolotl wrote:
>
> > I've looked at a ton of Hubble images. I've yet
> > to see one showing a "PROPERTY OF YHWH" stamped
> > on the universe.
>
> Again you demonstrate your massive error.
> It is stamped on earth.

Where?

> Focus on that before you start eyeing everything else ...

Show us where to focus, kook.

[Ted]

That's evidence for the FSM, not for any god.

[Smiler]

Yes, and the fact that he endowed the world with nourishing noodles is
evidence of his graciousness. May we continue to eat his delicious noodly
flesh in his honour.

Ramen.

--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Cloud Hobbit]

Pastafarian heaven or Christian heaven?

I know which one I choose.

That's right the one without the bloody history of genocide and oppression.

The one without a deity who sends bears to murder children.

The one without the demand for foreskin removal, although many conclude this why Jewish women insist on 10% off. It's what they are used to.

[Yap Honghor]

A non-thinking nature can do that.

However, since you believe in a thinking creator, show us why it has ignored all the suffering of the believers in natural disasters such as quakes and floods?

There is no excuse for your foolish behavior.

[Yap Honghor]

Nonsense....we don't see any stamp in Mars, Jupiter, Saturn????

[Ted]

Oh yeah. I never heard that one before.

[Ted]

Smiler <smi...@jo.king> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 19:34:38 +0000, Ted wrote:
>
>> "Andrew" <andrew.3...@usa.net> wrote:
>>> "Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message
>>> news:u5adnQnijsZwWFTE...@giganews.com...
>>>> Yap Honghor wrote:
>>>>> Andrew wrote:
>>>>>> "Atlatl Axolotl" wrote: > >> > I'm simply saying that the evidence
>>>>>> clearly points >> > to a most awesome Creator, and it surely does.
>>>>> You keep saying that but then you never give us the > evidence so we
>>>>> have no choice but to assume you're > either lying or you're
>>>>> completely delusional.
>>>
>>> The evidence for our most awesome Creator is all over the place. In
>>> fact,
>>> the entire created Universe stands as evidence. Therefore you have no
>>> excuse.
>>
>> That's evidence for the FSM, not for any god.
>
> Yes, and the fact that he endowed the world with nourishing noodles is
> evidence of his graciousness. May we continue to eat his delicious noodly
> flesh in his honour.
>
> Ramen.

Thank you, Pasta.

[Jeanne Douglas]

On 26 Sep 2017 07:27 AM ,Atlatl Axolotl <atlatlth...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 26, 2017 at 7:04:22 AM UTC-7, Andrew wrote:
> > "Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message news:u5adnQnijsZwWFTE...@giganews.com...
> > >Yap Honghor wrote:
> > >> Andrew wrote:
> > >> > "Atlatl Axolotl" wrote:
> > >
> > >> > I'm simply saying that the evidence clearly points
> > >> > to a most awesome Creator, and it surely does.
> > >
> > > You keep saying that but then you never give us the
> > > evidence so we have no choice but to assume you're
> > > either lying or you're completely delusional.
> >
> > The evidence for our most awesome Creator is all
> > over the place. In fact, the entire created Universe
> > stands as evidence. Therefore you have no excuse.

How, precisely, does "the entire created Universe" stand as evidence? How can a faulty premise like that lead to your conclusion?

> I've looked at a ton of Hubble images. I've yet
> to see one showing a "PROPERTY OF YHWH" stamped
> on the universe.
>
> Explain why your "evidence" is not equally evidence
> for Brahma or Ahura Mazda or Anansi or Gitche Manitou
> or Izanagi and Izanami:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm quite confident if you happened to be born in
> one of those other cultures and indoctrinated into their
> awesome Creator, you'd be here pitching that one.
>
> For such gullibility you have no excuse.
>
>
> aa

[duke]

See, I knew you were playing games when you elected to worship a fsm.

the dukester, American-American


*****
The Catholic Church is like a thick steak, a glass of red wine
and a good cigar.

G.K. Chesterton
*****

[duke]

On Wed, 27 Sep 2017 00:23:12 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smi...@jo.king> wrote:

>On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 19:34:38 +0000, Ted wrote:
>
>> "Andrew" <andrew.3...@usa.net> wrote:
>>> "Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message
>>> news:u5adnQnijsZwWFTE...@giganews.com...
>>>> Yap Honghor wrote:
>>>>> Andrew wrote:
>>>>>> "Atlatl Axolotl" wrote: > >> > I'm simply saying that the evidence
>>>>>> clearly points >> > to a most awesome Creator, and it surely does.
>>>>> You keep saying that but then you never give us the > evidence so we
>>>>> have no choice but to assume you're > either lying or you're
>>>>> completely delusional.
>>>
>>> The evidence for our most awesome Creator is all over the place. In
>>> fact,
>>> the entire created Universe stands as evidence. Therefore you have no
>>> excuse.
>>
>> That's evidence for the FSM, not for any god.
>
>Yes, and the fact that he endowed the world with nourishing noodles is
>evidence of his graciousness. May we continue to eat his delicious noodly
>flesh in his honour.

But if you eat you god, it's no more.

[Ted]

duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 19:34:38 GMT, Ted <stree...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Andrew" <andrew.3...@usa.net> wrote:
>>> "Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message news:u5adnQnijsZwWFTE...@giganews.com...
>>>> Yap Honghor wrote:
>>>>> Andrew wrote:
>>>>>> "Atlatl Axolotl" wrote: > >> > I'm simply saying that the evidence
>>>>>> clearly points >> > to a most awesome Creator, and it surely does.
>>>>> You keep saying that but then you never give us the > evidence so we
>>>>> have no choice but to assume you're > either lying or you're completely delusional.
>>>
>>> The evidence for our most awesome Creator is all over the place. In fact,
>>> the entire created Universe
>>> stands as evidence. Therefore you have no excuse.
>>
>> That's evidence for the FSM, not for any god.
>
> See, I knew you were playing games when you elected to worship a fsm.
>
> the dukester, American-American
>

The FSM is the Creator.

[duke]

Of what?

[Ted]

He created everything; the universe, the Earth, all the plants and animals,
etc. I took him 4 days, after which he rested for 3, thus setting an
example for us to follow.

[duke]

God almighty well stated that you shall not have any other gods before him.
You're on the path to damnation.

[Davej]

On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 5:03:04 AM UTC-5, Andrew wrote:
> [...]

> Folks, do you see here what I mean? They surmise that

> they would be more holy than God if ''they'' were God,

> instead of the God who actually is-->God.

Maybe it's because earth is filled with animals
eating each other alive or dying of parasites or
disease or hunger. This is a turd filled world, and
you're just another turd polishing your god idol.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-rBW_GSH_s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58C6uU3YBzo

[Davej]

On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 3:54:40 PM UTC-5, duke wrote:
> [...]

> God almighty well stated that you shall not have any other
> gods before him. You're on the path to damnation.

And you're a sick delusional f*ck with an imaginary friend.

[Ted]

Hank's gonna kick the shit out of you, Duke, and when he does, I'll be
counting my money and laughing. :)

[Don Martin]

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:12:59 -0700 (PDT), Davej <gal...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Monday, September 25, 2017 at 5:03:04 AM UTC-5, Andrew wrote:
>> [...]
>> Folks, do you see here what I mean? They surmise that
>> they would be more holy than God if ''they'' were God,
>> instead of the God who actually is-->God.
>
>Maybe it's because earth is filled with animals
>eating each other alive or dying of parasites or
>disease or hunger. This is a turd filled world, and
>you're just another turd polishing your god idol.

And that's his GOOD side . . .

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-rBW_GSH_s
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58C6uU3YBzo
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.

[Andrew]

"Davej" wrote in message news:2b06ece1-ecd5-4345...@googlegroups.com...

> Andrew wrote:
>> [...]
>> Folks, do you see here what I mean? They surmise that
>> they would be more holy than God if ''they'' were God,
>> instead of the God who actually is-->God.
>
> Maybe it's because earth is filled with animals
> eating each other alive or dying of parasites or
> disease or hunger.

So although you do not deny that He is, you cite such
things that you do not understand as being reason that
you think you would do better at being *God* if only
you were God, instead of the God who really is God.

Right?

Yes.

[Ted]

"Andrew" <andrew.3...@usa.net> wrote:
> "Davej" wrote in message news:2b06ece1-ecd5-4345...@googlegroups.com...
>> Andrew wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> Folks, do you see here what I mean? They surmise that
>>> they would be more holy than God if ''they'' were God, >> instead of
>>> the God who actually is-->God.
>>> Maybe it's because earth is filled with animals > eating each other
>>> alive or dying of parasites or > disease or hunger.
> So although you do not deny that He is, you cite such things that you do
> not understand as being reason that you think you would do better at being *God* if only
> you were God, instead of the God who really is God.
> Right?
> Yes.

God's a prick, Andrew. That isn't hard to figure out. It's much better just
to assume he's nonexistent.

[Marvin Sebourn]

An insightful and thoughtful observation, Ted, as I have become used to expect from you. My question concerns Andrew, or others of his ilk here. Are they a transitional type from lower beings approaching the underside of the Pastafarian Pantheon? Or were they created by a jealous being cast into eternal darkness and ignorance from the shining presence of the most high FSM?

I have (in Kindle of course) an ancient an anointed (could that be with Marinara sauce?) copy of what I suspect may be one of the most Holy works of the Pastafarians, the immortal "Encyclopedia of Pasta" by Oretta Zanini de Vita, but I am woefully ignorant of the practices and beliefs of the Pastafarians.

Where might someone interested in conversion find information? I checked all my Bart Ehrman works, especially "Lost Scriptures", but find nothing. I am confident, however, that he is secretly writing something in the Pastafarian flavor.

So please, what is the best introductory book on the tasty religion of Pastafarianism?

Grazie infinite, Ted,
Marvin

Marvin Sebourn
osugeo...@aol.com

[Ted]

I'm sure of it. :)

>
> So please, what is the best introductory book on the tasty religion of Pastafarianism?
>
> Grazie infinite, Ted,
> Marvin
>
> Marvin Sebourn
> osugeo...@aol.com

You're such a cool guy, Brother Marvin. Pasta Smiler has provided me with
much spiritual advice. He's an alumnus of a very prestigious seminolinary.
I'll ask him.

[Davej]

On Saturday, September 30, 2017 at 6:37:46 PM UTC-5, Andrew wrote:

> "Davej" wrote:
> > Andrew wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> Folks, do you see here what I mean? They surmise that
> >> they would be more holy than God if ''they'' were God,
> >> instead of the God who actually is-->God.
> >
> > Maybe it's because earth is filled with animals
> > eating each other alive or dying of parasites or
> > disease or hunger.
>
> So although you do not deny that He is, you cite such
> things that you do not understand as being reason that
> you think you would do better at being *God* if only
> you were God, instead of the God who really is God.

Wow, an idiot with a total lack of comprehension. A
jackass making excuses for an ongoing horror.

[duke]

Au contraire. God is not imaginary except to the one seeking eternal
damnation..

[Melzzzzz]

On 2017-10-01, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:15:26 -0700 (PDT), Davej <gal...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 3:54:40 PM UTC-5, duke wrote:
>>> [...]
>>> God almighty well stated that you shall not have any other
>>> gods before him. You're on the path to damnation.
>
>>And you're a sick delusional f*ck with an imaginary friend.
>
> Au contraire. God is not imaginary except to the one seeking eternal
> damnation..

God is imaginary alright. So is eternal damnation.


--
press any key to continue or any other to quit...

[duke]

Do let me know how bad it hurts.

[Smiler]

On Tue, 03 Oct 2017 13:07:55 -0500, duke wrote:

> On Sun, 1 Oct 2017 18:08:18 +0000 (UTC), Melzzzzz <Melz...@zzzzz.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On 2017-10-01, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:15:26 -0700 (PDT), Davej <gal...@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 3:54:40 PM UTC-5, duke wrote:
>>>>> [...]
>>>>> God almighty well stated that you shall not have any other gods
>>>>> before him. You're on the path to damnation.
>>>
>>>>And you're a sick delusional f*ck with an imaginary friend.
>>>
>>> Au contraire. God is not imaginary except to the one seeking eternal
>>> damnation..
>>
>>God is imaginary alright. So is eternal damnation.
>
> Do let me know how bad it hurts.

It hurts to see idiots like you fall for the god con.

> *****
> The Catholic Church is like a thick steak,
>

> G.K. Chesterton *****

I hear that Catholics like steaks, for burning people against.

[duke]

On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 01:31:02 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smi...@jo.king> wrote:

>On Tue, 03 Oct 2017 13:07:55 -0500, duke wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 1 Oct 2017 18:08:18 +0000 (UTC), Melzzzzz <Melz...@zzzzz.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On 2017-10-01, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:15:26 -0700 (PDT), Davej <gal...@hotmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 3:54:40 PM UTC-5, duke wrote:
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>> God almighty well stated that you shall not have any other gods
>>>>>> before him. You're on the path to damnation.
>>>>
>>>>>And you're a sick delusional f*ck with an imaginary friend.
>>>>
>>>> Au contraire. God is not imaginary except to the one seeking eternal
>>>> damnation..
>>>
>>>God is imaginary alright. So is eternal damnation.
>>
>> Do let me know how bad it hurts.
>
>It hurts to see idiots like you fall for the god con.

Yet you can't support the alternative.

the dukester, American-American


*****

[Tim]

On Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 4:04:58 PM UTC-4, duke wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 01:31:02 +0000 (UTC), Smiler <smi...@jo.king> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 03 Oct 2017 13:07:55 -0500, duke wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 1 Oct 2017 18:08:18 +0000 (UTC), Melzzzzz <Melz...@zzzzz.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>On 2017-10-01, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>>> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:15:26 -0700 (PDT), Davej <gal...@hotmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 3:54:40 PM UTC-5, duke wrote:
> >>>>>> [...]
> >>>>>> God almighty well stated that you shall not have any other gods
> >>>>>> before him. You're on the path to damnation.
> >>>>
> >>>>>And you're a sick delusional f*ck with an imaginary friend.
> >>>>
> >>>> Au contraire. God is not imaginary except to the one seeking eternal
> >>>> damnation..
> >>>
> >>>God is imaginary alright. So is eternal damnation.
> >>
> >> Do let me know how bad it hurts.
> >
> >It hurts to see idiots like you fall for the god con.
>
> Yet you can't support the alternative.

The alternative is that there are no gods. And that is supported by the fact that no theist has any evidence of their particular purported god. So you lose, myth boy.

[duke]

Oh, there are (g)ods everywhere. Anything consuming a shallow mind is a (g)od.
But there is only one almighty (G)od.

[Astero...@yahoo.com]

You poorly support evolution.

[Tim]

So you keep saying, but without a shred of evidence.

[Tim]

Show me where, or just admit that you're a liar and a fake Christian.

[Andrew]

"Tim" wrote in message news:0062d8c2-0c81-4646...@googlegroups.com...

> duke wrote:
<>
>> Oh, there are (g)ods everywhere. Anything consuming
a shallow mind is a (g)od. But there is only one almighty
> (G)od.
>
> So you keep saying, but without a shred of evidence.

You have a personal responsibility to search for it.

And when you do, you will find plenty of evidence.

[Tim]

On Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 12:10:02 PM UTC-4, Andrew wrote:
> "Tim" wrote in message news:0062d8c2-0c81-4646...@googlegroups.com...
> > duke wrote:
> <>
> >> Oh, there are (g)ods everywhere. Anything consuming
> a shallow mind is a (g)od. But there is only one almighty
> > (G)od.
> >
> > So you keep saying, but without a shred of evidence.
>
> You have a personal responsibility to search for it.

Only from your perspective. A perspective that assumes that which it was told and wants to believe.

From a rational perspective _you_ have a responsibility to provide the evidence that gives rise to your belief. Since you believe in the Christian god, you also have a responsibility to show the criteria and evidence by which you are capable of dismissing all other assumed gods.

>
> And when you do, you will find plenty of evidence.

Only if I assume your perspective, which assumes what it believes, and which contradicts non-Christian religion and its purported evidence.

I don't make such assumptions.

Your 'case' relies on a fallacious assumed authority, as do most religions. You keep mistaking your faith for evidence. That won't do.

[%]

yes it will

[Andrew]

Tim" wrote in message news:482b00dd-4b4a-43a4...@googlegroups.com...
> Andrew wrote:

>> "Tim" wrote:
>> > duke wrote:
>> <>
>> >> Oh, there are (g)ods everywhere. Anything consuming
>> a shallow mind is a (g)od. But there is only one almighty
>> > (G)od.
>> >
>> > So you keep saying, but without a shred of evidence.
>>
>> You have a personal responsibility to search for it.
>
> Only from your perspective.

From my perspective one needs to search for and find,-->truth.

Since you disagree, then you testify that you are not interested
in,-->truth.

[Yap Honghor]

Just like we use the electricity widely, we rarely support it.

[Smiler]

When are you going to take up your personal responsibility to search for
leprechauns?

[Smiler]

On Sat, 23 Sep 2017 12:19:46 -0700, AsteroidSeven wrote:

I hear that Jesus was there.
Somebody had to mow the grass!

[Tim]

On Sunday, October 8, 2017 at 8:22:12 PM UTC-4, Andrew wrote:
> Tim" wrote in message news:482b00dd-4b4a-43a4...@googlegroups.com...
> > Andrew wrote:
> >> "Tim" wrote:
> >> > duke wrote:
> >> <>
> >> >> Oh, there are (g)ods everywhere. Anything consuming
> >> a shallow mind is a (g)od. But there is only one almighty
> >> > (G)od.
> >> >
> >> > So you keep saying, but without a shred of evidence.
> >>
> >> You have a personal responsibility to search for it.
> >
> > Only from your perspective.
>
> From my perspective one needs to search for and find,-->truth.

But under your perspective faith equals evidence equals truth.

But that too is irrational.

>
> Since you disagree, then you testify that you are not interested
> in,-->truth.

Since you admit that is your perspective, you are not rational and the truth is whatever you assume. So you're right: I'm not interested in your irrational notion of truth.

Judging from you snipping what I said, it is apparent that you're not really interested in the truth.