Historical Question
Jo
Christianity?
Carol Lee Smith
> What was the name of that Pope who said it was ok to lie to further
> Christianity?
Pope Martin Luther
"What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of
the good and for the Christian church [...]a lie out of necessity, a
useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would
accept them."-- Martin Luther cited by his secretary, in a letter in Max
Lenz, ed., "Briefwechsel Landgraf Phillips des Grossmthigen von Hessen mit
Bucer", vol. I.
Al Klein
<hu...@csd.uwm.edu> posted in alt.atheism:
>Pope Martin Luther
One of the founding fathers of Christianity (one of those present at
the Nicean Council?) said that lying for Jesus was no sin. (I don't
remember either the exact quote or the author.)
--
Al - rukbat at optonline dot net
Zymurgist # 2
Adam Marczyk
news:Pine.OSF.3.96.102112...@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu...
Uh... I'm pretty sure Martin Luther was never Pope, being as he was the founder
of the Protestant Reformation and all. ;)
--
a.a. #2001
"Blasphemy is a victimless crime."
Director, EAC Black Monolith Division - "My God, it's full of stars"
Operative: EAC Electronic Warfare Division
EAC Subversive Fiction Division
http://www.ebonmusings.org ICQ: 8777843 PGP Key ID: 0x5C66F737
JdB
>What was the name of that Pope who said it was ok to lie to further
>Christianity?
>
I dunno, but a Jehoover's Witless at my door said the same thing.
Randy Day
[snip]
> One of the founding fathers of Christianity (one of those present at
> the Nicean Council?) said that lying for Jesus was no sin. (I don't
> remember either the exact quote or the author.)
Philippians 1:15-18 talks about it. Is that what you
were thinking of?
R
Atheist Chair,
EAC Disciplinary Committee
--
Yang
wrote:
>Al Klein wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>> One of the founding fathers of Christianity (one of those present at
>> the Nicean Council?) said that lying for Jesus was no sin. (I don't
>> remember either the exact quote or the author.)
>
>Philippians 1:15-18 talks about it. Is that what you
>were thinking of?
End justfies the means, by hook or by crook.
-----
"Close a bigger deal to hide the loss"
-Thomas White, in an interanl email memo to his staff at Enron Retail Division, responding to worsening cashflow in February 2001. White currently serves as the secretary of the US Army as appointed by George W. Bush.
http://www.salon.com/politics/feature/2002/08/29/white/index.html
Mike Ruskai
>What was the name of that Pope who said it was ok to lie to further
>Christianity?
Probably all of them, secretly. But the only public comment to that end
I'm aware of was from Martin Luther, not a pope.
--
- Mike
Remove 'spambegone.net' and reverse to send e-mail.
dgillesp
Jo wrote:
>
> What was the name of that Pope who said it was ok to lie to further
> Christianity?
It's such a comfort to know that atheists never lie or stretch the truth
in order to attack religion and promote atheism. :-(
Denny
seaotter
"dgillesp" <dgil...@swva.net> wrote in message
news:3DE19CC8...@swva.net...
> It's such a comfort to know that atheists never lie or stretch the truth
> in order to attack religion and promote atheism. :-(
>
> Denny
How have atheists promoted atheism? I've never received a letter, seen an
advertisement, or had a knock on the door from an atheist. I can't say the
same for theism.
seaotter
Al Klein
>Al Klein wrote:
>[snip]
>> One of the founding fathers of Christianity (one of those present at
>> the Nicean Council?) said that lying for Jesus was no sin. (I don't
>> remember either the exact quote or the author.)
>Philippians 1:15-18 talks about it. Is that what you
>were thinking of?
No, the one I'm thinking of said "Lying for Jesus is no sin", or
something VERY close to that.
Adam Marczyk
news:ars763$2d1$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net...
Why, we post honest questions in our own newsgroup, of course. Don't you see how
this is promoting atheism and attacking those poor victimized religious folk
whom we force to come here and read our messages?
J. Flachs
wrote:
Denny, funny enough you sayest it.
Most atheists do indeed not lie, or stretch the truth. At least when
discussing atheism. There is absolutely no need for it.
Theists, on the other hand have divine dispensation (so they claim) to
lie in order to promote the faith.
--
Jos Flachs
Bangkok, Thailand.
And the LORD was with Judah; and he drove out the inhabitants of the mountain;
but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had......
chariots of iron...!!! (Judges 1:19)
Will
Why would it ever be necessary for an Atheist to lie about religion?
Were the Roman persecutions of Christians a myth? Were the subsequent
Christian persecutions of heretics a myth? Were the Crusades a myth?
Was the 30 years' war a myth? Was the inquisition a myth? Is it a lie
that all over Europe for hundreds of years women were hunted, hanged
and burned as witches? Didn't German Christians helped by Lithuanian,
Latvian and Ukrainian Christians participate in the wanton slaughter
of millions of innocent Jews? Were those great paragons of
Christianity, Jim Bakker and his loathsome mate Tammy Faye
fabrications of the evil Atheist mind? Are the current scandals
involving pedophile priests lies and exaggerations?
History is so rich with examples of the wars, persecutions, and
suffering caused by religious folk that only a fool would have to lie
about it.
Will
Jeff Dee
> What was the name of that Pope who said it was ok to lie to further
> Christianity?
Eusebius? I don't have a direct quote, but he's a prime suspect for the
forged Jesus reference in Josephus. He's known to have doctored the
records of Constantine's life to make then fit the claims of
Christianity, so clearly he felt that fibbing for Jesus was okay.
-Jeff Dee
--
"It is as morally bad not to care whether a thing is true
or not, so long as it makes you feel good, as it is not to
care how you got your money as long as you have got it."
-Edmund Way Teale, "Circle of the Seasons", 1950
unig...@io.com * http://www.io.com/unigames/index.html
* * * AA #1355 - Knight of the BAAWA since 10/26/99 * * *
duke32
Oh, it's the only way atheists can promote their mythical fable that
there is no Almighty God.
duke, American-American
*****
2Cor 5:10 - For we must all appear before the
judgment seat of Christ, that each one may
receive what is due him for the things done
while in the body, whether good or bad.
*****
Dave
"Jo" <h...@fh.com> wrote in message news:arr271$b08$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
> What was the name of that Pope who said it was ok to lie to further
> Christianity?
His name was http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Hollow/4492/
Seriously, I've seen that quote before, too, but I can't remember which pope
said it.
--
Dave
a.a. #2049 apatriot #17 || AIM screen name: Non Homogenized
EAC Director of R.A.M.(classified) || an Official EAC Corruptor of Innocents
Satan, according to Bluskie || FYK || UDP for WebTV!
"In the unlikely event of losing Pascal's Wager, I intend to saunter in to
Judgement Day with a bookshelf full of grievances, a flaming sword of my own
devising, and a serious attitude problem." -Rick Moen
Adam Marczyk
news:eoo4uu8ub114h1450...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 24 Nov 2002 22:45:12 -0500, dgillesp <dgil...@swva.net>
> wrote:
>
>
> >> What was the name of that Pope who said it was ok to lie to further
> >> Christianity?
>
> >It's such a comfort to know that atheists never lie or stretch the truth
> >in order to attack religion and promote atheism. :-(
> >Denny
>
> Oh, it's the only way atheists can promote their mythical fable that
> there is no Almighty God.
Hey, godbot, who asked you? Don't you have a herd you should go back to so you
can bleat along with them?
Roger Pearse
> Jo wrote:
>
> > What was the name of that Pope who said it was ok to lie to further
> > Christianity?
You're thinking of a 'quote' attributed to Leo X:
"How well we know what a profitable superstition this fable of Christ
has been for us."
However it's bogus, and is first recorded in an anti-Catholic pamphlet
by John Bale almost a century after he died. The apologist
J.P.Holding has done some useful work collecting material about this
one, <http://www.tektonics.org/popeleox.html>. It's actually pretty
out of character as well.
The last time I saw this, it was being attributed to the Borgia pope,
Alexander VI who is a much better candidate. However the reference
given was to the Diary of John Burchard, his master of ceremonies, for
the year 1500, and I went and read through this (in Latin -- but the
word 'Christ' is easy enough to search for) looking for it. It wasn't
there.
Amusingly the word 'Christ' only actually appears in the first 100
pages a handful of times, always in the context of an official
announcement! Which is also somewhat revealing... But Alex VI. was a
scumbag. Every institution gets these from time to time, I suppose.
> Eusebius? I don't have a direct quote, but he's a prime suspect for the
> forged Jesus reference in Josephus. He's known to have doctored the
> records of Constantine's life to make then fit the claims of
> Christianity, so clearly he felt that fibbing for Jesus was okay.
Again this is a myth, although I know you give it in good faith.
Unlike a century ago, most scholars today consider that the
Testimonium Flavianum is genuine but corrupt (see Dr Alice Whealey at
the academic Josephus site for a discussion, not of the TF but of how
and why views have changed -- josephus.yorku.ca, or the recent article
by DR J. Carleton Paget in the Journal of Theological Studies 52
(2000)), so this view is very hard to maintain today. Apart from
hate-writers, the only scholars to advance the view that *Eusebius*
wrote it were the late Dr Solomon Zeitlin (a Jew) and it has recently
been repeated by Dr Ken Olsen (an atheist), without finding acceptance
in either case (this from Paget).
The comment about doctoring the records of the life of Constantine is
also a myth. He wrote a panegryric of Constantine, known as the Life
of Constantine. It attracted a lot of venom in the 1840's-50's,
because agitators were attempting to overthrow the Austrian empire
(formerly the Holy Roman Empire), and this owed its ideological
legitimacy to the idea of 'Christian empire', which attacking Eusebius
allowed the violent people to undermine. A recent English translation
by Dr Averil Cameron and Dr. Stuart Hall (Oxford University Press,
1994-ish?) devotes a couple of pages on this, and dismisses the
attacks as 'prejudice'.
I hope that's useful. These funny ideas do the rounds, but they're
very seldom checked! Shout if I've not been clear about where this
info comes from, if you want to go and look yourself.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
duke32
<ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>duke32 <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:eoo4uu8ub114h1450...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 24 Nov 2002 22:45:12 -0500, dgillesp <dgil...@swva.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >> What was the name of that Pope who said it was ok to lie to further
>> >> Christianity?
>>
>> >It's such a comfort to know that atheists never lie or stretch the truth
>> >in order to attack religion and promote atheism. :-(
>> >Denny
>>
>> Oh, it's the only way atheists can promote their mythical fable that
>> there is no Almighty God.
>
>Hey, godbot, who asked you? Don't you have a herd you should go back to so you
>can bleat along with them?
Oh, I have much too much fun correcting you loony atheists about the
mythical fable that there is no Almighty God.
duke, American-American
Adam Marczyk
> On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 18:37:43 -0500, "Adam Marczyk"
> <ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>
> >duke32 <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> >news:eoo4uu8ub114h1450...@4ax.com...
> >> On Sun, 24 Nov 2002 22:45:12 -0500, dgillesp <dgil...@swva.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >> What was the name of that Pope who said it was ok to lie to further
> >> >> Christianity?
> >>
> >> >It's such a comfort to know that atheists never lie or stretch the truth
> >> >in order to attack religion and promote atheism. :-(
> >> >Denny
> >>
> >> Oh, it's the only way atheists can promote their mythical fable that
> >> there is no Almighty God.
> >
> >Hey, godbot, who asked you? Don't you have a herd you should go back to so
you
> >can bleat along with them?
>
> Oh, I have much too much fun correcting you loony atheists about the
> mythical fable that there is no Almighty God.
Aw, isn't that cute; the little godbot thinks he's going to convert us. Tell us,
bleater, how many souls have you saved on a.a. so far? Or did you just mean you
were going to hang around and occasionally post ignorant and self-righteous
messages, to give us a chuckle and serve as a living reminder of how ridiculous
Christianity is? Do you hope you'll win persecution points with your mythical
sky-fairy that way?
Incidentally, you should be interested in knowing that a person very like you
was the one who ultimately (though unintentionally) convinced me to become an
atheist. So keep up the preaching, I say, by all means. It's people like you who
do more to further our cause than anything any of us could say ourselves.
FatherFAK
enough to enlighten me in alt.atheism with this:
> duke32 <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:3cc7uugf8t3u4lp0f...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 18:37:43 -0500, "Adam Marczyk"
>> <ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>>
>>> duke32 <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>> news:eoo4uu8ub114h1450...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sun, 24 Nov 2002 22:45:12 -0500, dgillesp <dgil...@swva.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
<snip>
> Incidentally, you should be interested in knowing that a person very like you
> was the one who ultimately (though unintentionally) convinced me to become an
> atheist. So keep up the preaching, I say, by all means. It's people like you
> who
> do more to further our cause than anything any of us could say ourselves.
I had no single individual who did that for me, but I have people who remind
me, almost daily, of how lucky I am to think for myself.
--
Fundamentalism means never having to say "I´m wrong."
(thank you, Norwegian Heathen)
duke32
<ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>> Oh, I have much too much fun correcting you loony atheists about the
>> mythical fable that there is no Almighty God.
>Aw, isn't that cute; the little godbot thinks he's going to convert us. Tell us,
>bleater, how many souls have you saved on a.a.
Could be millions.
>so far? Or did you just mean you
>were going to hang around and occasionally post ignorant and self-righteous
>messages, to give us a chuckle and serve as a living reminder of how ridiculous
>Christianity is? Do you hope you'll win persecution points with your mythical
>sky-fairy that way?
Your chuckle is your funeral.
>Incidentally, you should be interested in knowing that a person very like you
>was the one who ultimately (though unintentionally) convinced me to become an
>atheist. So keep up the preaching, I say, by all means. It's people like you who
>do more to further our cause than anything any of us could say ourselves.
Further your cause? Like what?
Give us all a laugh and answer that one.
duke32
<kins...@bell.south.net> wrote:
>I had no single individual who did that for me, but I have people who remind
>me, almost daily, of how lucky I am to think for myself.
Cool, and what does "thinking for yourself" do for you?
Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
no Almighty God do for you?
Adam Marczyk
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 15:58:38 -0500, "Adam Marczyk"
> <ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>
> >> Oh, I have much too much fun correcting you loony atheists about the
> >> mythical fable that there is no Almighty God.
>
> >Aw, isn't that cute; the little godbot thinks he's going to convert us. Tell
us,
> >bleater, how many souls have you saved on a.a.
>
> Could be millions.
*chuckle* You just keep telling yourself that, little sheep. Hey, how many
people out there have been converted by this guy? Speak up! Raise your voices!
> >so far? Or did you just mean you
> >were going to hang around and occasionally post ignorant and self-righteous
> >messages, to give us a chuckle and serve as a living reminder of how
ridiculous
> >Christianity is? Do you hope you'll win persecution points with your mythical
> >sky-fairy that way?
>
> Your chuckle is your funeral.
Right back at you, pal. Isn't it sad that *I'm* the one who's really living -
who's laughing, who's loving, who's learning, who's getting the best out of
life - while *you're* the one cringing and scraping, groveling in the dirt,
wasting the only life you'll ever have in mindless servitude to an imaginary
cosmic dictator? And the saddest part is, you'll never even realize how wrong
you were. You'll die, and then... nothing. The end of consciousness. The flame
will be blown out. You'll cease to be, never having found out that your fairy
tale was the fiction it was all along. I suppose it's a small mercy.
> >Incidentally, you should be interested in knowing that a person very like you
> >was the one who ultimately (though unintentionally) convinced me to become an
> >atheist. So keep up the preaching, I say, by all means. It's people like you
who
> >do more to further our cause than anything any of us could say ourselves.
>
> Further your cause? Like what?
>
> Give us all a laugh and answer that one.
I understand you have a hard time reading things that aren't the Bible, so I'll
say it again, more slowly, and with small words so you can comprehend. I *used*
to believe in God. It was someone almost exactly like you who convinced me
(unintentionally) that God-belief was so irrational, so insane, so dangerous, so
destructive to a thinking mind that I could no longer in good conscience hold
onto it myself. In short, it was someone almost exactly like you who converted
me from a theist into an atheist. (And I know I'm not the only one who this has
happened to.) That's what I mean when I say that people like you are simply
furthering the atheist cause. Not only are you embarrassing yourself by showing
off your arrogance and ignorance for everyone to see, you're actually creating
more of us. So by all means, keep it up. See what it gets you in the end.
Adam Marczyk
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 16:20:10 -0600, FatherFAK
> <kins...@bell.south.net> wrote:
>
>
> >I had no single individual who did that for me, but I have people who remind
> >me, almost daily, of how lucky I am to think for myself.
>
> Cool, and what does "thinking for yourself" do for you?
Are you curious? Wouldn't you just love to be able to find out for yourself? You
can - if you have the courage and the honesty.
> Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
> no Almighty God do for you?
An enlightened life of wonder and knowledge, free of paralyzing superstition,
guilt, and shame - for one thing. And there are more of them here:
http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/world.html
And incidentally, it's not a "fable," it's the honest-to-goodness truth. You
should try it sometime. You might even like it.
Clothaire
<ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>duke32 <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:ekiauukne3pedjl9g...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 16:20:10 -0600, FatherFAK
>> <kins...@bell.south.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >I had no single individual who did that for me, but I have people who remind
>> >me, almost daily, of how lucky I am to think for myself.
>>
>> Cool, and what does "thinking for yourself" do for you?
>
>Are you curious? Wouldn't you just love to be able to find out for yourself? You
>can - if you have the courage and the honesty.
>
>> Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
Never having to defend a Christian pedophile church is an advantage.
>> no Almighty God do for you?
>
>An enlightened life of wonder and knowledge, free of paralyzing superstition,
>guilt, and shame - for one thing. And there are more of them here:
>
>http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/world.html
>
>And incidentally, it's not a "fable," it's the honest-to-goodness truth. You
>should try it sometime. You might even like it.
Clothaire #1392
"An honest God's the noblest work of man."
-- Robert G. Ingersoll
"The Christian pedophile church is the most evil work of man."
--Clothaire
FatherFAK
enlighten me in alt.atheism with this:
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 16:20:10 -0600, FatherFAK
> <kins...@bell.south.net> wrote:
>
>
>> I had no single individual who did that for me, but I have people who remind
>> me, almost daily, of how lucky I am to think for myself.
>
> Cool, and what does "thinking for yourself" do for you?
>
> Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
> no Almighty God do for you?
The knowledge that my mind is free and unfettered by the confusion,
contradiction and hypocrisy of organized religion.
--
Still sitting in the pumpkin patch, Linus?
stoney
<arr271$b08$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk> wrote in alt.atheism;
>What was the name of that Pope who said it was ok to lie to further
>Christianity?
Biblegateway
1 Corinthians 6 (KJV)
9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom
of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor
adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor
extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
/end quote
Lying is sanctioned here.
There's another one that flat says lying is sanctioned as long as it
if for the 'greater glory of imaginary buddy.' Saul/Paul wrote it,
iirc.
--
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
stoney
Message ID: <3DE19CC8...@swva.net> wrote in alt.atheism;
Objective supporting evidence Jo is lying rather than is
misremembering something or is checking on something someone told
him/her?
stoney
Message ID: <eoo4uu8ub114h1450...@4ax.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
>On Sun, 24 Nov 2002 22:45:12 -0500, dgillesp <dgil...@swva.net>
>wrote:
>
>
>>> What was the name of that Pope who said it was ok to lie to further
>>> Christianity?
>
>>It's such a comfort to know that atheists never lie or stretch the truth
>>in order to attack religion and promote atheism. :-(
>>Denny
>
>Oh, it's the only way atheists can promote their mythical fable that
>there is no Almighty God.
Piss off lying fuckwit.
stoney
Pearse), Message ID:
<3a88eeea.02112...@posting.google.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
(snip)
>Unlike a century ago, most scholars today consider that the
>Testimonium Flavianum is genuine but corrupt
A quick explaination of 'genuine but corrupt' would be?
(snip)
Roger Pearse
> On 26 Nov 2002 06:53:35 -0800, roger_...@yahoo.co.uk (Roger
> Pearse), Message ID:
> <3a88eeea.02112...@posting.google.com> wrote in
> alt.atheism;
>
> (snip)
>
> >Unlike a century ago, most scholars today consider that the
> >Testimonium Flavianum is genuine but corrupt
>
> A quick explaination of 'genuine but corrupt' would be?
The passage would be 'not genuine' if it was inserted by someone later
than Josephus -- an interpolation of all or part. Consensus is that
there isn't enough evidence to say this.
'Corrupt' means that it hasn't reached us in the form it left the
author's hand, because of the accidents of transmission. In a sense
every text is corrupt, because every text has to be copied and have
minor spelling and other errors, but this isn't what is meant here.
Rather that the text has suffered significant damage, and perhaps
well-meant but erroneous 'correction'.
Alice Whealey, in her analysis of the new manuscript witnesses
(Syriac, Arabic) suggests that these demonstrate a normal text
corruption has happened. Specifically, the sentence 'He was the
Christ' reads in these 'He was believed to be the Christ'. It is easy
to see that the first is derived from the second the accident of the
first verb being lost -- skipped over, or in the margin of a damaged
copy -- and the infinitive 'corrected' to the indicative by a scribe
with no other copy before him who could see that a sentence reading,
'To be the Christ' is not grammatical. This is evidence of
straightforward damage to the transmitted text, and involves no higher
considerations other than simple text-critical ones. (Not everyone
agrees with Whealey that this is necessarily the only explanation
here, btw).
On this basis there is (a) clear evidence of damage/corruption and (b)
no real evidence that the whole thing is a bogus insertion. So the
general consensus is that Josephus did write something or other about
Jesus, probably more or less along the lines indicated, but that
without introducing any speculative motive or deciding which bits seem
'probable' -- inevitably subjective -- it can still be seen that at
least one part is corrupt in the Greek text as we have it.
Whether or not you agree with that view (and minorities at either end
of the spectrum do still hold out for either 'not genuine, whether
corrupt or not' or 'genuine and not corrupt'), I hope that slightly
condensed explanation makes sense.
Keenan Clay Wilkie
>On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 18:37:43 -0500, "Adam Marczyk"
><ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>>duke32 <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>news:eoo4uu8ub114h1450...@4ax.com...
>>> On Sun, 24 Nov 2002 22:45:12 -0500, dgillesp <dgil...@swva.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> >> What was the name of that Pope who said it was ok to lie to further
>>> >> Christianity?
>>>
>>> >It's such a comfort to know that atheists never lie or stretch the truth
>>> >in order to attack religion and promote atheism. :-(
>>> >Denny
>>>
>>> Oh, it's the only way atheists can promote their mythical fable that
>>> there is no Almighty God.
>>
>>Hey, godbot, who asked you? Don't you have a herd you should go back to so you
>>can bleat along with them?
>Oh, I have much too much fun correcting you loony atheists about the
>mythical fable that there is no Almighty God.
You're an arrogant prick. Your "Almighty God" is just one of thousands of
human-invented deities in which we lack belief. Your "Almighty God" is no
more real to us than Allah, Krsna or Zeus. If you've got an argument that
we should believe in your particular version of God then the burden of
proof is on you to demonstrate that this God is somehow more real than all
of the other fictional entities worshipped throughout human history.
--
d a r k s t a r @ i g l o u . c o m | atheist #29
"You're a group of Christian-based, conservative organizations with
several million dollars to spend. Do you: feed the hungry? Clothe the
poor? Don't be so naieve! You blow the millions on a series of slickly-
worded, logic-bending ads espousing a widely-discredited theory that one
can be 'cured' of homosexuality through counseling and prayer."
-- MAD Magazine #337, p. 32
Keenan Clay Wilkie
>On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 16:20:10 -0600, FatherFAK
><kins...@bell.south.net> wrote:
>>I had no single individual who did that for me, but I have people who remind
>>me, almost daily, of how lucky I am to think for myself.
>Cool, and what does "thinking for yourself" do for you?
>Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
>no Almighty God do for you?
"Almighty God" is your assertion much like Allah is the assertion of
Muslims and Krsna is the assertion of Hindus. Atheists simply don't
accept your assertion. That you cannot grasp this concept only shows that
you shouldn't be here.
stoney
<uuaug5o...@corp.supernews.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
>duke32 <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:ekiauukne3pedjl9g...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 16:20:10 -0600, FatherFAK
>> <kins...@bell.south.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >I had no single individual who did that for me, but I have people who remind
>> >me, almost daily, of how lucky I am to think for myself.
>>
>> Cool, and what does "thinking for yourself" do for you?
>
>Are you curious? Wouldn't you just love to be able to find out for yourself? You
>can - if you have the courage and the honesty.
Dukeshit has neither. Nor has he a speck of intelligence.
stoney
Message ID: <cgiauuocmokbelr01...@4ax.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
>On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 15:58:38 -0500, "Adam Marczyk"
><ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>
>>> Oh, I have much too much fun correcting you loony atheists about the
>>> mythical fable that there is no Almighty God.
>
>>Aw, isn't that cute; the little godbot thinks he's going to convert us. Tell us,
>>bleater, how many souls have you saved on a.a.
>
>Could be millions.
>
>>so far? Or did you just mean you
>>were going to hang around and occasionally post ignorant and self-righteous
>>messages, to give us a chuckle and serve as a living reminder of how ridiculous
>>Christianity is? Do you hope you'll win persecution points with your mythical
>>sky-fairy that way?
>
>Your chuckle is your funeral.
Damned moron. /me puts a cover over the parrot cage.
stoney
It does. Thank you for the explaination.
>All the best,
>
>Roger Pearse
--
Roger Pearse
> >Whether or not you agree with that view (and minorities at either end
> >of the spectrum do still hold out for either 'not genuine, whether
> >corrupt or not' or 'genuine and not corrupt'), I hope that slightly
> >condensed explanation makes sense.
>
> It does. Thank you for the explaination.
You're very welcome.
Mark Nutter
> Oh, it's the only way atheists can promote their mythical fable that
> there is no Almighty God.
Hey, this is a new one, or new for me at least. Who are the main
characters in this fable and what exactly is the plot? Has it been
published, and if so do you have the ISBN number? It sounds like an
interesting read.
m
duke32
<ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>> Cool, and what does "thinking for yourself" do for you?
>Are you curious? Wouldn't you just love to be able to find out for yourself? You
>can - if you have the courage and the honesty.
Nope - not curious. It a dead end street. God Almighty exists -
period.
>> Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
>> no Almighty God do for you?
>An enlightened life of wonder and knowledge, free of paralyzing superstition,
>guilt, and shame - for one thing. And there are more of them here:
You an atheist - an "enlightened life" - no kidding!
Believe me, my enlightened anticipations are without limit due to my
love of God and an eternity of love with Him.
Your future is limited to, what, plant food?
>http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/world.html
>And incidentally, it's not a "fable," it's the honest-to-goodness truth. You
>should try it sometime. You might even like it.
There is neither proof nor evidence to support the non-existance of
Alimghty God - it is the true atheist's unfounded mythical fable.
I would never be so stupid as to follow that ill-gotten path.
Billy Goat
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 16:20:10 -0600, FatherFAK
> <kins...@bell.south.net> wrote:
>
>
> >I had no single individual who did that for me, but I have people who remind
> >me, almost daily, of how lucky I am to think for myself.
>
> Cool, and what does "thinking for yourself" do for you?
>
> Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
> no Almighty God do for you?
Every since I abandoned Christianity, I no longer hate myself.
Mark 14:26
"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife,
and children,and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he
cannot be my disciple."
The Bible states that art is a sin, but now I can draw and sculpt
without feeling guilty about it.
Exodus 20:4
"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of
any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or
that is in the wter under the earth."
Tell me, why do you want us to hate ourselves?
--Billy
duke32
<kins...@bell.south.net> wrote:
>> Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
>> no Almighty God do for you?
>The knowledge that my mind is free and unfettered by the confusion,
>contradiction and hypocrisy of organized religion.
The end of the road - plant food.
duke32
Wilkie) wrote:
>>Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
>>no Almighty God do for you?
>"Almighty God" is your assertion much like Allah is the assertion of
>Muslims and Krsna is the assertion of Hindus.
Yeah, but my guy died on a cross, was buried for 3 days, rose from the
dead, and walked and talked and ate and drank with 500+ of his friends
for 40 days before ascending to the God the Father.
Neither Allah nor Krsna has been seen again.
> Atheists simply don't accept your assertion.
Your funeral.
> That you cannot grasp this concept only shows that
>you shouldn't be here.
I can grasp it, but it would be more of a gasp.
duke32
<ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>> >Aw, isn't that cute; the little godbot thinks he's going to convert us. Tell
>us,
>> >bleater, how many souls have you saved on a.a.
>> Could be millions.
>*chuckle* You just keep telling yourself that, little sheep. Hey, how many
>people out there have been converted by this guy? Speak up! Raise your voices!
*chuckle* - Hopefully for their souls they are at least htinking about
it.
What can atheism offer - nothing?
What can Christianity offer - an eternity of happiness and love of
God!!!
>> Your chuckle is your funeral.
>Right back at you, pal. Isn't it sad that *I'm* the one who's really living -
>who's laughing, who's loving, who's learning, who's getting the best out of
>life
Me.
> while *you're* the one cringing and scraping, groveling in the dirt,
>wasting the only life you'll ever have in mindless servitude to an imaginary
>cosmic dictator?
I'm all smiles. I have a future, you don't.
>nd the saddest part is, you'll never even realize how wrong
>you were.
Gee, with the flames of hell tickling the cheeks of your butt, I trust
you will remember your words.
>You'll die, and then... nothing.
My guy rose from the dead and said we could follow him.
>The end of consciousness. The flame
>will be blown out. You'll cease to be, never having found out that your fairy
>tale was the fiction it was all along. I suppose it's a small mercy.
My soul will be glad.
>> Give us all a laugh and answer that one.
>I understand you have a hard time reading things that aren't the Bible, so I'll
>say it again, more slowly, and with small words so you can comprehend. I *used*
>to believe in God.
Let me say it quietly - that does not negate his existance.
>It was someone almost exactly like you who convinced me
>(unintentionally) that God-belief was so irrational, so insane, so dangerous, so
>destructive to a thinking mind that I could no longer in good conscience hold
>onto it myself.
Name some things. You're a real joker.
>In short, it was someone almost exactly like you who converted
>me from a theist into an atheist. (And I know I'm not the only one who this has
>happened to.) That's what I mean when I say that people like you are simply
>furthering the atheist cause. Not only are you embarrassing yourself by showing
>off your arrogance and ignorance for everyone to see, you're actually creating
>more of us. So by all means, keep it up. See what it gets you in the end.
I have nothing to lose unless you convince me you are right - you,
otoh, have already lost it all.
duke32
>>Your chuckle is your funeral.
>Damned moron. /me puts a cover over the parrot cage.
Bad move - your parrot could have helped you.
duke32
Wilkie) wrote:
>>Oh, I have much too much fun correcting you loony atheists about the
>>mythical fable that there is no Almighty God.
>You're an arrogant prick.
For trying to help you see the error of your ways?
> Your "Almighty God" is just one of thousands of
>human-invented deities in which we lack belief.
There is only one Almighty God. All the rest are false.
> Your "Almighty God" is no
>more real to us than Allah, Krsna or Zeus.
At least you do understand the Krsna, and Zeus are false gods.
Allah is the Muslim word for Almighty God - yes, the one and the same
as for the Christian and the Jew Almighty God.
> If you've got an argument that
>we should believe in your particular version of God then the burden of
>proof is on you to demonstrate that this God is somehow more real than all
>of the other fictional entities worshipped throughout human history.
What a loser!
I owe you proof of nothing - it's your silly butt that you youself are
throwing away.
Fred Stone
>On 28 Nov 2002 15:13:40 -0500, dark...@shell1.iglou.com (Keenan Clay
>Wilkie) wrote:
>
>
>
>>>Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
>>>no Almighty God do for you?
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>"Almighty God" is your assertion much like Allah is the assertion of
>>Muslims and Krsna is the assertion of Hindus.
>>
>>
>
>Yeah, but my guy died on a cross, was buried for 3 days, rose from the
>dead, and walked and talked and ate and drank with 500+ of his friends
>for 40 days before ascending to the God the Father.
>
Big deal. I can *lie* too.
--
Fred Stone
aa # 1369
John Hattan
>On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 23:36:05 -0600, FatherFAK
><kins...@bell.south.net> wrote:
>
>>> Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
>>> no Almighty God do for you?
>
>>The knowledge that my mind is free and unfettered by the confusion,
>>contradiction and hypocrisy of organized religion.
>
>The end of the road - plant food.
Is this version 1.1 of your repeated-to-death "it's your funeral"
argument?
---
John Hattan Grand High UberPope - First Church of Shatnerology
jo...@thecodezone.com http://www.shatnerology.com
John Hattan
>On 28 Nov 2002 15:13:40 -0500, dark...@shell1.iglou.com (Keenan Clay
>Wilkie) wrote:
>
>>>Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
>>>no Almighty God do for you?
>
>>"Almighty God" is your assertion much like Allah is the assertion of
>>Muslims and Krsna is the assertion of Hindus.
>
>Yeah, but my guy died on a cross, was buried for 3 days, rose from the
>dead, and walked and talked and ate and drank with 500+ of his friends
>for 40 days before ascending to the God the Father.
There are more eyewitness accounts of the risen Elvis than the risen
Jesus.
John Hattan
>On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 21:04:04 -0500, "Adam Marczyk"
><ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>
>>> >Aw, isn't that cute; the little godbot thinks he's going to convert us. Tell
>>us,
>>> >bleater, how many souls have you saved on a.a.
>
>>> Could be millions.
>
>>*chuckle* You just keep telling yourself that, little sheep. Hey, how many
>>people out there have been converted by this guy? Speak up! Raise your voices!
>
>*chuckle* - Hopefully for their souls they are at least htinking about
>it.
Yeah, that "your funeral" argument wasn't convincing the first 75 times
you said it, but the 76th time really got me htinking :)
Elroy Willis
> duke32 <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> FatherFAK <kins...@bell.south.net> wrote:
>>>> Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
>>>> no Almighty God do for you?
>>> The knowledge that my mind is free and unfettered by the confusion,
>>> contradiction and hypocrisy of organized religion.
>> The end of the road - plant food.
> Is this version 1.1 of your repeated-to-death "it's your funeral"
> argument?
How much you wanna bet that just "ceasing to exist" wouldn't
bother duke so much, but he actually believes in some hell where
people burn in pain forever? Wouldn't surprise me to find out that
he believes Satan carries a pitchfork.
--
Elroy Willis
EAP Chief Editor and Newshound
http://web2.airmail.net/~elo/news
duke32
wrote:
>duke32 <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 23:36:05 -0600, FatherFAK
>><kins...@bell.south.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
>>>> no Almighty God do for you?
>>
>>>The knowledge that my mind is free and unfettered by the confusion,
>>>contradiction and hypocrisy of organized religion.
>>
>>The end of the road - plant food.
>
>Is this version 1.1 of your repeated-to-death "it's your funeral"
>argument?
Actually a prior recognition. I thought maybe kb could offer some
reason, some impossible wild dream, that would help one to understand
the value in being an atheist, and it's obvious he can't.
duke32
wrote:
>>>>> Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
>>>>> no Almighty God do for you?
>>>> The knowledge that my mind is free and unfettered by the confusion,
>>>> contradiction and hypocrisy of organized religion.
>>> The end of the road - plant food.
>> Is this version 1.1 of your repeated-to-death "it's your funeral"
>> argument?
>How much you wanna bet that just "ceasing to exist" wouldn't
>bother duke so much, but he actually believes in some hell where
>people burn in pain forever? Wouldn't surprise me to find out that
>he believes Satan carries a pitchfork.
He's got a forked tail too, with some horns.
But, actually, hell is likely a very cold and lonely place - no love
of God, no love of anything - heaven is love eternal; hell is void of
love.
A little heat would likely make you smile.
duke32
<fsto...@earthling.com> wrote:
>>Yeah, but my guy died on a cross, was buried for 3 days, rose from the
>>dead, and walked and talked and ate and drank with 500+ of his friends
>>for 40 days before ascending to the God the Father.
>Big deal. I can *lie* too.
Suppose you're wrong and it's NOT a lie by 500+ eye witnesses and then
professed and believed by the earliest Christians continuously from
the very first few to over 2 billion alive today.
And it isn't.
Fred Stone
>duke32 <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>>On 28 Nov 2002 15:13:40 -0500, dark...@shell1.iglou.com (Keenan Clay
>>Wilkie) wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>>Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
>>>>no Almighty God do for you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>"Almighty God" is your assertion much like Allah is the assertion of
>>>Muslims and Krsna is the assertion of Hindus.
>>>
>>>
>>Yeah, but my guy died on a cross, was buried for 3 days, rose from the
>>dead, and walked and talked and ate and drank with 500+ of his friends
>>for 40 days before ascending to the God the Father.
>>
>>
>
>There are more eyewitness accounts of the risen Elvis than the risen
>Jesus.
>
>
JFK and Elvis have had miraculous healings attributed to them.
duke32
wrote:
>duke32 <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>On 28 Nov 2002 15:13:40 -0500, dark...@shell1.iglou.com (Keenan Clay
>>Wilkie) wrote:
>>
>>>>Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
>>>>no Almighty God do for you?
>>
>>>"Almighty God" is your assertion much like Allah is the assertion of
>>>Muslims and Krsna is the assertion of Hindus.
>>
>>Yeah, but my guy died on a cross, was buried for 3 days, rose from the
>>dead, and walked and talked and ate and drank with 500+ of his friends
>>for 40 days before ascending to the God the Father.
>
>There are more eyewitness accounts of the risen Elvis than the risen
>Jesus.
Could be, but what has Elvis done for us?
Nothing.
duke32
>> Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
>> no Almighty God do for you?
>Every since I abandoned Christianity, I no longer hate myself.
Every since 1 in 3 people alive today embraced Christianity, they no
longer hate theyselves.
>Mark 14:26
>"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife,
>and children,and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he
>cannot be my disciple."
Tsk, tsk - biblical scholars proclaim the intent here is "...if you
love others more than me...
>The Bible states that art is a sin, but now I can draw and sculpt
>without feeling guilty about it.
Now there's a wild one you pulled out of the cheeks of your ass.
>Exodus 20:4
>"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of
>any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or
>that is in the wter under the earth."
Tsk, tsk - "graven" mandates "idolatry". Christians don't idolize or
worship statues. That was a Hebrew trick with the golden calf.
>Tell me, why do you want us to hate ourselves?
>--Billy
Your confusion drives you to it.
duke32
wrote:
>duke32 <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 21:04:04 -0500, "Adam Marczyk"
>><ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> >Aw, isn't that cute; the little godbot thinks he's going to convert us. Tell
>>>us,
>>>> >bleater, how many souls have you saved on a.a.
>>
>>>> Could be millions.
>>
>>>*chuckle* You just keep telling yourself that, little sheep. Hey, how many
>>>people out there have been converted by this guy? Speak up! Raise your voices!
>>
>>*chuckle* - Hopefully for their souls they are at least htinking about
>>it.
>
>Yeah, that "your funeral" argument wasn't convincing the first 75 times
>you said it, but the 76th time really got me htinking :)
Convincing for you or not, it's fact for me.
You need to htink harder about it.
Fred Stone
>On Sun, 01 Dec 2002 14:25:21 -0500, Fred Stone
><fsto...@earthling.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>>Yeah, but my guy died on a cross, was buried for 3 days, rose from the
>>>dead, and walked and talked and ate and drank with 500+ of his friends
>>>for 40 days before ascending to the God the Father.
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>Big deal. I can *lie* too.
>>
>>
>
>Suppose you're wrong and it's NOT a lie by 500+ eye witnesses and then
>professed and believed by the earliest Christians continuously from
>the very first few to over 2 billion alive today.
>
So what? Two billion fools *can* all be wrong.
>
>And it isn't.
>
It's your funeral. You've been dead since birth.
Fred Stone
>On Sun, 01 Dec 2002 14:00:57 -0600, John Hattan <jo...@thecodezone.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>
>>duke32 <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>On 28 Nov 2002 15:13:40 -0500, dark...@shell1.iglou.com (Keenan Clay
>>>Wilkie) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
>>>>>no Almighty God do for you?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>"Almighty God" is your assertion much like Allah is the assertion of
>>>>Muslims and Krsna is the assertion of Hindus.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Yeah, but my guy died on a cross, was buried for 3 days, rose from the
>>>dead, and walked and talked and ate and drank with 500+ of his friends
>>>for 40 days before ascending to the God the Father.
>>>
>>>
>>There are more eyewitness accounts of the risen Elvis than the risen
>>Jesus.
>>
>>
>
>Could be, but what has Elvis done for us?
>
He entertains millions of people. He never gave anyone reason to start a
war.
>
>Nothing.
>
Nothing that would impress a death junkie like you.
John Hattan
>On Sun, 01 Dec 2002 14:00:57 -0600, John Hattan <jo...@thecodezone.com>
>wrote:
>>duke32 <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>On 28 Nov 2002 15:13:40 -0500, dark...@shell1.iglou.com (Keenan Clay
>>>Wilkie) wrote:
>>>
>>>>>Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
>>>>>no Almighty God do for you?
>>>
>>>>"Almighty God" is your assertion much like Allah is the assertion of
>>>>Muslims and Krsna is the assertion of Hindus.
>>>
>>>Yeah, but my guy died on a cross, was buried for 3 days, rose from the
>>>dead, and walked and talked and ate and drank with 500+ of his friends
>>>for 40 days before ascending to the God the Father.
>>
>>There are more eyewitness accounts of the risen Elvis than the risen
>>Jesus.
>
>Could be, but what has Elvis done for us?
Waitwaitwait. You asserted that your god is superior to the
aforementioned Allah and Krishna because he rose and was witnessed. Now
you're moving the goalposts and saying that the worth of a god is based
on "what it has done for us".
>Nothing.
Elvis gave us rock & roll. Jesus gave us Amy Grant.
John Hattan
>duke32 wrote:
>>
>>Could be, but what has Elvis done for us?
>>
>He entertains millions of people. He never gave anyone reason to start a
>war.
1. Millions have been killed in the name of Jesus, but not a single
person has ever been killed in the name of Elvis.
2. Jesus said "hate your family in order to follow me". Elvis loved his
momma.
3. Churches force cities to tax citizens more to make up for the fact
that they don't pay property taxes. Graceland pays property taxes.
4. Nobody has ever given me the finger for refusing to worship Elvis.
5. Elvis' followers do not demand relaxed "charitable choice" standards
because they cannot pass the established standards for welfare
organizations.
6. If the Columbine killers had asked an Elvis-worshipper if he believed
in Elvis, he would've said "You bet I do, asshole", then shot the
killers with the gun stashed in his jumpsuit.
7. Nobody ever shot an abortion doctor in the name of Elvis.
8. Nobody appeared on CNN after 9/11 to proclaim that the terror attacks
were the result of failing to worship Elvis.
9. Elvis didn't whine about his father forsaking him when he died.
10. Elvis paid his posse very well. Jesus told his posse to give away
everything they had.
11. The eyewitness accounts of the death of Elvis are internally
consistent and non-contradictory.
John Hattan
>On 1 Dec 2002 10:37:09 -0800, eric...@my-deja.com (Billy Goat) wrote:
>>
>>Mark 14:26
>>"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife,
>>and children,and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he
>>cannot be my disciple."
>
>Tsk, tsk - biblical scholars proclaim the intent here is "...if you
>love others more than me...
Not the honest ones.
Adam Marczyk
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 21:04:04 -0500, "Adam Marczyk"
> <ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>
> >> >Aw, isn't that cute; the little godbot thinks he's going to convert us.
Tell
> >us,
> >> >bleater, how many souls have you saved on a.a.
>
> >> Could be millions.
>
> >*chuckle* You just keep telling yourself that, little sheep. Hey, how many
> >people out there have been converted by this guy? Speak up! Raise your
voices!
>
> *chuckle* - Hopefully for their souls they are at least htinking about
> it.
I *do* think about it. I debate with evangelical Christians quite frequently,
and I also read their books - after all, I'll never know if my beliefs are wrong
unless I test them against the best arguments of people who think differently.
(Bet you've never done anything even remotely similar, have you, little godbot?
When was the last time you read a pro-atheist book?) I've never come away
doubting that atheism is the correct position - in fact, the absurdities,
internal contradictions and logical fallacies that riddle every pro-Christian
argument I've ever seen or heard of only give me more confidence that my
position is correct.
> What can atheism offer - nothing?
Dan Barker, an evangelical Christian minister for 19 years who finally saw the
light and deconverted to atheism, thinks differently. Here's what he has to say
on p.227 of _Losing Faith in Faith_ (you know, one of those atheist books you
haven't read, because you, unlike me, are afraid of being exposed to things that
disagree with you):
"Several months after my deconversion I met with a group of fundamentalists to
discuss the bible. I identified myself as an atheist and did not hesitate to
examine critically the contradictions and errors in their 'holy' book. After the
meeting, one of the older men came up to my car window and said: 'Dan, I think
you're still a Christian.'
'Why do you say that?' I asked.
'Because you seem so happy. You're a nice person; you enjoy life and love
people. You appreciate God's beauty in music, art and nature. How can an atheist
have such peace? How can a non-Christian be so joyful?'
I looked at him and said, 'No, I'm not a Christian--I no longer accept those
myths. The reason I am happy is because I choose to be happy. For me, happiness
is primarily a state of mind and since I now control my own mind, I also control
my own happiness. I am no puppet of a higher mind, no slave to eternity. I never
knew real joy before I regained possession of my own mind. You should try it!'"
> What can Christianity offer - an eternity of happiness and love of
> God!!!
If you plan on being happy in Heaven while there are billions of lost souls -
far more souls than are in Heaven - suffering in Hell for all eternity with no
promise and no hope, then you are not a kind, merciful or loving individual. You
are a sick, heartless, subhuman sadist, and even *if* your whole mythology is
correct - a possibility unsupported by a single shred of evidence - I would
*rather* be condemned than spend the rest of eternity worshipping an insane
tyrant of a god along with you and all the rest of your fellow sycophants.
> >> Your chuckle is your funeral.
>
> >Right back at you, pal. Isn't it sad that *I'm* the one who's really living -
> >who's laughing, who's loving, who's learning, who's getting the best out of
> >life
>
> Me.
"Me" what? That doesn't even make sense.
> > while *you're* the one cringing and scraping, groveling in the dirt,
> >wasting the only life you'll ever have in mindless servitude to an imaginary
> >cosmic dictator?
>
> I'm all smiles. I have a future, you don't.
Your smile is the vacant, mindless grin of a sadly deluded individual, too
wrapped up in his childish wish-fulfilling fantasies to notice the only life
he'll ever have passing all around him, wasted. We all only get one chance, and
yours is vanishing like frost on a sunny morning, if only you could see it.
You'd better wake up before it's too late.
> >nd the saddest part is, you'll never even realize how wrong
> >you were.
>
> Gee, with the flames of hell tickling the cheeks of your butt, I trust
> you will remember your words.
Gee, I can't help but notice you said something completely contradictory to that
in another post:
"But, actually, hell is likely a very cold and lonely place - no love
of God, no love of anything - heaven is love eternal; hell is void of
love."
I guess it's too much to ask for a theist like yourself to be consistent.
> >You'll die, and then... nothing.
>
> My guy rose from the dead and said we could follow him.
And what do you have to substantiate that ridiculous claim? An ancient book,
written by superstitious and ignorant men, multiply mistranslated as it was
passed down through the centuries, twisted by every writer who wanted to
reinterpret it to fit his own ideas, wildly contradictory both within itself and
with external reality. *I* have science, and you have nothing but shadowy scraps
of primitive mythology.
> >The end of consciousness. The flame
> >will be blown out. You'll cease to be, never having found out that your fairy
> >tale was the fiction it was all along. I suppose it's a small mercy.
>
> My soul will be glad.
Sounds like someone who can't face the truth to me. If you'd ever read any good
books on neurology, you'd know how intimately the sense of self and personality
is connected to the brain. When one ends, so does the other.
> >> Give us all a laugh and answer that one.
>
> >I understand you have a hard time reading things that aren't the Bible, so
I'll
> >say it again, more slowly, and with small words so you can comprehend. I
*used*
> >to believe in God.
>
> Let me say it quietly - that does not negate his existance.
You're right. The total lack of evidence does that.
> >It was someone almost exactly like you who convinced me
> >(unintentionally) that God-belief was so irrational, so insane, so dangerous,
so
> >destructive to a thinking mind that I could no longer in good conscience hold
> >onto it myself.
>
> Name some things. You're a real joker.
"Name some things"? What are you talking about?
> >In short, it was someone almost exactly like you who converted
> >me from a theist into an atheist. (And I know I'm not the only one who this
has
> >happened to.) That's what I mean when I say that people like you are simply
> >furthering the atheist cause. Not only are you embarrassing yourself by
showing
> >off your arrogance and ignorance for everyone to see, you're actually
creating
> >more of us. So by all means, keep it up. See what it gets you in the end.
>
> I have nothing to lose unless you convince me you are right - you,
> otoh, have already lost it all.
You have everything to lose, and you're losing it as we speak - and the sad
thing is, you don't even know. You're like a stubborn child, irrationally
determined to stay in the musty dark confessional box you've wedged yourself
into, while we freethinkers live and laugh in the light. I'd pity you - but the
willful ignorance, arrogance, and sadism you've displayed make it quite clear
that you don't deserve it.
--
a.a. #2001
"We have loved the stars too fondly to be fearful of the night."
--Tombstone epitaph of two amateur astronomers,
quoted in Carl Sagan's _Cosmos_
http://www.ebonmusings.org ICQ: 8777843 PGP Key ID: 0x5C66F737
Billy Goat
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 21:05:53 -0500, "Adam Marczyk"
> <ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
> >http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/world.html
>
> >And incidentally, it's not a "fable," it's the honest-to-goodness truth. You
> >should try it sometime. You might even like it.
>
> There is neither proof nor evidence to support the non-existance of
> Alimghty God - it is the true atheist's unfounded mythical fable.
>
> I would never be so stupid as to follow that ill-gotten path.
Um, didn't Jesus say that we're supposed to love each other the way
God loves us? Calling people "stupid" doesn't sound like love to me.
Or was Jesus only talking about how Christians should treat *each*
*other*, not everbody?
And by the way, if YOU were sincere about being willing to enter an
honest discussion with me about my reasons for rejecting Christianity,
you'll first need to read about my past dealings with religion:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&selm=6bd3c70a.0108181239.284a7c09%40posting.google.com
I'll be nice and assume you weren't deliberately ignoring my October
21 response. It *was* a week later, and you may have simply missed it.
Events conspired to prevent me from responding sooner.
>
> >> Cool, and what does "thinking for yourself" do for you?
>
> >Are you curious? Wouldn't you just love to be able to find out for yourself? You
> >can - if you have the courage and the honesty.
>
> Nope - not curious. It a dead end street. God Almighty exists -
> period.
Even if He does exist, why would you worship Him? He sends stillborn
babies to Hell. Do you enjoy that thought? (Well, you do chuckle at
the thought of good people going to Hell for merely being atheists.)
> >> Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
> >> no Almighty God do for you?
>
> >An enlightened life of wonder and knowledge, free of paralyzing superstition,
> >guilt, and shame - for one thing. And there are more of them here:
>
> You an atheist - an "enlightened life" - no kidding!
>
> Believe me, my enlightened anticipations are without limit due to my
> love of God and an eternity of love with Him.
>
> Your future is limited to, what, plant food?
So what? We're content with that. Are you suggesting that contentment
is a crime? What exactly is your criticism here? That we're not as
greedy for "the treasures of Heaven" as you are? It seems odd that a
God who teaches the virtue of selflessness, and the evils of desire,
would offer His followers rewards, or send people to Hell for not
seeking His rewards.
--Billy
Billy Goat
> On 1 Dec 2002 10:37:09 -0800, eric...@my-deja.com (Billy Goat) wrote:
>
> >> Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
> >> no Almighty God do for you?
>
> >Every since I abandoned Christianity, I no longer hate myself.
>
> Every since 1 in 3 people alive today embraced Christianity, they no
> longer hate theyselves.
What works for some won't work for others. I know from experience that
Christianity makes me miserable. I'm not going to embrace it again
just because it makes someone *else* happy.
And by the way, if YOU were sincere about being willing to enter an
honest discussion with me about my reasons for rejecting Christianity,
you'll first need to read about my past dealings with religion:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&selm=6bd3c70a.0108181239.284a7c09%40posting.google.com
I'll be nice and assume you weren't deliberately ignoring my October
21 response. It *was* a week later, and you may have simply missed it.
Events conspired to prevent me from responding sooner.
> >Mark 14:26
> >"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife,
> >and children,and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he
> >cannot be my disciple."
>
> Tsk, tsk - biblical scholars proclaim the intent here is "...if you
> love others more than me...
Only because those scholars are trying to preserve their preconceived
notion that Jesus wants people to love each other. Yes, there are
other passages where Jesus *does* tell people to love Him more than
they love their families and themselves. Matthew 10:37, for example.
But if you believe that Jesus wants people to love each other, then
Mark 14:26 certainly conflicts with that belief, and you need scholars
to come along and tell you the passage doesn't really mean what it
says.
However, what if Jesus wants us to hate our families and ourselves?
This belief also does not conflict with Matthew 10:37. Nor does it
conflict with Mark 14:26. There is no conflict between the verses, and
no apologetics necessary. It all fits together.
If scholars are the only people who can understand the Bible, then
maybe the Bible isn't for everyone.
> >The Bible states that art is a sin, but now I can draw and sculpt
> >without feeling guilty about it.
>
> Now there's a wild one you pulled out of the cheeks of your ass.
No, I really used to be scared of being an artist. In a way, I still
am. After all, I may someday find out the Christian God is real, and
that He indeed considers art a sin, just like Exodus 20:4 says.
> >Exodus 20:4
> >"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of
> >any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or
> >that is in the wter under the earth."
>
> Tsk, tsk - "graven" mandates "idolatry". Christians don't idolize or
> worship statues. That was a Hebrew trick with the golden calf.
No, "graven" means "sculpted", nothing more.
> >Tell me, why do you want us to hate ourselves?
> >--Billy
>
> Your confusion drives you to it.
At least you admit that you believe I really am confused. It's not
like I choose to be confused. But how does my confusion change the
fact that you want me to hate myself? As long as I'm confused, I can't
be a Christian without hating myself. If you want me to be Christian
in spite of my confusion, then you want me to hate myself.
--Billy
Adam Marczyk
news:6bd3c70a.02120...@posting.google.com...
[snip]
> > >> Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
> > >> no Almighty God do for you?
> >
> > >An enlightened life of wonder and knowledge, free of paralyzing
superstition,
> > >guilt, and shame - for one thing. And there are more of them here:
> >
> > You an atheist - an "enlightened life" - no kidding!
> >
> > Believe me, my enlightened anticipations are without limit due to my
> > love of God and an eternity of love with Him.
> >
> > Your future is limited to, what, plant food?
>
> So what? We're content with that. Are you suggesting that contentment
> is a crime? What exactly is your criticism here? That we're not as
> greedy for "the treasures of Heaven" as you are? It seems odd that a
> God who teaches the virtue of selflessness, and the evils of desire,
> would offer His followers rewards, or send people to Hell for not
> seeking His rewards.
But then again, that is one of the problems with theistic morality: it strands
human beings at a five-year-old child's level of ethics, where one does good
things only because they bring reward, and avoids bad things only because they
bring punishment. Duke doesn't avoid murder because he thinks it's intrinsically
wrong to murder someone - indeed, his belief in the Bible requires him to
believe that murder can actually be the right thing to do on some occasions.
Rather, he only abstains from murdering people because he doesn't believe God
has currently given him a directive to do so. If he ever comes to believe he had
a revelation instructing him to murder, everyone around him is in deep trouble!
I'd feel much safer around an atheist who believes some acts, such as murder,
are always wrong regardless of who's ordering them to be committed.
Adam Marczyk
> On 28 Nov 2002 15:11:53 -0500, dark...@shell1.iglou.com (Keenan Clay
> Wilkie) wrote:
>
> >>Oh, I have much too much fun correcting you loony atheists about the
> >>mythical fable that there is no Almighty God.
>
> >You're an arrogant prick.
>
> For trying to help you see the error of your ways?
Well, yes. I'm sure you'd feel slightly insulted if some atheists knocked on
your door one day, barged into your house, and spent several hours berating you
and telling you how stupid you were for believing in God, and then justified
their actions by saying it was all for your own good. You chose to come to a
place where you don't belong and where you're not welcome, to say things no one
here is interested in hearing - you deserve the reaction you predictably get,
and have no one to blame for it but yourself.
> > Your "Almighty God" is just one of thousands of
> >human-invented deities in which we lack belief.
>
> There is only one Almighty God. All the rest are false.
Ironically, the connection between statements such as this one, and people
accusing you of arrogance, doesn't even seem to register on you.
> > Your "Almighty God" is no
> >more real to us than Allah, Krsna or Zeus.
>
> At least you do understand the Krsna, and Zeus are false gods.
Maybe you haven't realized it, but you're not that different from us. You
believe all the gods humanity has ever invented, except for one, are false. We
only go one step further; we only believe in one fewer god than you do.
> Allah is the Muslim word for Almighty God - yes, the one and the same
> as for the Christian and the Jew Almighty God.
I think most Muslims would disagree with you rather strongly about that, as
would most Jews and most Christians.
> > If you've got an argument that
> >we should believe in your particular version of God then the burden of
> >proof is on you to demonstrate that this God is somehow more real than all
> >of the other fictional entities worshipped throughout human history.
>
> What a loser!
>
> I owe you proof of nothing
That's right, you don't. But if you don't intend to present any proof, then why
are you even here? What is the point of any of your posts? Why are you even
making these claims if you're not going to attempt to substantiate them? Are you
just *trying* to waste our time?
>- it's your silly butt that you youself are
> throwing away.
If you feel that way, then go away and let us do so in peace, since it's a
foregone conclusion that you'll convince absolutely no one here of anything. Or
is it that you secretly *want* to be an atheist, and you're just sticking around
because you need our help to break free of your brainwashing? If so, many people
would be glad to help you, I'm sure. Quite a few people have deconverted and
abandoned religion entirely as a result of reading this group (the latest one is
here: http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3DE55665.1040007%40qwest.net). We'd
be happy to add you to their number.
Elroy Willis
> Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
>>>>>> no Almighty God do for you?
>>>>> The knowledge that my mind is free and unfettered by the confusion,
>>>>> contradiction and hypocrisy of organized religion.
>>>> The end of the road - plant food.
>>> Is this version 1.1 of your repeated-to-death "it's your funeral"
>>> argument?
>> How much you wanna bet that just "ceasing to exist" wouldn't
>> bother duke so much, but he actually believes in some hell where
>> people burn in pain forever? Wouldn't surprise me to find out that
>> he believes Satan carries a pitchfork.
> He's got a forked tail too, with some horns.
> But, actually, hell is likely a very cold and lonely place - no love
> of God, no love of anything - heaven is love eternal; hell is void of
> love.
Funny, the Bible says Jesus will be in hell watching people burn.
Wayne Delia
> On 1 Dec 2002 10:37:09 -0800, eric...@my-deja.com (Billy Goat) wrote:
> >Mark 14:26
> >"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife,
> >and children,and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he
> >cannot be my disciple."
>
> Tsk, tsk - biblical scholars proclaim the intent here is "...if you
> love others more than me...
So what? Are you worshipping Bible scholars, who euphemized the
translation, or are you worshipping Jesus, who used the word "hate"?
> >The Bible states that art is a sin, but now I can draw and sculpt
> >without feeling guilty about it.
>
> Now there's a wild one you pulled out of the cheeks of your ass.
You're confusing "art" (as idolatry) with "your priest's dick."
> >Exodus 20:4
> >"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of
> >any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or
> >that is in the wter under the earth."
>
> Tsk, tsk - "graven" mandates "idolatry".
And "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image" means you're not
supposed to do it.
> Christians don't idolize or
> worship statues. That was a Hebrew trick with the golden calf.
Or a Catholic trick with a statue of Mary.
> >Tell me, why do you want us to hate ourselves?
> >--Billy
>
> Your confusion drives you to it.
His "confusion" is based on the unreasonable assumption that the Bible
means what it says. I can understand how you would strongly disagree
with that assumption.
> duke, Asshole-American
> *****
> 2Cor 5:10 - For we must all appear before the
> toilet seat of Christ, that each one may
> receive what is due him for the things done
> while in the body, whether good or bad.
> *****
Wayne Delia, via groups.google.com
Wayne Delia
> On Sun, 01 Dec 2002 14:25:21 -0500, Fred Stone
> <fsto...@earthling.com> wrote:
>
> >>Yeah, but my guy died on a cross, was buried for 3 days, rose from the
> >>dead, and walked and talked and ate and drank with 500+ of his friends
> >>for 40 days before ascending to the God the Father.
As has been pointed out many times before, the figure of "500+" is a
hearsay estimate of a number of unidentified alleged eyewitnesses who
supposedly only merely saw Jesus after the resurrection, but not
necessarily having eaten and drank with Him. There is no Biblical
support for your well-conditioned knee-jerk response, and you are too
brainwashed to modify it. If "your guy died on a cross," He's not a
God, since it can be reasonably presumed that no God can be killed by
a mere human or group of humans. The prophecy in the Bible given by
Jesus (about the "sign of Jonah") is that He would be dead for 3 days
AND THREE NIGHTS, which (according to the Gospel accounts) was way too
long for what actually happened. Finally, you are presupposing that
"your guy" is actually God, and that the qualifications for anyone who
would be a God would be exactly what "your guy" did. The trouble is,
your debate opponents are not making the same assumption, so you are
just begging the question by assuming your conclusion.
> >Big deal. I can *lie* too.
>
> Suppose you're wrong and it's NOT a lie by 500+ eye witnesses and then
> professed and believed by the earliest Christians continuously from
> the very first few to over 2 billion alive today.
What are the eyewitnesses' names? Where are their statements? What are
their individual credibilities, or personal agendas? If you're just
taking Paul's word for it, why not have Paul claim that a thousand, or
a million, or any arbitrary large number of unidentified people saw
Jesus? That's pretty much why hearsay evidence is inadmissable in
court. But in any case, your argument boils down to "Pretend my
argument is correct, therefore, my argument is correct."
> And it isn't.
Indeed!
> duke, Asshole-American
> *****
> 2Cor 5:10 - For we must all appear before the
> toilet seat of Christ, that each one may
> receive what is due him for the things done
> while in the body, whether good or bad.
> *****
Wayne Delia, via groups.google.com
duke32
>> >And incidentally, it's not a "fable," it's the honest-to-goodness truth. You
>> >should try it sometime. You might even like it.
>> There is neither proof nor evidence to support the non-existance of
>> Alimghty God - it is the true atheist's unfounded mythical fable.
>> I would never be so stupid as to follow that ill-gotten path.
>Um, didn't Jesus say that we're supposed to love each other the way
>God loves us? Calling people "stupid" doesn't sound like love to me.
Actually he said to love the sinner, but hate the sin, and people who
deny the existance of Almighty God are displaying really stupid
traits.
>I'll be nice and assume you weren't deliberately ignoring my October
>21 response. It *was* a week later, and you may have simply missed it.
>Events conspired to prevent me from responding sooner.
My apologies. I was not aware (as far as I know) of a response from
you, or even the subject matter. If it's a legitimate response open
for real discussion, I'm sure you'll copy and paste it. If I saw it
and didn't respond, it was likely not worthy of a response.
You make the decision.
>> Nope - not curious. It a dead end street. God Almighty exists -
>> period.
>Even if He does exist, why would you worship Him? He sends stillborn
>babies to Hell.
No he doesn't. There's nothing at all to suggest he does such a
thing, and everything to suggest he has a special place for the
aborted and stillborn.
> Do you enjoy that thought? (Well, you do chuckle at
>the thought of good people going to Hell for merely being atheists.)
Perhaps you're confused about what "hell" is. Remembering that God
spoke to people in a langauge they could understand, burning the chaff
was a common line of thought.
Actually I think that hell is a cold, dark, lonely place - a place
with no love. For God is pure love, and if one elects to live his
human life void of God's love, I profess it likely that God will grant
you your wish for all eternity - a place of pure no-love, of God, of
other people, of anything. Now that's hell to put up with.
>> Your future is limited to, what, plant food?
>So what? We're content with that. Are you suggesting that contentment
>is a crime? What exactly is your criticism here?
Firstly, you appear to reject life after life in your comment. Well,
that's your loss.
However, if you accept life after life, even in "hell", then you're
failing to comprehend that you won't have contentment in hell - for
contentment requires love (of something, anything), and there is no
love in hell. There is "no friends, no happiness, no loved ones or
family, no warmth, no nothing but no-love, etc"
> That we're not as
>greedy for "the treasures of Heaven" as you are?
Yet my treasure is an eternity of love and happiness with Almighty God
in heaven, not of things.
>It seems odd that a
>God who teaches the virtue of selflessness, and the evils of desire,
>would offer His followers rewards, or send people to Hell for not
>seeking His rewards.
His reward is not to be sought, but to be practiced. Jesus gave us a
new commandment - that we love one another as God loves us - to place
the welfare of others before our own material wellness. Jesus came to
serve mankind, not be served, and he calls us to do the same.
When you profess you're "being punished for not seeking his rewards",
you're proclaiming you're standing in opposition to his commandments.
I personally believe there are atheists in heaven - those that
unbeknowest to themselves, they did live the life of the New
Commandment. Unfortunately, our Good Book also clearly states that
only the pure will see God. As you reject God, and your "friends"
reject God and hence don't pray for you, your time is the "place of
purification" is going to be very, very long indeed.
Remember, it's all your choice.
duke, American-American
*****
2Cor 5:10 - For we must all appear before the
judgment seat of Christ, that each one may
duke32
<ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>> So what? We're content with that. Are you suggesting that contentment
>> is a crime? What exactly is your criticism here? That we're not as
>> greedy for "the treasures of Heaven" as you are? It seems odd that a
>> God who teaches the virtue of selflessness, and the evils of desire,
>> would offer His followers rewards, or send people to Hell for not
>> seeking His rewards.
>But then again, that is one of the problems with theistic morality: it strands
>human beings at a five-year-old child's level of ethics, where one does good
>things only because they bring reward, and avoids bad things only because they
>bring punishment.
The problem is that "you don't understand".
> Duke doesn't avoid murder because he thinks it's intrinsically
>wrong to murder someone - indeed, his belief in the Bible requires him to
>believe that murder can actually be the right thing to do on some occasions.
>Rather, he only abstains from murdering people because he doesn't believe God
>has currently given him a directive to do so.
Then you obviously do't believe in your intrinsic free choice and
desire to say *no* to God. Hence, you obviously don't comprehend that
our election to say *yes* to God is exactly what we're called to do.
> If he ever comes to believe he had
>a revelation instructing him to murder, everyone around him is in deep trouble!
>I'd feel much safer around an atheist who believes some acts, such as murder,
>are always wrong regardless of who's ordering them to be committed.
What a shame you don't even realize that you're savoring
compansionship with one who CHOSE to reject murder as wrong, and
believes such - something you then turn around and chide God's people
for doing.
duke32
wrote:
>> But, actually, hell is likely a very cold and lonely place - no love
>> of God, no love of anything - heaven is love eternal; hell is void of
>> love.
>Funny, the Bible says Jesus will be in hell watching people burn.
le'roi, you must be confusing mad mag for the bible.
Fred Stone
>On 1 Dec 2002 19:35:45 -0800, eric...@my-deja.com (Billy Goat) wrote:
>
>
>
>>>>And incidentally, it's not a "fable," it's the honest-to-goodness truth. You
>>>>should try it sometime. You might even like it.
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
>
>>>There is neither proof nor evidence to support the non-existance of
>>>Alimghty God - it is the true atheist's unfounded mythical fable.
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>>I would never be so stupid as to follow that ill-gotten path.
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>Um, didn't Jesus say that we're supposed to love each other the way
>>God loves us? Calling people "stupid" doesn't sound like love to me.
>>
>>
>
>Actually he said to love the sinner, but hate the sin, and people who
>deny the existance of Almighty God are displaying really stupid
>traits.
>
Ah, so calling you a fuckhead is merely addressing your fuckheaded
traits, not you personally.
duke32
<fsto...@earthling.com> wrote:
>>Suppose you're wrong and it's NOT a lie by 500+ eye witnesses and then
>>professed and believed by the earliest Christians continuously from
>>the very first few to over 2 billion alive today.
>So what? Two billion fools *can* all be wrong.
That's only the *present day* world population who believe in Christ.
1 in 6 people alive today are Roman Catholic, 1 in 3 are Christian, 1
in 2 profess a belief in God Almighty.
What is it - 3 in 100 profess atheism.
socode
"duke32" <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Then you obviously do't believe in your intrinsic free choice and
> desire to say *no* to God.
That would be the intrinsic "free" choice constrained by the omniscience of
your
god? Do you understand that "free" and "constrained" are mutually exclusive?
socode
socode
"duke32" <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Actually he said to love the sinner, but hate the sin, and people who
> deny the existance of Almighty God are displaying really stupid
> traits.
Calling someone a fool; judging; are you trying to monopolise -those-
sins for yourself?
> >Even if He does exist, why would you worship Him? He sends stillborn
> >babies to Hell.
> No he doesn't. There's nothing at all to suggest he does such a
> thing, and everything to suggest he has a special place for the
> aborted and stillborn.
In which case, abortion is the best thing for the soul, as it prevents
actually being born and being sinful enough to be send to hell.
> However, if you accept life after life, even in "hell", then you're
> failing to comprehend that you won't have contentment in hell - for
> contentment requires love (of something, anything), and there is no
> love in hell. There is "no friends, no happiness, no loved ones or
> family, no warmth, no nothing but no-love, etc"
Is an infinity of torture a reasonable punishment for a bounded "sin"?
socode
socode
> On Sun, 01 Dec 2002 17:27:10 -0500, Fred Stone
> <fsto...@earthling.com> wrote:
>
> >>Suppose you're wrong and it's NOT a lie by 500+ eye witnesses and then
> >>professed and believed by the earliest Christians continuously from
> >>the very first few to over 2 billion alive today.
So how come your Christ was rejected by 2/3 of the world? Are
Europeans and Americans North & South, more inclined to be virtuous,
the rest of the world virtuous approximately in relation to the proportion
of
their population that professes Christianity, and the presumably-evil
Chinese
to be consigned straight to hell?
It's quite funny that you're making not only a fallacious appeal to numbers,
but one in which the numbers work against you.
socode
Fred Stone
>On Sun, 01 Dec 2002 17:27:10 -0500, Fred Stone
><fsto...@earthling.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>>Suppose you're wrong and it's NOT a lie by 500+ eye witnesses and then
>>>professed and believed by the earliest Christians continuously from
>>>the very first few to over 2 billion alive today.
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>So what? Two billion fools *can* all be wrong.
>>
>>
>
>That's only the *present day* world population who believe in Christ.
>
Safety in numbers, eh Duke?
>
>1 in 6 people alive today are Roman Catholic, 1 in 3 are Christian, 1
>in 2 profess a belief in God Almighty.
>
That makes half the world are atheists, not your next stat:
>
>What is it - 3 in 100 profess atheism.
>
If I was *alone* in the world, I'd *still* stand for what I know to be
right.
duke32
wrote:
>> >>Yeah, but my guy died on a cross, was buried for 3 days, rose from the
>> >>dead, and walked and talked and ate and drank with 500+ of his friends
>> >>for 40 days before ascending to the God the Father.
>As has been pointed out many times before, the figure of "500+" is a
>hearsay estimate of a number of unidentified alleged eyewitnesses who
>supposedly only merely saw Jesus after the resurrection, but not
>necessarily having eaten and drank with Him.
And your knee jerk ignores the real proof that 500+ saw himm.
Swoosh - right over your head.
>There is no Biblical
>support for your well-conditioned knee-jerk response, and you are too
>brainwashed to modify it.
1 Corinthians 15
5and that he appeared to Peter,[1] and then to the Twelve. 6After
that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the
same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen
asleep. 7Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles,
Swoosh - right over your head.
> If "your guy died on a cross," He's not a
>God, since it can be reasonably presumed that no God can be killed by
>a mere human or group of humans.
God Almighty presented himself to us in 3 ways, as Father and Holy
Spirit, and as the man Jesus (100% man in every way including pain,
loneliness, and death - to share in our humanity such that some day we
might share in his divinity).
> The prophecy in the Bible given by
>Jesus (about the "sign of Jonah") is that He would be dead for 3 days
>AND THREE NIGHTS, which (according to the Gospel accounts) was way too
>long for what actually happened.
Sorry, Jonah was the one dead for 3 days and 3 night. Jesus rose on
the 3rd day.
swoosh - right over your head.
> Finally, you are presupposing that
>"your guy" is actually God, and that the qualifications for anyone who
>would be a God would be exactly what "your guy" did. The trouble is,
>your debate opponents are not making the same assumption, so you are
>just begging the question by assuming your conclusion.
Presupposing? He rose from the dead and walked - oh, you know the
words.
>What are the eyewitnesses' names? Where are their statements? What are
>their individual credibilities, or personal agendas? If you're just
>taking Paul's word for it, why not have Paul claim that a thousand, or
>a million, or any arbitrary large number of unidentified people saw
>Jesus? That's pretty much why hearsay evidence is inadmissable in
>court. But in any case, your argument boils down to "Pretend my
>argument is correct, therefore, my argument is correct."
Swoosh - right over your head.
duke, American-American
*****
2Cor 5:10 - For we must all appear before the
judgment seat of Christ, that each one may
duke32
<fsto...@earthling.com> wrote:
>>>There are more eyewitness accounts of the risen Elvis than the risen
>>>Jesus.
>>Could be, but what has Elvis done for us?
>He entertains millions of people. He never gave anyone reason to start a
>war.
Yet Jesus promised us an eternity of happiness with Almighty God in
Heaven.
duke32
wrote:
>>>>>"Almighty God" is your assertion much like Allah is the assertion of
>>>>>Muslims and Krsna is the assertion of Hindus.
>>>>Yeah, but my guy died on a cross, was buried for 3 days, rose from the
>>>>dead, and walked and talked and ate and drank with 500+ of his friends
>>>>for 40 days before ascending to the God the Father.
>>>There are more eyewitness accounts of the risen Elvis than the risen
>>>Jesus.
>>Could be, but what has Elvis done for us?
>Waitwaitwait. You asserted that your god is superior to the
>aforementioned Allah and Krishna because he rose and was witnessed.
Ummmmmmmm, not quite. There is only one God Almighty, some others who
call him Jehovah, or Allah. For the muslims, you must be thinking of
mohammed, who has never been seen again, and for the Jews, well, they
profess the messiah hasn't come yet.
The part that you missed is that Almighty God presented himself to us
in 3 different ways - as loving Father, as redeemer the Son Jesus, and
as love of the Holy Spirit.
You need to learn to keep your facts together better than that.
> Now
>you're moving the goalposts and saying that the worth of a god is based
>on "what it has done for us".
Nah - the goalposts haven't moved. Jesus did all that for us, and
those that profess belief in him and follow his teachings.
You're just in over your head.
Wayne Delia
> On 28 Nov 2002 15:11:53 -0500, dark...@shell1.iglou.com (Keenan Clay
> Wilkie) wrote:
>
> >>Oh, I have much too much fun correcting you loony atheists about the
> >>mythical fable that there is no Almighty God.
>
> >You're an arrogant prick.
>
> For trying to help you see the error of your ways?
That's not relevant, because you have not shown any error of our ways;
we simply disagree with you. We call you an arrogant prick because
you're an arrogant prick.
> >Your "Almighty God" is just one of thousands of
> >human-invented deities in which we lack belief.
>
> There is only one Almighty God. All the rest are false.
But the people who follow those supposedly false gods are saying that
your religious fantasy of your own "Almighty God" is false, too. Who
are we supposed to believe, and why? If you cut and paste your canned
parrotted answer which begins with "Because my guy died on the
cross..." you will need to explain why your God can be killed by
ordinary humans.
> >Your "Almighty God" is no
> >more real to us than Allah, Krsna or Zeus.
>
> At least you do understand the Krsna, and Zeus are false gods.
As well as your "Almighty God." Unless you can demonstrate that your
"Almighty God" is not false, we just lump Him into the same pile you
throw the others into - the heap of false gods.
> Allah is the Muslim word for Almighty God - yes, the one and the same
> as for the Christian and the Jew Almighty God.
Yet the Muslim God indicates in the Qu'ran that anyone who believes
Jesus is God is headed for the Islamic hell. Meanwhile, according to
the Bible, belief that Jesus is God is necessary to get into the
Christian hell. Why is this one and only Almighty God so fucking
schizophrenic?
> >If you've got an argument that
> >we should believe in your particular version of God then the burden of
> >proof is on you to demonstrate that this God is somehow more real than all
> >of the other fictional entities worshipped throughout human history.
>
> What a loser!
Yeah! Imagine the nerve of anyone expecting you to back up your
dubious claims with evidence and facts! They oughta know better than
to expect that out of you!
> I owe you proof of nothing - it's your silly butt that you youself are
> throwing away.
Great! You owe me $10,000, and I owe you proof of nothing. So pay up,
deadbeat!
You will, of course, unless "it's your silly butt that you yourself
are throwing away."
> duke, Asshole-American
> *****
> 2Cor 5:10 - For we must all appear before the
> toilet seat of Christ, that each one may
> receive what is due him for the things done
> while in the body, whether good or bad.
> *****
Wayne Delia, via groups.google.com
Wayne Delia
> On Thu, 28 Nov 2002 17:09:55 -0800, stoney <sto...@the.net> wrote:
>
> >>Your chuckle is your funeral.
>
>
> Bad move - your parrot could have helped you.
BWAAAK! Polly wanna cracker, BWAAAAK!
duke32
wrote:
>duke32 <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>On 1 Dec 2002 10:37:09 -0800, eric...@my-deja.com (Billy Goat) wrote:
>>>
>>>Mark 14:26
>>>"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife,
>>>and children,and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he
>>>cannot be my disciple."
>>
>>Tsk, tsk - biblical scholars proclaim the intent here is "...if you
>>love others more than me...
>
>Not the honest ones.
The ones that know.
"To hate" is contrary to all of the teachings of Christ.
"To love others more than we love God" - now that's significant.
duke, American-American
*****
2Cor 5:10 - For we must all appear before the
judgment seat of Christ, that each one may
Fred Stone
>On Sun, 01 Dec 2002 17:29:20 -0500, Fred Stone
><fsto...@earthling.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>>>There are more eyewitness accounts of the risen Elvis than the risen
>>>>Jesus.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Could be, but what has Elvis done for us?
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>He entertains millions of people. He never gave anyone reason to start a
>>war.
>>
>>
>
>Yet Jesus promised us an eternity of happiness with Almighty God in
>Heaven.
>
Promises are worth their weight in gold.
Wayne Delia
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 21:04:04 -0500, "Adam Marczyk"
> >> Your chuckle is your funeral.
>
> >who's laughing, who's loving, who's learning, who's getting the best out of
> >life
>
> Me.
By way of explanation, errrrl is having some moderate to severe mental
problems lately, and his current debate strategy involves responses
with irrelevant one-word non-sequiturs. Further requests for him to
elaborate on his answers result in responses of "Swoosh, right over
your head." I am not making this up - check out his answers to the
question of what he plans to tell Jesus about intentionally disobeying
Matthew 5:22.
> > while *you're* the one cringing and scraping, groveling in the dirt,
> >wasting the only life you'll ever have in mindless servitude to an imaginary
> >cosmic dictator?
>
> I'm all smiles. I have a future, you don't.
But your future absolutely depends on Jesus being rock stupid enough
to buy into your shitty-ass explanations of why you disobeyed His
instruction in Matthew 5:22.
> >and the saddest part is, you'll never even realize how wrong
> >you were.
>
> Gee, with the flames of hell tickling the cheeks of your butt, I trust
> you will remember your words.
"Worship my invisible sky-daddy or He'll kick your ass."
> >You'll die, and then... nothing.
>
> My guy rose from the dead and said we could follow him.
So what? A real God couldn't be killed in the first place.
> >> Give us all a laugh and answer that one.
>
> >I understand you have a hard time reading things that aren't the Bible, so I'll
> >say it again, more slowly, and with small words so you can comprehend. I *used*
> >to believe in God.
>
> Let me say it quietly - that does not negate his existance.
What DOES negate His existence are three Bible verses: 1 John 4:8, 1
Corinthians 13:4, and Exodus 20:5.
> >It was someone almost exactly like you who convinced me
> >(unintentionally) that God-belief was so irrational, so insane, so dangerous, so
> >destructive to a thinking mind that I could no longer in good conscience hold
> >onto it myself.
>
> Name some things. You're a real joker.
For example, someone like you telling a lie ("Say, I've got a ship
called the Queen Mary I'd like to sell to you") in order to support a
weak attempt at sarcasm; calling other people fools ("Anyone who
believes I have the QM to sell is a fool"), failing to acknowledge the
offense, apologize to those offended, or repent by promising to not do
it again in the future; and finally professing that the Bible rules
you're threatening everyone else with do not apply to you.
Need a few more examples?
> >In short, it was someone almost exactly like you who converted
> >me from a theist into an atheist. (And I know I'm not the only one who this has
> >happened to.) That's what I mean when I say that people like you are simply
> >furthering the atheist cause. Not only are you embarrassing yourself by showing
> >off your arrogance and ignorance for everyone to see, you're actually creating
> >more of us. So by all means, keep it up. See what it gets you in the end.
>
> I have nothing to lose unless you convince me you are right - you,
> otoh, have already lost it all.
Depends on if you believe the Bible is correct. If you do, then 1 John
4:8, 1 Corinthians 13:4, and Exodus 20:5 prove your God cannot
logically exist. Whether that convinces you or not is of no concern to
me; as I've said, I need you to remain unconvinced so that I can
continue to use you as a bona-fide example of an ignorant, arrogant
Christian.
> duke, Asshole-American
> *****
> 2Cor 5:10 - For we must all appear before the
> toilet seat of Christ, that each one may
> receive what is due him for the things done
> while in the body, whether good or bad.
> *****
Wayne Delia, via groups.google.com
duke32
>> Every since 1 in 3 people alive today embraced Christianity, they no
>> longer hate theyselves.
>What works for some won't work for others. I know from experience that
>Christianity makes me miserable. I'm not going to embrace it again
>just because it makes someone *else* happy.
Then it goes without saying that you are truly a strange person.
>Only because those scholars are trying to preserve their preconceived
>notion that Jesus wants people to love each other. Yes, there are
>other passages where Jesus *does* tell people to love Him more than
>they love their families and themselves. Matthew 10:37, for example.
>But if you believe that Jesus wants people to love each other, then
>Mark 14:26 certainly conflicts with that belief, and you need scholars
>to come along and tell you the passage doesn't really mean what it
>says.
Matthew 10 (NIV)
37"Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of
me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of
me;
Mark 14 (NIV)
26When they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.
???????
>If scholars are the only people who can understand the Bible, then
>maybe the Bible isn't for everyone.
"Scholars" are in no way the only people that can understand the
bible.
But a problem that does exist for the non-scholar is that one can only
*truly* pull it all together if one truly pulls it all together, and I
mean that. It's too easy to pick out one or two statements, stand
them alone, and then pretend to know God's mind. "Hate your mother
and father" is a case in point.
>> >The Bible states that art is a sin, but now I can draw and sculpt
>> >without feeling guilty about it.
>> Now there's a wild one you pulled out of the cheeks of your ass.
>No, I really used to be scared of being an artist. In a way, I still
>am. After all, I may someday find out the Christian God is real, and
>that He indeed considers art a sin, just like Exodus 20:4 says.
Exodus 20
4 "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in
heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below.
Gosh, how often do I have to point out that a wood statue, or a piece
of art, is not an idol unless one *worships* it as a god, like in the
case of the golden calf.
Did you know that God instructed His people to build two gold statues
of cherubim and place them on top of the Ark of the Covenant? Exod
25:10-22
>> >Exodus 20:4
>> >"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of
>> >any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or
>> >that is in the wter under the earth."
>>
>> Tsk, tsk - "graven" mandates "idolatry". Christians don't idolize or
>> worship statues. That was a Hebrew trick with the golden calf.
>No, "graven" means "sculpted", nothing more.
Try looking up "graven image" instead of "graven".
graven image n. An idol or a fetish carved in wood or stone.
>At least you admit that you believe I really am confused. It's not
>like I choose to be confused.
Well, you did it to yourself - I didn't do it to you.
> But how does my confusion change the
>fact that you want me to hate myself? As long as I'm confused, I can't
>be a Christian without hating myself. If you want me to be Christian
>in spite of my confusion, then you want me to hate myself.
>--Billy
The educated know better, billy.
duke, American-American
*****
2Cor 5:10 - For we must all appear before the
judgment seat of Christ, that each one may
Wayne Delia
> On 28 Nov 2002 15:13:40 -0500, dark...@shell1.iglou.com (Keenan Clay
> Wilkie) wrote:
>
> >>Can you name one advantage pushing your mythical fable that there is
> >>no Almighty God do for you?
>
> >"Almighty God" is your assertion much like Allah is the assertion of
> >Muslims and Krsna is the assertion of Hindus.
>
> Yeah, but my guy died on a cross, was buried for 3 days, rose from the
> dead, and walked and talked and ate and drank with 500+ of his friends
> for 40 days before ascending to the God the Father.
That's nothing more than your canned, parrotted response that your
brainwashers have programmed into you to spout on command. There's
nothing in the Bible which says that Jesus "ate and drank with 500+ of
His friends," it's just something that you (or your brainwashers) made
up. You've been asked to back that up with a reference to Scripture,
and all you could come up with was the final verse in the Gospel of
John which says Jesus did all sorts of things the author was too lazy
to write about. That establishes that Jesus "ate and drank with 500+
of His friends" with about as much validity as it establishes Jesus
"said He liked to wave His penis at His pet cat, Boris."
> Neither Allah nor Krsna has been seen again.
Or Jesus, for that matter.
> > Atheists simply don't accept your assertion.
>
> Your funeral.
You really ought to consider selling admission tickets or signing a
pay-per-view deal for your "appearance at the judgement seat of
Christ," because I would certainly pay $39.95 to see the look on your
stupid, stupid face when Jesus sends you to hell for disobeying Him in
Matthew 5:22.
> duke, Asshole-American
> *****
> 2Cor 5:10 - For we must all appear before the
> toilet seat of Christ, that each one may
> receive what is due him for the things done
> while in the body, whether good or bad.
> *****
Wayne Delia, via groups.google.com
Wayne Delia
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 21:05:53 -0500, "Adam Marczyk"
> <ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
> >And incidentally, it's not a "fable," it's the honest-to-goodness truth. You
> >should try it sometime. You might even like it.
>
> There is neither proof nor evidence to support the non-existance of
> Alimghty God - it is the true atheist's unfounded mythical fable.
1 John 4:8 - "God is love."
1 Corinthians 13:4 - "Love is not jealous."
Exodus 20:5 - "I, the Lord thy God am a jealous God."
Combining the first two verses, we conclude that God is not a jealous
God.
By the law of non-contradiction, the third verse cannot co-exist with
the combination of the first and second verses.
Therefore, such a God cannot logically exist.
However, we are confident you will be able to ignore the above
reasoning, sweeping the whole syllogism under the carpet, pretending
it doesn't exist.
Your only escape route is to say that one (or more) of the Bible
verses are false premises, which is a frankly embarrassing thing for
any Christian to say, particularly since you're already on record as
saying they're all correct.
> I would never be so stupid as to follow that ill-gotten path.
Yeah, you avoid logic and valid reasoning like the plague.
Elroy Willis
> Elroy Willis <e...@airmail.net> wrote:
>>> But, actually, hell is likely a very cold and lonely place - no love
>>> of God, no love of anything - heaven is love eternal; hell is void of
>>> love.
>> Funny, the Bible says Jesus will be in hell watching people burn.
> le'roi, you must be confusing mad mag for the bible.
Yeah, Revelation is about as true or believable as Mad Magazine.
Revelation 14:10
"he, too, will drink of the wine of God's fury, which has been poured
full strength into the cup of his wrath. He will be tormented
with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the
Lamb."
What a stupid myth you believe in. How do you manage to cling
to it?
duke32
<ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>> *chuckle* - Hopefully for their souls they are at least htinking about
>> it.
>I *do* think about it. I debate with evangelical Christians quite frequently,
>and I also read their books - after all, I'll never know if my beliefs are wrong
>unless I test them against the best arguments of people who think differently.
>(Bet you've never done anything even remotely similar, have you, little godbot?
go to alt.religion.christian.baptist.
They hate it because I, a Roman Catholic, know a whole lot more about
the bible than they do.
>When was the last time you read a pro-atheist book? I've never come away
>doubting that atheism is the correct position - in fact, the absurdities,
>internal contradictions and logical fallacies that riddle every pro-Christian
>argument I've ever seen or heard of only give me more confidence that my
>position is correct.
Gee, and to think I STILL can't find any proof (will never be found by
definition) or even any evidence to suggest that there is no Almighty
God.
>> What can atheism offer - nothing?
>Dan Barker, an evangelical Christian minister for 19 years who finally saw the
>light and deconverted to atheism, thinks differently. Here's what he has to say
>on p.227 of _Losing Faith in Faith_ (you know, one of those atheist books you
>haven't read, because you, unlike me, are afraid of being exposed to things that
>disagree with you):
ok, let's look at it.
>"Several months after my deconversion I met with a group of fundamentalists to
>discuss the bible. I identified myself as an atheist and did not hesitate to
>examine critically the contradictions and errors in their 'holy' book. After the
>meeting, one of the older men came up to my car window and said: 'Dan, I think
>you're still a Christian.'
> 'Why do you say that?' I asked.
> 'Because you seem so happy. You're a nice person; you enjoy life and love
>people. You appreciate God's beauty in music, art and nature. How can an atheist
>have such peace? How can a non-Christian be so joyful?'
> I looked at him and said, 'No, I'm not a Christian--I no longer accept those
>myths. The reason I am happy is because I choose to be happy. For me, happiness
>is primarily a state of mind and since I now control my own mind, I also control
>my own happiness. I am no puppet of a higher mind, no slave to eternity. I never
>knew real joy before I regained possession of my own mind. You should try it!'"
Gee, what is my one-best comeback?
Obviously one need not be a Christian to be happy, but I'm fishing
away from the real answer.
So here it is: He never ever understood what it meant to be a
Christian. IOW, he never got the message. He played a part in a
movie, but never understood the movie.
>> What can Christianity offer - an eternity of happiness and love of
>> God!!!
>If you plan on being happy in Heaven while there are billions of lost souls -
>far more souls than are in Heaven - suffering in Hell for all eternity with no
>promise and no hope, then you are not a kind, merciful or loving individual.
Why not? I didn't put them there in hell - they chose it on their
own. Just like you're doing, no matter how hard I try to get you to
rethink your own position.
>> >> Your chuckle is your funeral.
>> >Right back at you, pal. Isn't it sad that *I'm* the one who's really living -
>> >who's laughing, who's loving, who's learning, who's getting the best out of
>> >life
>> Me.
>"Me" what? That doesn't even make sense.
I am the one that's really living, laughing, loving, learning, and
getting the best out of life.
You've selected the dead end material things of life, and so your life
will end accordingly - as plant food and nothing else. I've selected
the open end spiritual things of life (while I also enjoy the material
things within reason) offered to us by Almighty God.
I enjoy these things just as much as you do. Unlike you, I know I
can't take my money with me.
But I can take something else, and God promised me that.
>> I'm all smiles. I have a future, you don't.
>Your smile is the vacant, mindless grin of a sadly deluded individual, too
>wrapped up in his childish wish-fulfilling fantasies to notice the only life
>he'll ever have passing all around him, wasted.
Really!! How about that.
>We all only get one chance, and
>yours is vanishing like frost on a sunny morning, if only you could see it.
>You'd better wake up before it's too late.
If you have cancer, are you enjoying it? If you have a disability,
are you enjoying it? If your lose a child in an accident, are you
enjoying it? If you lose a loved one in a fire, are you enjoying it?
Remember, those things we enjoy compliments of the exercised free will
of Adam and Eve, who thought like you did - that only the free things
in life are best, and we need answer to no one other than ourselves.
>> >nd the saddest part is, you'll never even realize how wrong
>> >you were.
>> Gee, with the flames of hell tickling the cheeks of your butt, I trust
>> you will remember your words.
>Gee, I can't help but notice you said something completely contradictory to that
>in another post:
Play on words.
>> My guy rose from the dead and said we could follow him.
>And what do you have to substantiate that ridiculous claim? An ancient book,
>written by superstitious and ignorant men, multiply mistranslated as it was
>passed down through the centuries, twisted by every writer who wanted to
>reinterpret it to fit his own ideas, wildly contradictory both within itself and
>with external reality. *I* have science, and you have nothing but shadowy scraps
>of primitive mythology.
Actually the same quality of evidence as for the American Revolution -
original documents heavy historical historical and some spiritual,
archelogical documents, paintings, etc.
Your science - hahaha - that's a laugh. What does science promise you
when you die other than a future as plant food.
>> >The end of consciousness. The flame
>> >will be blown out. You'll cease to be, never having found out that your fairy
>> >tale was the fiction it was all along. I suppose it's a small mercy.
>> My soul will be glad.
>Sounds like someone who can't face the truth to me. If you'd ever read any good
>books on neurology, you'd know how intimately the sense of self and personality
>is connected to the brain. When one ends, so does the other.
But not the human soul.
Hey, just for grins, suppose there really is a God Almighty. Do you
not suppose all those neurologies you refer to can be reinstituted
with a mere snap of Almighty God's holy finger?
Except he's already told those in hell that their last chance is gone
forever.
>> Let me say it quietly - that does not negate his existance.
>You're right. The total lack of evidence does that.
Your lack of current and unstandable evidence does not negate his
existance in the least.
>> >It was someone almost exactly like you who convinced me
>> >(unintentionally) that God-belief was so irrational, so insane, so dangerous,
>so
>> >destructive to a thinking mind that I could no longer in good conscience hold
>> >onto it myself.
>>
>> Name some things. You're a real joker.
>"Name some things"? What are you talking about?
Things so irrational, so insane, so dangerous that you could no longer
hold on to yourself.
You said it above.
>> I have nothing to lose unless you convince me you are right - you,
>> otoh, have already lost it all.
>You have everything to lose, and you're losing it as we speak - and the sad
>thing is, you don't even know.
Can you give me even so much as one tiny, tiny little reason to
believe you.
Remember, If I'm wrong and you're right, I wasted "some" of my life as
you pointed out
However, If I'm right and you're wrong, shame on you.
> You're like a stubborn child, irrationally
>determined to stay in the musty dark confessional box you've wedged yourself
>into, while we freethinkers live and laugh in the light.
You think **I'm** the irrational one. You can't even begin to offer
any evidence to so much as suggest that there is no Almighty God,
other than your desire to just say no.
You are a real comedy act.
> I'd pity you - but the
>willful ignorance, arrogance, and sadism you've displayed make it quite clear
>that you don't deserve it.
But I don't pity you - I feel sorry for you. You have your chance -
you just elect to say "no".
duke, American-American
*****
2Cor 5:10 - For we must all appear before the
judgment seat of Christ, that each one may
duke32
<ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>> >You're an arrogant prick.
>> For trying to help you see the error of your ways?
>Well, yes. I'm sure you'd feel slightly insulted if some atheists knocked on
>your door one day, barged into your house, and spent several hours berating you
>and telling you how stupid you were for believing in God, and then justified
>their actions by saying it was all for your own good.
Well, that's not me.
>You chose to come to a
>place where you don't belong and where you're not welcome, to say things no one
>here is interested in hearing - you deserve the reaction you predictably get,
>and have no one to blame for it but yourself.
What reaction? I'm here to help you.
>> > Your "Almighty God" is just one of thousands of
>> >human-invented deities in which we lack belief.
>> There is only one Almighty God. All the rest are false.
>Ironically, the connection between statements such as this one, and people
>accusing you of arrogance, doesn't even seem to register on you.
I just know that you're in error in your mythical fable about there
being no Almighty God.
>Maybe you haven't realized it, but you're not that different from us. You
>believe all the gods humanity has ever invented, except for one, are false. We
>only go one step further; we only believe in one fewer god than you do.
But I have evidence of mine.
>> Allah is the Muslim word for Almighty God - yes, the one and the same
>> as for the Christian and the Jew Almighty God.
>I think most Muslims would disagree with you rather strongly about that, as
>would most Jews and most Christians.
It's a fact. Christians, Jews, and Muslims all worship the one and
only same God Almighty.
>> I owe you proof of nothing
>That's right, you don't. But if you don't intend to present any proof, then why
>are you even here? What is the point of any of your posts? Why are you even
>making these claims if you're not going to attempt to substantiate them? Are you
>just *trying* to waste our time?
I can't prove God - You can't prove no-God. I can offer evidence of
God - you *cannot* offer evidence of no-God.
I'm 1&1. You're 0&2.
Fred Stone
> On Mon, 2 Dec 2002 00:42:35 -0500, "Adam Marczyk"
> <ebon...@hotmailNOTexcite.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>>You're an arrogant prick.
>>>
>>>For trying to help you see the error of your ways?
>>
>
>>Well, yes. I'm sure you'd feel slightly insulted if some atheists knocked on
>>your door one day, barged into your house, and spent several hours berating you
>>and telling you how stupid you were for believing in God, and then justified
>>their actions by saying it was all for your own good.
>
>
> Well, that's not me.
None so blind as those who will not see.
>
>
>>You chose to come to a
>>place where you don't belong and where you're not welcome, to say things no one
>>here is interested in hearing - you deserve the reaction you predictably get,
>>and have no one to blame for it but yourself.
>
>
> What reaction? I'm here to help you.
It's only your superstitious nonsense that makes you believe that we
need help.
>
>
>>>> Your "Almighty God" is just one of thousands of
>>>>human-invented deities in which we lack belief.
>>>
>>>There is only one Almighty God. All the rest are false.
>>
>
>>Ironically, the connection between statements such as this one, and people
>>accusing you of arrogance, doesn't even seem to register on you.
>
>
> I just know that you're in error in your mythical fable about there
> being no Almighty God.
Prove it.
>
>
>>Maybe you haven't realized it, but you're not that different from us. You
>>believe all the gods humanity has ever invented, except for one, are false. We
>>only go one step further; we only believe in one fewer god than you do.
>
>
> But I have evidence of mine.
Show it to us.
>
>
>>>Allah is the Muslim word for Almighty God - yes, the one and the same
>>>as for the Christian and the Jew Almighty God.
>>
>
>>I think most Muslims would disagree with you rather strongly about that, as
>>would most Jews and most Christians.
>
>
> It's a fact. Christians, Jews, and Muslims all worship the one and
> only same God Almighty.
The Jews' God doesn't have a son. And the Muslim's God will send you to
hell for saying that Jesus is *his* son.
>
>
>>>I owe you proof of nothing
>>
>
>>That's right, you don't. But if you don't intend to present any proof, then why
>>are you even here? What is the point of any of your posts? Why are you even
>>making these claims if you're not going to attempt to substantiate them? Are you
>>just *trying* to waste our time?
>
>
> I can't prove God - You can't prove no-God. I can offer evidence of
> God - you *cannot* offer evidence of no-God.
"No-god" is easy to prove. Just ask any two beleivers to reconcile their
differences.
>
> I'm 1&1. You're 0&2.
We're not playing your game.
>
>
> duke, American-American
> *****
> 2Cor 5:10 - For we must all appear before the
> judgment seat of Christ, that each one may
> receive what is due him for the things done
> while in the body, whether good or bad.
> *****
--
Fred Stone
aa # 1369; linux user # 254178; machine # 138214
John Hattan
>On 1 Dec 2002 19:35:45 -0800, eric...@my-deja.com (Billy Goat) wrote:
>
>>> Nope - not curious. It a dead end street. God Almighty exists -
>>> period.
>
>>Even if He does exist, why would you worship Him? He sends stillborn
>>babies to Hell.
>
>No he doesn't. There's nothing at all to suggest he does such a
>thing, and everything to suggest he has a special place for the
>aborted and stillborn.
Really? Everything? Where is this everything?
---
John Hattan Grand High UberPope - First Church of Shatnerology
jo...@thecodezone.com http://www.shatnerology.com
John Hattan
>On 2 Dec 2002 08:31:14 -0800, wayne...@hotmail.com (Wayne Delia)
>wrote:
>
>>> >>Yeah, but my guy died on a cross, was buried for 3 days, rose from the
>>> >>dead, and walked and talked and ate and drank with 500+ of his friends
>>> >>for 40 days before ascending to the God the Father.
>
>>As has been pointed out many times before, the figure of "500+" is a
>>hearsay estimate of a number of unidentified alleged eyewitnesses who
>>supposedly only merely saw Jesus after the resurrection, but not
>>necessarily having eaten and drank with Him.
>
>And your knee jerk ignores the real proof that 500+ saw himm.
Where is this "real proof"? All I see is a mention in an old book.
John Hattan
>On Sun, 01 Dec 2002 18:40:57 -0600, John Hattan <jo...@thecodezone.com>
>wrote:
>
>>>>>>"Almighty God" is your assertion much like Allah is the assertion of
>>>>>>Muslims and Krsna is the assertion of Hindus.
>
>>>>>Yeah, but my guy died on a cross, was buried for 3 days, rose from the
>>>>>dead, and walked and talked and ate and drank with 500+ of his friends
>>>>>for 40 days before ascending to the God the Father.
>>>>There are more eyewitness accounts of the risen Elvis than the risen
>>>>Jesus.
>>>Could be, but what has Elvis done for us?
>
>>Waitwaitwait. You asserted that your god is superior to the
>>aforementioned Allah and Krishna because he rose and was witnessed.
>
>Ummmmmmmm, not quite. There is only one God Almighty, some others who
>call him Jehovah, or Allah. For the muslims, you must be thinking of
>mohammed, who has never been seen again, and for the Jews, well, they
>profess the messiah hasn't come yet.
So when you were refuting the assertion in the top two lines, you did
not mean to count Allah in that line, even though he was clearly
mentioned there.
>The part that you missed is that Almighty God presented himself to us
>in 3 different ways - as loving Father, as redeemer the Son Jesus, and
>as love of the Holy Spirit.
>
>You need to learn to keep your facts together better than that.
And you need to learn to read.
>> Now
>>you're moving the goalposts and saying that the worth of a god is based
>>on "what it has done for us".
>
>Nah - the goalposts haven't moved. Jesus did all that for us, and
>those that profess belief in him and follow his teachings.
Elvis did more for us than Jesus ever did.
John Hattan
>On Sun, 01 Dec 2002 19:00:11 -0600, John Hattan <jo...@thecodezone.com>
>wrote:
>>duke32 <duk...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>On 1 Dec 2002 10:37:09 -0800, eric...@my-deja.com (Billy Goat) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Mark 14:26
>>>>"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife,
>>>>and children,and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he
>>>>cannot be my disciple."
>>>
>>>Tsk, tsk - biblical scholars proclaim the intent here is "...if you
>>>love others more than me...
>>
>>Not the honest ones.
>
>The ones that know.
>
>"To hate" is contrary to all of the teachings of Christ.
Not according to Christ. Despite your claims to the contrary, there is
not a single Bible that translates the verse as you mentioned.