Re: The Folly of Atheism

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 16:20:39 +0530
Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Jun 2013 23:54:05 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
> atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>
> >His thinking is really screwed up. I usually just ignore him, but
> >once in a while I feel like responding because his claims are only
> >slightly more relevant than usual.
>
> Everyone has faith in something. No human being can exist without some
> type of faith.

People who are unconscious can exist without faith. People who are
vegetables on life support systems can exist without faith. People who
are born with a brain that can't conceptualize anything can exist
without faith. That's three examples so far, so why should anyone else
be excluded since it seems to be so common?

> People have faith in the system they belong to and in the daily
> activities they perform. They have faith in their culture and way of
> life. People have faith in different "isms," like nationalism,
> atheism, Marxism, empiricism, feminism, Globalism, Hinduism,
> Darwinism, racism, etc.

Yes, but not all people.

> So the question is clearly not whether or not to have faith, but
> rather, what do we choose to place our faith in? That's a basic choice
> everyone has to make in life. Some people reflect over their faith,
> and wonder why they think like they do, but most people of the world
> today belong in the category of the mindless masses who simply accept
> what they are brought up to believe as gospel truth.
> Regardless of that, the faith or conviction of a person, whether
> rational or not, will determine the course of his activities in life
> and thus behavioral patterns will evolve. In other words, people act
> in accordance with their faith or conviction. So the bottom line is
> that everyone, whether they call themselves Christians, Hindus,
> atheists or whatever, subscribes to some kind of tenets or beliefs on
> which they base their outlook in life.

Your premise is flawed because it assumes that everyone must have faith
in at least one "something."

Your assumption that atheists subscribe to some kind of tenets or
beliefs is inconsistent with the etymoloically obvious fact that atheism
is merely a classification of the "absence of theism."

> Modern atheists, for instance, claim they have no faith, but when
> closer examined it emerges they are very strongly convinced that there
> is no eternal soul; they think the self is the body and that life is
> meant to serve the body and mind. They have faith that the fact of
> awareness or consciousness is nothing more than neuro-chemical
> reactions in his brain. Thus to them there is no higher meaning to
> life than what the individual makes of it. Others have faith that
> there is a supreme intelligence guiding and controlling everything,
> and which is the original cause of all things.

The absence of theism is not the same as the absence of faith in an
idea or someone else's ability to make a particular decision. You are
confusing the meaning of faith, for in the context of atheism a faith
is merely a reference to a "religious faith" (a theology, a theism).

A skeptic, on the other hand, ultimately disclaims all manners of faith
because they value fact.

> Even persons who claim, irrationally, to have no faith will still
> have to concede in the end, that that very claim is based on faith. If
> you say you have no faith, you have to have faith this is a rational
> statement to make, otherwise you wouldn't make it. Unfortunately it is
> the sad state of the world today, that the idea of living without
> faith is widespread amongst even the so-called intelligentsia. I have
> met people who seriously, without a trace of shame or embarrassment
> state that they have no faith. They only believe in facts, they say.
> So if you are one of them, you can just throw this Journal away and go
> watch some TV. This essay is for thinking human beings. Still today
> most people in the world live according to some system of faith
> perpetuated by their culture and different religious scriptures of the
> world.

Living without faith isn't sad, it's a matter of freedom. You're just
confusing skepticism with pessimism.

> Since we have to have faith in something, it makes more sense to place
> our faith in a religious system or a supreme person rather that
> placing our faith in blind natural laws, or the big nothingness.
> Because the thing is, if everything ultimately happens by chance, as
> some would have it, it makes for a very bleak outlook in life. This is
> also why, that the more atheistic people become, the more depressed
> and miserable they also become. This is a statistic fact. And how can
> we ever hope to control our own destiny if everything happens by
> chance? In that case we can't even hope to control our own suffering
> and enjoyment because if our suffering and enjoyment is completely
> random it means you can't do anything to enhance one or the other.
> That means we are helpless pawns in the hands of nature with no
> influence whatsoever on the workings of matter.

Now you're being pessimistic, and you're also demonstrating bias by
claiming that "faith in a religious system or a supreme being" makes
more sense, but you fail to logically justify your reasoning.

> Contrary to that scenario, which unfortunately is becoming quite
> common place in the word today, there is the holistic idea, that we
> all are part of the same whole. The religion of Vedas is the original
> belief system in human society that says harmony will only evolve when
> all individuals give up their selfish pursuits, and come together to
> serve the complete whole.

No, Vedism is not the original belief system (and even if it were it
still doesn't earn any additional credibility or authority for it). In
fact a much older religion would be Asatru (the one that worships Thor,
Odin, and various others).

> If we don't serve the complete whole we are bound to be serving our
> own little spheres of interest, but we have tried that so much already
> and it has always been in vain. Who can honestly say that he became
> satisfied just by serving his senses and/or the senses of his loved
> ones? The path to true satisfaction lies in giving up selfish and ego
> centered pursuits and serving the complete whole, Krishna. Only such a
> course of action will bring real and lasting satisfaction to the self.
> The basic misunderstanding of the modern way of life is to confuse the
> self with the body and mind. We think we are the body and mind. That's
> why no one can find any satisfaction in the material world and
> everyone is frustrated, because it is actually not possible to satisfy
> the real self or the soul by trying to satisfy the body and mind.
> It is like trying to satisfy a bird in a cage by polishing the cage.
> The self is the soul, the eternal observer within the gross body and
> subtle mind. And because the self is unchanging and eternal it cannot
> find satisfaction in the non-permanent sphere of the material world.

Krishna is your own little sphere of interest. Why should anyone
else's interest in "living in the manner that suits them best" be any
more or less valid than your interest? You're disdain for modernity is
your choice, and although I don't disagree with your choice to reject
modernity I do hold the opinion that you're missing out on progress.

> The material world, including the body and mind, is constantly going
> through changes from creation, maintenance and destruction, but the
> self is an eternal, atomic particle of consciousness, for whom there
> is no birth or death or old age. Therefore such a conscious self
> cannot find satisfaction in a world of repeated birth and death. How
> can you find satisfaction when you know you are soon going to die?
> Therefore a conditioned living entity is willing to completely forget
> the fact that he is headed for death, and that in the face of death
> ultimately everyone's hopes and aspirations are rendered meaningless.

So you choose religion as your means of coping with reality, which
means that you're trying to avoid the cycle of life instead of finding
a way to understand it better. That's your choice, not mine.

> Of course, we don't think like that. We just go on in life as if we
> were never going to die, and as if this life is the only chance we
> will ever get to obtain happiness. So, in the meantime, while we are
> waiting for death, we try to find so many causes to believe in, but
> since everything is transient in the material world, whatever we place
> our faith in, changes, and becomes something else than what we
> expected. That is the unavoidable factor of material existence.

Yeah. So what? Why not live a better life instead of whining about it?

> Everyone is seeking a common factor of life they can share with others
> of a similar denomination and in this way experience a sense of
> identity, because our identity can only be established in terms of the
> relationships we form with other living entities. The inherent problem
> of the modern world is that our identities are being defined in terms
> of our bodies and minds. We live in a culture where our identity is
> established by the flesh we belong to, but as that flesh - the body-
> changes at every moment our identity changes along with it, and
> therefore people do not actually know who they really are. They cannot
> fix their identity. They don't have an anchor in life - a foundation
> that does not change. Someone might say, I have my name, that doesn't
> change, so I'll just hang on to that. And indeed, people do just that.
> But if you think about it, what kind of an identity is it to be Joe
> Smith or even Lord Blitherblather?

You can't speak for everyone (neither can I). People generally have
different expectations and goals in life, and then there are some who
have no expectations or goals at all, hence your assumption that
"everyone is seeking a common factor" is misinformed and unrealistic.

> IOW, besides their name, people do not have a constant in their lives,
> which brings us to another factor of life, and that is that everyone
> needs a constant in their lives, a value or a standard that does not
> change. The modern notion, that knowledge develops and evolves as we
> gather more and more information (which funny enough keeps proving the
> current ideas wrong), and that we evolved from amoebas, which, after
> the universe popped out of a point, somehow crawled out of the
> primordial soup, grew legs and learned to talk, is simply bogus. It is
> actually a proposal so ridiculous and laughable and an insult to the
> intelligence that it is a great wonder 99 percent of the world's
> population seem to believe in it.

Why should people need to have a constant in their lives? Is it
because you expect conformity from everyone? In fact inconsistency in
life is what makes it so much more meaningful, profound, exciting, and
interesting. It's the challenges in life that can make it worthwhile.

> The real truth is that the truth does not change. Either something is
> or isn't the truth. Take reincarnation for instance. It is not a
> matter of whether or not we believe in it. Either reincarnation is a
> fact or it isn't a fact, regardless of what you or I believe in. It is
> not that all of the sudden it becomes true because someone found out
> about it or starts to believe it. Or like the scientific "discovery"
> of planets. The planets existed before the scientists came along. They
> existed before, without anyone's knowledge - they were simply unseen
> by our meager, limited sense perception. So it is not knowledge that
> evolved. It was there all the time. We just couldn't see it. That is
> the truth. If is true now, it was also true before, and it will also
> remain true in the future. Only such truth is knowledge worth
> pursuing. Relative knowledge may have its use for making technology
> and consumer gadgets, but it is useless when it comes to solving the
> existential mysteries of life.

So why are you trying to delude people if the truth doesn't change, and
how can you be certain that the laws of reality are static? What if
they are changing at such a slow pace that it isn't noticeable to life
forms who don't live as long as Scientologists (who claim to live for
billions of years)?

> There is only one factor, one platform that all living entities can
> unite around, and that is the Supreme factor. Actually that is the
> only platform of faith upon which everyone can get together and work
> in a corporative spirit. As long as we do not act on the same platform
> of faith there will continue to be conflict of interests and egos
> clashing together. If, however, we can believe that we are all parts
> of the same whole - Krishna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead -
> then, in that case, we can also believe and understand that we are all
> brothers and sisters coming from the same father, the same origin -
> Krishna.

We can't; it's human nature. Conformity is the bane of one's existence.

> Anything else will be tribal oriented. It's funny how people of
> different great nations like the US or Russia think they are
> sophisticated and don't fancy themselves to be just another tribe
> bullying others or squabbling with them for area and resources. There
> is nothing less tribal, mentality wise, about the Disney company, the
> White House or the Pentagon, than some tribes in the remote jungles of
> Africa or Asia. As long as this type of narrow, ego-centric mentality
> prevails, whether it be in Swahili land or in Wall Street, there will
> be constant competition between individuals or groups of individuals
> of who can gratify their minds and senses in the most refined or
> extravagant manner. How can such a primitive, tribal oriented
> mentality bring all beings together in harmony? As Krishna says in the
> Bhagavad Gita, how can there be happiness without peace?
> There has to be a common platform for everyone to act on, but clearly
> the modern society and culture does not provide people with such a
> common platform. They may call it the global culture, but the only
> thing global about it is that now everyone can happily drink Coca Cola
> together. Regardless of the enlightenment of the information age the
> 'global' culture still churns out the same old tribal clones, except
> that now they are dressed in suits and carry cell phones. That's
> called advancement, BTW. But it doesn't matter how fancy or recent
> your cell phone model is, or how powerful your notebook, or how many
> cylinders your car have, or how advanced you otherwise consider
> yourself in learning and prestige, you are still not happy and
> satisfied, and there are still no conceptions and ideas offered by any
> of the great institutions of the global culture that can make your
> life meaningful and satisfied; none that work, anyway, or are being
> practiced. There is a lot of talk about finding oneself, and getting
> together in peace and harmony, and saving the this and the that; in
> fact nowadays it has been made into a whole industry to spill your
> heart out on Oprah and Jerry Springer shows, but no one seems able yet
> to have come up with a solution to the problem of how to counteract
> the miseries of the material world.

Your view of tribal life is limited. In fact there is a tremendous
variety of tribal culture throughout world history, some of which is
still in existence today in certain regions (think "Amazon rain forest,"
etc.), and very likely [I suspect] on many other planets throughout
not only this galaxy but the entire universe (here and there, etc.).

> One can of course also choose to just forget about the existential
> questions of life, and stop wondering why he is suffering, and just
> get on in life. What's the problem, right? But what's the meaning of
> forgetting about death and becoming a dull consumer whose only aim in
> life is to acquire brand-name items defined by the culture he happens
> to belong to? It is especially useless seen in the light of the fact
> that no one in existence ever became happy and satisfied by becoming
> successful in material life - no matter how much he tried. And who can
> say that it hasn't been tried?

Forgetting about death does not have a causal relationship with
becoming a dull consumer. In fact, shopping for shoes, dresses, etc.,
does make some people feel very happy. This goes back to a point I
made earlier about people having different expectations and goals in
life. Certainly some expectations and goals are, perhaps, more
meaningful to different people, but from the standpoint of objectivity
it varies and one particular standard (such as yours) isn't neccessarily
applicable to everyone.

Your expectation in life that your standards are superior are valid in
the context of yourself, but not to others who have different ideas on
how they wish to live. Once again, conformity is the bane of one's
existence, but not only when projected onto others, for it is the bane
of those who try to change the world which is a highly stressful way to
go about living one's life, and I assume that probably all freedom
fighters and international human rights advocates would agree with me
based on their own personal experiences in being a "rock in the stream."

> The weekly magazines are full of colorful reports on the successful
> people, the celebrities, who enjoy their senses to the max, but who
> are all having so many problems with broken relationships, drugs,
> suicide, etc. - in fact, the same problems that everyone else has. You
> can worry about not being able to pay your monthly rent of 10.000
> dollars or you can worry about not being able to pay 300 dollars, but
> the worry is the same. If you are worrying about 10.000 dollars
> instead of 300 dollars you have just upgraded your miseries and
> worries. You can improve the material qualities of life such as wealth
> and prestige, but the basic experience of suffering and enjoyment is
> the same for everyone regardless of their material status in life. You
> can't say that a rich man in a high-rise apartment in Manhattan eating
> his bloody steak with silver cutlery is enjoying his meal more than a
> Bengali farmer eating puffed rice from a leaf plate with his fingers.
> The eating process is exactly the same. Or when you sleep, do you then
> care or even notice if you are lying on a box spring mattress in
> Beverly Hills or on a straw matt in a mud hut?

You're back to being pessimistic again. Some people like drugs, some
people like to eat too much, some people like to push religion, some
people like to have wild sex orgies, the list goes on. This boils down
to personal goals and expectations about life, and it's always personal.

> The only solution to the problems of finding our identity and finding
> that which we can place our faith in is to accept divinely inspired
> knowledge descending from Krishna, and which furthermore has been
> recorded and transcribed in the Vedas, the most comprehensive body of
> knowledge known to mankind. The essence of that great body of
> knowledge has been delivered and made accessible to the people of this
> modern, fallen age by Srila Prabhupada, who comes in the ancient
> disciplic succession from Krishna Himself. Anything else is mere
> speculation. So there is faith based on speculation, and faith based
> on fact. The process of Krishna consciousness is faith based on facts.
> Just try it out. Simply chant the Hare Krisna mantra and your life
> will be sublime. It's guaranteed.

Once again, what's appropriate for yourself isn't necessarily
appropriate for others. It certainly doesn't apply to me.

--
Fidem Turbāre, the non-existent atheist goddess
"Good for some may not be the same for others."
-- Charles Milles Manson

[%]

yes it does in fact especially to you

[Jahnu]

On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 21:49:31 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

>People who are unconscious can exist without faith. People who are
>vegetables on life support systems can exist without faith. People who
>are born with a brain that can't conceptualize anything can exist
>without faith. That's three examples so far, so why should anyone else
>be excluded since it seems to be so common?

Let me rephrase that. Everyone with a functioning brain has faith in
someone or something. Nobody can exist without faith. It's such an
obvious point. Atheists, being of the irrational belief that there are
no gods, are by definition less intelligent. I mean, how unintelligent
do you have to be, to believe that life arose from chemical
combinations and then claim -- but, but I have no faith? hahaha :) Do
you now understand how atheism has damaged your brain by ruining your
capacity for analytical, rational thinking?

<blah blah>

Krishna says:

Those miscreants who are grossly foolish, who are lowest among
mankind, whose knowledge is stolen by illusion, and who partake of the
atheistic nature of demons do not surrender unto Me. (Bg 7.15)




Have a look at my art -

http://youtu.be/K6y-GNCHgow - Buddha Bar
http://youtu.be/Ucvk5t2Inyk - Friction
http://youtu.be/sVUgoBaq71Q - I am your soul
http://youtu.be/2uRbsf9Vzg8 - Sudder street
http://youtu.be/DC5OHr-Pm4I - Jahnava
http://youtu.be/y9KqLPCWR1E - Krishnart

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu
http://www.facebook.com/groups/138462029613179/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq-n0bbhpaA - George
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5QIX5h8y1w&feature - TOVP

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 15:50:28 +0530
Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 21:49:31 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
> atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>
> >People who are unconscious can exist without faith. People who are
> >vegetables on life support systems can exist without faith. People
> >who are born with a brain that can't conceptualize anything can exist
> >without faith. That's three examples so far, so why should anyone
> >else be excluded since it seems to be so common?
>
>
> Let me rephrase that. Everyone with a functioning brain has faith in
> someone or something. Nobody can exist without faith. It's such an
> obvious point. Atheists, being of the irrational belief that there are
> no gods, are by definition less intelligent. I mean, how unintelligent
> do you have to be, to believe that life arose from chemical
> combinations and then claim -- but, but I have no faith? hahaha :) Do
> you now understand how atheism has damaged your brain by ruining your
> capacity for analytical, rational thinking?
>
> <blah blah>

Actually, atheism is where analytical and rational thinking ultimately
leads people when they apply skepticism objectively. It is the faithful
subjective beliefs that people hold which often interfere with clarity.

--
Fidem Turbāre, the non-existent atheist goddess

"What led you to believe that convinced skeptic is an oxymoron? I am
skeptical about many claims but convinced that the Earth's rotation
will create the illusion of sunrise tomorrow morning."
-- Dakota (June 2, 2013)

[%]

Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 15:50:28 +0530
> Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 21:49:31 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
>> atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>>
>>> People who are unconscious can exist without faith. People who are
>>> vegetables on life support systems can exist without faith. People
>>> who are born with a brain that can't conceptualize anything can
>>> exist without faith. That's three examples so far, so why should
>>> anyone else be excluded since it seems to be so common?
>>
>>
>> Let me rephrase that. Everyone with a functioning brain has faith in
>> someone or something. Nobody can exist without faith. It's such an
>> obvious point. Atheists, being of the irrational belief that there
>> are no gods, are by definition less intelligent. I mean, how
>> unintelligent do you have to be, to believe that life arose from
>> chemical combinations and then claim -- but, but I have no faith?
>> hahaha :) Do you now understand how atheism has damaged your brain
>> by ruining your capacity for analytical, rational thinking?
>>
>> <blah blah>
>
> Actually, atheism is where analytical and rational thinking ultimately
> leads people when they apply skepticism objectively. It is the
> faithful subjective beliefs that people hold which often interfere
> with clarity.

no its not

[Jahnu]

On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 15:46:36 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess" blithered:

>Actually, atheism is where analytical and rational thinking ultimately
>leads people when they apply skepticism objectively. It is the faithful
>subjective beliefs that people hold which often interfere with clarity.

You wouldn't know clarity if it fell on your head. Atheism is
irrational thinking for the less intelligent. It's as simple as that.
Atheism is blind, idiotic scepticism. It goes against all observation,
logic and common sense. In fact, you'd have to be an indoctrinated
product of the Coca-cola culture to be able to entertain such a
retarded idea, thus fulfilling the predictions of Bhagavad Gita.

[Don Stockbauer]

Pantheism is better in that it unites science and religion,

[Zerkon]

On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 21:49:31 -0700, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess wrote:

> People who are unconscious can exist without faith.

Stating a person does or does not have faith is a leap of faith.

[bil...@m.nu]

On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 07:11:58 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 15:46:36 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
>atheist goddess" blithered:
>

>You wouldn't know clarity if it fell on your head. Atheism is
>irrational thinking for the less intelligent. It's as simple as that.
>Atheism is blind, idiotic scepticism. It goes against all observation,
>logic and common sense. In fact, you'd have to be an indoctrinated
>product of the Coca-cola culture to be able to entertain such a
>retarded idea, thus fulfilling the predictions of Bhagavad Gita.
>

dude are you serious? I mean is that the way your mind operates?

>Krishna says:
>
Honestl y who gives a fuck what santa claus and his pals have to say
>
>
>
>Have a look at my Homosexual gay boy fag art -
>
>http://youtu.be/K6y-GNCHgow - Gay Buddha Bar
>http://youtu.be/Ucvk5t2Inyk - dick Friction
>http://youtu.be/sVUgoBaq71Q - I am your gay soul
>http://youtu.be/2uRbsf9Vzg8 - Sudder street gayboy
>http://youtu.be/DC5OHr-Pm4I - Jahnava the gay
>http://youtu.be/y9KqLPCWR1E - Krishnart gayfart

[raven1]

On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 12:47:05 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:

>On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 07:11:58 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 15:46:36 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
>>atheist goddess" blithered:
>>
>>You wouldn't know clarity if it fell on your head. Atheism is
>>irrational thinking for the less intelligent. It's as simple as that.
>>Atheism is blind, idiotic scepticism. It goes against all observation,
>>logic and common sense. In fact, you'd have to be an indoctrinated
>>product of the Coca-cola culture to be able to entertain such a
>>retarded idea, thus fulfilling the predictions of Bhagavad Gita.
>>
>dude are you serious? I mean is that the way your mind operates?

Jesper is a brainwashed member of ISKCON, (the "Hare Krishnas"). His
mind doesn't operate at all.

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <o71kr858eljknjdsm...@4ax.com>, bil...@m.nu
wrote:

> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 07:11:58 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 15:46:36 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
> >atheist goddess" blithered:
> >
> >You wouldn't know clarity if it fell on your head. Atheism is
> >irrational thinking for the less intelligent. It's as simple as that.
> >Atheism is blind, idiotic scepticism. It goes against all observation,
> >logic and common sense. In fact, you'd have to be an indoctrinated
> >product of the Coca-cola culture to be able to entertain such a
> >retarded idea, thus fulfilling the predictions of Bhagavad Gita.
> >
> dude are you serious? I mean is that the way your mind operates?

Tragically, yes, that's the way what's left of his mind operates. That's
what Hare Krishna will do to you.

--

JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden

[Jahnu]

On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 12:47:05 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:

>>Krishna says:
>>
>Honestl y who gives a fuck what santa claus and his pals have to say

People with brains. That excludes you :)

"I owed a magnificent day to the Bhagavad Geeta. It was the first of
books; it was as if an empire spoke to us, nothing small or unworthy,
but large, serene, consistent, the voice of an old intelligence which
in another age and climate had pondered and thus disposed of the same
questions which exercise us." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

Have a look at my art -

http://youtu.be/IX3BR5fx8KU - Evolution
http://youtu.be/K6y-GNCHgow - Buddha Bar
http://youtu.be/Ucvk5t2Inyk - Friction
http://youtu.be/sVUgoBaq71Q - I am your soul

http://youtu.be/2uRbsf9Vzg8 - Sudder street

[bil...@m.nu]

That would in fact explain alot

[Jahnu]

On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 20:17:31 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:

>That would in fact explain alot

Birdy is a member of the Coca-cola cult just like you. He is the
brain-dead product of the most harmful, destructive and insane culture
to ever visit the planet.

Krishna says:

Bewildered by false ego, strength, pride, lust and anger, the demons
become envious of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is situated
in their own bodies and in the bodies of others, and blaspheme against
the real religion. (Bg 16.18)

Have a look at my art -

http://youtu.be/IX3BR5fx8KU - Evolution

http://youtu.be/K6y-GNCHgow - Buddha Bar
http://youtu.be/Ucvk5t2Inyk - Friction
http://youtu.be/sVUgoBaq71Q - I am your soul

http://youtu.be/2uRbsf9Vzg8 - Sudder street

[raven1]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 08:24:11 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 20:17:31 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:
>
>>That would in fact explain alot
>
>Birdy is a member of the Coca-cola cult just like you.

As I have pointed out elsewhere, Jesper, there are alternatives to
being either a mindless consumer or a mindless cultist. But being
mindless, you aren't aware of them.

[raven1]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 05:10:39 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 12:47:05 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:
>
>>>Krishna says:
>>>
>>Honestl y who gives a fuck what santa claus and his pals have to say
>
>People with brains.

Jesper, the only people with brains you ever interact with are the
atheists here.

[bil...@m.nu]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 08:24:11 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 20:17:31 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:
>
>>That would in fact explain alot
>
>Birdy is a member of the Coca-cola cult just like you. He is the
>brain-dead product of the most harmful, destructive and insane culture
>to ever visit the planet.

you give yourself away. I mean you are so damn stupid you bring up
this cult shit when it is you that is affiliated with a cult. and the
bad thing is that you know it and you even feel guillty about it
>
who gives a fuck what the faggot >Krishna says:

[Jahnu]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 14:33:04 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:

>who gives a fuck what the faggot >Krishna says:

hahaha :) ... listen to this low class piece of trailer-park trash.

Didn't you hear what I just said, retard? Let me try again - people
with brains have always been inspired by Krishna's words.

"The Bhagavad Geeta is the most systematic statement of spiritual
evolution of endowing value to mankind. It is one of the most clear
and comprehensive summaries of perennial philosophy ever revealed;
hence its enduring value is subject not only to India but to all of
humanity." - Aldous Huxley

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 07:11:58 +0530
Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 15:46:36 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
> atheist goddess" blithered:
>
> >Actually, atheism is where analytical and rational thinking
> >ultimately leads people when they apply skepticism objectively. It
> >is the faithful subjective beliefs that people hold which often
> >interfere with clarity.
>
> You wouldn't know clarity if it fell on your head.

How heavy is clarity? How fast do you assume it would be falling?

> Atheism is irrational thinking for the less intelligent. It's as
> simple as that.

Atheism isn't rational or irrational. It also doesn't have any minimum
nor maximum intelligence requirements.

> Atheism is blind, idiotic scepticism.

Blindness isn't applicable to atheism because sight isn't one of
atheism's attributes. Atheism is the ultimate result of applying
skepticism objectively, impartially, and consistently.

> It goes against all observation, logic and common sense.

Atheism is merely the classification of the "absence of theism." It is
not a position, and espouses no virtues or values, for it is not
dogmatic in any way as that is the nature of classifications.

Therefore atheism is incidental to observation, logic, and common
sense, because it is none of those things, and certainly not opposed to
any of them.

You are, of course, welcome to provide Logical, Objective, Verifiable
Evidence in support of your assertion, but know that if you fail to do
this that your argument will merely remain as an "unproven assertion."

L.O.V.E.: http://www.atheistfrontier.com/glossary/love.pl

> In fact, you'd have to be an indoctrinated product of the Coca-cola
> culture to be able to entertain such a retarded idea, thus fulfilling
> the predictions of Bhagavad Gita.

When did Bhagavad Gita predict the "Coca-Cola culture?"

How has the idea earned the status of "retarded?"

> Krishna says:
>
> Those miscreants who are grossly foolish, who are lowest among
> mankind, whose knowledge is stolen by illusion, and who partake of the
> atheistic nature of demons do not surrender unto Me. (Bg 7.15)

Demons are not atheistic since they are supernatural agents of deities.

--
Fidem Turbāre, the non-existent atheist goddess

"I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but
have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called
religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the
world so far as our science can reveal it."
-- Dr. Albert Einstein

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

Indeed, that is an assertion which could qualify as a "leap of faith."

If you meant to imply that I made such a statement then you have
misunderstood my words -- I merely stated that "faith isn't necessary
for existence by those who are unconscious," which clearly doesn't
exclude other possibilities such as existing with faith.

--
Fidem Turbāre, the non-existent atheist goddess

"Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing
your temper or your self-confidence."
-- Robert Frost

[%]

they don't exist

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

I would like to nominate Quoth The Raven for the above reply to Jahnu.

--
Fidem Turbāre, the non-existent atheist goddess

"He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned
my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for
him, the spinal cord would fully suffice."
-- Dr. Albert Einstein

[%]

Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 13:49:05 +0000 (UTC)
> Zerkon <Zer...@Z.Zorg> wrote:
>> On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 21:49:31 -0700, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
>> atheist goddess wrote:
>>
>>> People who are unconscious can exist without faith.
>>
>> Stating a person does or does not have faith is a leap of faith.
>
> Indeed, that is an assertion which could qualify as a "leap of faith."
>
> If you meant to imply that I made such a statement then you have
> misunderstood my words -- I merely stated that "faith isn't necessary
> for existence by those who are unconscious," which clearly doesn't
> exclude other possibilities such as existing with faith.

yes it does

[Jahnu]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:48:00 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

>How heavy is clarity? How fast do you assume it would be falling?

You are kidding, right? :)

>Atheism isn't rational or irrational. It also doesn't have any minimum
>nor maximum intelligence requirements.

Are you kidding? It requires exceptional stupidity to be an atheist.

>Blindness isn't applicable to atheism because sight isn't one of
>atheism's attributes. Atheism is the ultimate result of applying
>skepticism objectively, impartially, and consistently.

Atheism is the blind belief that life evolved from a bunch of
chemicals.

>Atheism is merely the classification of the "absence of theism." It is
>not a position, and espouses no virtues or values, for it is not
>dogmatic in any way as that is the nature of classifications.

Atheism is merely the idiotoc idea that life evolved from a bunch of
chemicals.

>Therefore atheism is incidental to observation, logic, and common
>sense, because it is none of those things, and certainly not opposed to
>any of them.

To be an atheist you'd have to reject logic and reason, direct
observation and even common sense.

>You are, of course, welcome to provide Logical, Objective, Verifiable
>Evidence in support of your assertion, but know that if you fail to do
>this that your argument will merely remain as an "unproven assertion."

Krishna says:

My dear Arjuna, because you are never envious of Me, I shall impart to
you this most confidential knowledge and realization, knowing which
you shall be relieved of the miseries of material existence. (Bg. 9.1)

This knowledge is the king of education, the most secret of all
secrets. It is the purest knowledge, and because it gives direct
perception of the self by realization, it is the perfection of
religion. It is everlasting, and it is joyfully performed. (Bg. 9.2)

Have a look at my art -

http://youtu.be/IX3BR5fx8KU - Evolution

http://youtu.be/K6y-GNCHgow - Buddha Bar
http://youtu.be/Ucvk5t2Inyk - Friction
http://youtu.be/sVUgoBaq71Q - I am your soul
http://youtu.be/2uRbsf9Vzg8 - Sudder street

[Jahnu]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:51:53 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

>Indeed, that is an assertion which could qualify as a "leap of faith."
>
>If you meant to imply that I made such a statement then you have
>misunderstood my words -- I merely stated that "faith isn't necessary
>for existence by those who are unconscious," which clearly doesn't
>exclude other possibilities such as existing with faith.

The funny thing is that it takes gigantic leaps of faith to be an
atheist.

"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing --
they believe in anything."   --  GK Chesterton

[bil...@m.nu]

On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 05:10:13 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 14:33:04 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:
>
>>who gives a fuck what the faggot >Krishna says:
>
>hahaha :) ... listen to this low class piece of trailer-park trash.
>
>Didn't you hear what I just said, retard? Let me try again - people
>with brains have always been inspired by Krishna's words.
>

sure ... everyone has a brain, but alot of people, including you, just
have not quite worked out the processes involved in using said brain.
And I am so sorry that you are that way

[bil...@m.nu]

On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 12:05:09 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:48:00 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
>atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>
>>How heavy is clarity? How fast do you assume it would be falling?
>
>You are kidding, right? :)
>
>>Atheism isn't rational or irrational. It also doesn't have any minimum
>>nor maximum intelligence requirements.
>
>Are you kidding? It requires exceptional stupidity to be an atheist.

Really? what does it require to believe in santa claus? because you
certainly do

>
>>Blindness isn't applicable to atheism because sight isn't one of
>>atheism's attributes. Atheism is the ultimate result of applying
>>skepticism objectively, impartially, and consistently.
>
>Atheism is the blind belief that life evolved from a bunch of
>chemicals.

dumbass

>
>>Atheism is merely the classification of the "absence of theism." It is
>>not a position, and espouses no virtues or values, for it is not
>>dogmatic in any way as that is the nature of classifications.
>
>Atheism is merely the idiotoc idea that life evolved from a bunch of
>chemicals.

Dumbass

>
>>Therefore atheism is incidental to observation, logic, and common
>>sense, because it is none of those things, and certainly not opposed to
>>any of them.
>
>To be an atheist you'd have to reject logic and reason, direct
>observation and even common sense.

and you are telling us this yet you believe in the tooth fairy what is
wrong with that picture?

>
>>You are, of course, welcome to provide Logical, Objective, Verifiable
>>Evidence in support of your assertion, but know that if you fail to do
>>this that your argument will merely remain as an "unproven assertion."
>
>Krishna says:
>

>My dear Arjuna, I enjoyed you fucking me in the ass

[Jahnu]

On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 04:32:26 -0500, bil...@m.nu blithered:

>Really? what does it require to believe in santa claus? because you
>certainly do

Contrary to you I don't deal in beliefs. I know who God is.

Krishna says:

Now hear, O son of Prtha, how by practicing yoga in full consciousness
of Me, with mind attached to Me, you can know Me in full, free from
doubt. (Bg 7.1)

[duke]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:57:09 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist
goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 07:41:22 -0400
>raven1 <quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 05:10:39 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 12:47:05 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:
>> >
>> >>>Krishna says:
>> >>>
>> >>Honestl y who gives a fuck what santa claus and his pals have to say
>> >
>> >People with brains.
>>
>> Jesper, the only people with brains you ever interact with are the
>> atheists here.
>
>I would like to nominate Quoth The Raven for the above reply to Jahnu.

I would like to nominate the following:
*****

Jesper, the only people with brains you ever interact with are the

atheists here who have no more brains than you to.
*****

The dukester, American - American

********************************************
Repeal Obama - most impotent president ever.
Five major US scandals and still going strong:
a)Fast/Furious,b)IRS,c)NSA d)News Phone Records,
e)Selective enforcement of environmental laws
********************************************

[Dreamer In Colore]

On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 12:16:02 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:57:09 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist
>goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 07:41:22 -0400
>>raven1 <quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 05:10:39 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 12:47:05 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>>Krishna says:
>>> >>>
>>> >>Honestl y who gives a fuck what santa claus and his pals have to say
>>> >
>>> >People with brains.
>>>
>>> Jesper, the only people with brains you ever interact with are the
>>> atheists here.
>>
>>I would like to nominate Quoth The Raven for the above reply to Jahnu.
>
>I would like to nominate the following:
>*****
>Jesper, the only people with brains you ever interact with are the
>atheists here who have no more brains than you to.
>*****
>

Nice try, liar. It's ridiculous for you to just make stuff up, but
that's par for your miniature golf course.

Let us all know when you have something of value to contribute to the
discussion, moron.

[Bob Casanova]

On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 23:01:10 -0700, the following appeared
in sci.skeptic, posted by "%" <per...@gmail.com>:

No, it doesn't. I recommend Remedial English 101.
--

Bob C.

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

- Isaac Asimov

[bil...@m.nu]

On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 15:28:19 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 04:32:26 -0500, bil...@m.nu blithered:
>
>
>>Really? what does it require to believe in santa claus? because you
>>certainly do
>
>Contrary to you I don't deal in beliefs. I know who God is.
>

ok then in that case tell me who is god. and while you are at it tell
me all about santa claus, the tooth fairy, puff the magic dragon,
frodo, and snow white and the 7 dwarves. because beliving in god is
the exact same thing as believing in all of those things that I listed
and every other concept and creature that has ever come out of the
human imagination. dude this is so far over your head that in 10
lifetimes you could not understand the most basic of concepts and it
is all because you are so afraid. Your fear is so rooted and so strong
that you can not go to sleep without "praying" to an entity that only
exists in your imagination. However, I will say that if it is that
important to you and if it allows you to retain your sanity then by
all means keep it up, I am sure santa tinkerbell and the like will
always be there for you.

[Jahnu]

On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 18:56:57 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:

>ok then in that case tell me who is god.

<blah blah>

Krishna says:

I am the source of all spiritual and material worlds. Everything
emanates from Me. The wise who perfectly know this engage in My
devotional service and worship Me with all their hearts. (Bg 10.8)

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

...or they just aren't using it correctly.

--
Fidem Turbāre, the non-existent atheist goddess

"There cannot be a crisis next week. My schedule is already full."
-- Henry Kissinger

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 12:07:35 +0530
Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:51:53 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
> atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>
> >Indeed, that is an assertion which could qualify as a "leap of
> >faith."
> >
> >If you meant to imply that I made such a statement then you have
> >misunderstood my words -- I merely stated that "faith isn't necessary
> >for existence by those who are unconscious," which clearly doesn't
> >exclude other possibilities such as existing with faith.
>
> The funny thing is that it takes gigantic leaps of faith to be an
> atheist.

According to you then, babies and animals are all actively taking
gigantic leaps of faith. I challenge you to prove your assertion.

--
Fidem Turbāre, the non-existent atheist goddess

"All belief systems ossify over time."
-- Morton Lucifer

[%]

Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 12:07:35 +0530
> Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:51:53 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
>> atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Indeed, that is an assertion which could qualify as a "leap of
>>> faith."
>>>
>>> If you meant to imply that I made such a statement then you have
>>> misunderstood my words -- I merely stated that "faith isn't
>>> necessary for existence by those who are unconscious," which
>>> clearly doesn't exclude other possibilities such as existing with
>>> faith.
>>
>> The funny thing is that it takes gigantic leaps of faith to be an
>> atheist.
>
> According to you then, babies and animals are all actively taking
> gigantic leaps of faith. I challenge you to prove your assertion.

i challenge you to prove i'm zachy and i already know you know i'm not

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 12:05:09 +0530
Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:48:00 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
> atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

> > On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 15:50:28 +0530
> > Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> You wouldn't know clarity if it fell on your head.
> >

> >How heavy is clarity? How fast do you assume it would be falling?
>
> You are kidding, right? :)

No. Mine was a serious effort to understand what you meant.

> >Atheism isn't rational or irrational. It also doesn't have any
> >minimum nor maximum intelligence requirements.
>
> Are you kidding? It requires exceptional stupidity to be an atheist.

Stupidity isn't a requirement -- it's entirely optional (and in some
cases, strongly encouraged). This is why atheism is such a threat to
theism, for it does not require conformity in a particular knowledge
base, such as the scholasticism or memorization of religous scriptures.

> >Blindness isn't applicable to atheism because sight isn't one of
> >atheism's attributes. Atheism is the ultimate result of applying
> >skepticism objectively, impartially, and consistently.
>
> Atheism is the blind belief that life evolved from a bunch of
> chemicals.

That's scientific theory; atheism is impartial regarding science.

Although there are many atheists who agree with the theory of
evolution, there are also many theists (such as Roman Catholics) who
also agree with it, and it's important to also note that the level of
agreement with the theory of evolution can vary.

> >Atheism is merely the classification of the "absence of theism." It
> >is not a position, and espouses no virtues or values, for it is not
> >dogmatic in any way as that is the nature of classifications.
>
> Atheism is merely the idiotoc idea that life evolved from a bunch of
> chemicals.

That's a combination of scientific hypothesis and theorum, and which
also ventures into the realm of proven fact. This is incidental to
atheism, which is merely the classification of the "absence of theism."

> >Therefore atheism is incidental to observation, logic, and common
> >sense, because it is none of those things, and certainly not opposed
> >to any of them.
>
> To be an atheist you'd have to reject logic and reason, direct
> observation and even common sense.

Not that I'm aware of. Can you provide an example to prove your claim?

> >You are, of course, welcome to provide Logical, Objective, Verifiable
> >Evidence in support of your assertion, but know that if you fail to
> >do this that your argument will merely remain as an "unproven
> >assertion."
>
> Krishna says:
>
> My dear Arjuna, because you are never envious of Me, I shall impart to
> you this most confidential knowledge and realization, knowing which
> you shall be relieved of the miseries of material existence. (Bg. 9.1)
>
> This knowledge is the king of education, the most secret of all
> secrets. It is the purest knowledge, and because it gives direct
> perception of the self by realization, it is the perfection of
> religion. It is everlasting, and it is joyfully performed. (Bg. 9.2)

"Perfection of religion" is an example of judgement that is influenced
by moral relativism. Therefore, it is not necessarily objective.

--
Fidem Turbāre, the non-existent atheist goddess

"... Two men say they're Jesus, one of them must be wrong ..."
-- Dire Straits ("Industrial Disease")

[Jeanne Douglas]

In article <20130615193050.e8b8...@fidemturbare.com>,

"Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess"
<god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 12:07:35 +0530
> Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:51:53 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
> > atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Indeed, that is an assertion which could qualify as a "leap of
> > >faith."
> > >
> > >If you meant to imply that I made such a statement then you have
> > >misunderstood my words -- I merely stated that "faith isn't necessary
> > >for existence by those who are unconscious," which clearly doesn't
> > >exclude other possibilities such as existing with faith.
> >
> > The funny thing is that it takes gigantic leaps of faith to be an
> > atheist.
>
> According to you then, babies and animals are all actively taking
> gigantic leaps of faith. I challenge you to prove your assertion.

I'm still waiting for someone to come up with an answer of what it is we
have faith in.

--

JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden

[%]

Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 04:25:58 -0500
> bil...@m.nu wrote:
>> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 05:10:13 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 14:33:04 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:
>>>
>>>> who gives a fuck what the faggot >Krishna says:
>>>
>>> hahaha :) ... listen to this low class piece of trailer-park trash.
>>>
>>> Didn't you hear what I just said, retard? Let me try again - people
>>> with brains have always been inspired by Krishna's words.
>>>
>>
>> sure ... everyone has a brain, but alot of people, including you,
>> just have not quite worked out the processes involved in using said
>> brain. And I am so sorry that you are that way
>
> ...or they just aren't using it correctly.

or you ars zachy

[%]

you look pretty stupid when you say i'm zachy when you and i know i'm not

[Jahnu]

On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 19:42:28 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

>No. Mine was a serious effort to understand what you meant.

You are kidding, right :)

Someone says you wouldn't know clarity if it fell on your head, and
you ask him how heavy is clarity. And that's a serious question?

You are funny or foolish :)

>Stupidity isn't a requirement --

Stupidity is a requirement in order to choose a world view where you
have nothing to look forward to except disease, old age and death, and
in between this misery some sensegratification here and there.
Atheists are like children trying to relieve an unbearable itch by
eating candy.

You'd have to be stupid to willfully choose such a hopeless, sad way
of looking at the world. No wonder atheists are such a depressed,
miserable, cynical lot.

Krishna says:

O learned Uddhava, those who fix their consciousness on Me, giving up
all material desires, share with Me a happiness that cannot possibly
be experienced by those engaged in sense gratification.

--Srimad Bhagavatam 11.14.12

>it's entirely optional (and in some
>cases, strongly encouraged).

It's not optional. As I said, only a fool would choose the depressing
world-view atheism is.

>This is why atheism is such a threat to
>theism, for it does not require conformity in a particular knowledge
>base, such as the scholasticism or memorization of religous scriptures.

You are kdding, right? You don't find more conformist and
indoctrinated people than atheists buying into the sick and twisted
values of the Coca-cola culture - the most destructive, sick culture

to ever visit the planet.

>That's scientific theory; atheism is impartial regarding science.

To atheists science is a like a religion. They actually think that a
bunch of idiots in white coats are going to solve the problems of
mankind in a laboratory. Atheists merely use science to explain away
God, whom they hate with a vengence.

>Although there are many atheists who agree with the theory of
>evolution, there are also many theists (such as Roman Catholics) who
>also agree with it, and it's important to also note that the level of
>agreement with the theory of evolution can vary.

Of course, Catholics have caved in to the silly theories of socalled
Science, because they have no better explanation of creation and
origin of lifethemselves. But there is nothing even remotely
scientific about Darwin's theory. It's the creation myth of fools and
rascals. Fortunately, as a Hare Krsna you don't have that problem
since the Vedic Version offers a reality-explanation that is far
superior to anything you'll find in science or other religions. The
only thing science is good for is to create technology. When it comes
to understanding the existence and out place in it, it is utterly
useless.

>That's a combination of scientific hypothesis and theorum, and which
>also ventures into the realm of proven fact. This is incidental to
>atheism, which is merely the classification of the "absence of theism."

"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are
great con-men, And the story they are telling may be the GREATEST HOAX
EVER." -- Dr.T.N.Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission

>> To be an atheist you'd have to reject logic and reason, direct
>> observation and even common sense.
>
>Not that I'm aware of. Can you provide an example to prove your claim?

Observable reality points to ID. As an atheist you have to reject the
obvious - thet the world is intelligently designed.

>"Perfection of religion" is an example of judgement that is influenced
>by moral relativism. Therefore, it is not necessarily objective.

Who gives a shit? Nothing, except maybe mathematics, is objective in
this world. Objectiviity doesn't exist. Only God has the power to be
objective. Humans are thoroughly subjective beings.

"We must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian
accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only
a variety of wishful speculations." -- Franklin Harold, Emeritus
Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colorado State
University, in an Oxford University Press text.

[Jahnu]

On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 19:30:50 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

>According to you then, babies and animals are all actively taking
>gigantic leaps of faith. I challenge you to prove your assertion.

Why would I want to prove anything to you? You wouldn't know proof if
it fell on your head. You are like a fool who whines - prove to me
honey is sweet - but who has no intention of tasting honey herself in
order to understand the proof.

Besides, that you can even question or dispute the presence of faith
in human existence, by your silly example above, shows that you are
not worth my while.

Krishna says:

Material nature consists of three modes -- goodness, passion and
ignorance. When the eternal living entity comes in contact with
nature, O mighty-armed Arjuna, he becomes conditioned by these modes.
(Bg 14.5)

[Jahnu]

On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 19:42:40 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
<hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:

>I'm still waiting for someone to come up with an answer of what it is we
>have faith in.

You have faith in the most silly, unsubstantiated, idiotic things,
like universes popping out of points and the world creating itself out
of a bunch of chemicals. You have faith that you are an intelligent,
rational human being, you have faith that the present consumer culture
is the epitomy of all human knowledge and leanring, you have faith
that all religion is brain-dead indoctrination, you have faith that
you won't suffer for your sinful activities etc. etc. I could go on
and on about the garbage you have faith in.

Krishna says:

But ignorant and faithless persons who doubt the revealed scriptures
do not attain God consciousness; they fall down. For the doubting soul
there is happiness neither in this world nor in the next. (Bg 4.40)

[bil...@m.nu]

On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 05:48:36 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 18:56:57 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:
>
>>ok then in that case tell me who is god.
>
><blah blah>
>

yes yes you made my point exactly

bilgat says: you are an idiot your children will be idiots if you
raise them like you. Make love not war... yada yada...

(only difference in what I say and what that kris feller says is I am
real LoL)

[raven1]

On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:48:06 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Stupidity is a requirement in order to choose a world view where you
>have nothing to look forward to except disease, old age and death, and
>in between this misery some sensegratification here and there.
>Atheists are like children trying to relieve an unbearable itch by
>eating candy.
>
>You'd have to be stupid to willfully choose such a hopeless, sad way
>of looking at the world. No wonder atheists are such a depressed,
>miserable, cynical lot.

And once again, Jesper, you display your greatest character flaw (one
of many you possess, but this is the most egregious) for all to see:
you are not concerned with whether or not a given world view is true,
your interest lies with whether or not it makes you happy. This core
intellectual dishonesty on your part is why your efforts here have
been met with nothing but abject failure for two decades now, and will
never succeed in the future. You may as well wear a button reading
"Con Man" on your robes.

---
raven1
aa # 1096
EAC Vice President (President in charge of vice)
BAAWA Knight

[duke]

On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 19:30:50 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist

goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 12:07:35 +0530
>Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:51:53 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
>> atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Indeed, that is an assertion which could qualify as a "leap of
>> >faith."
>> >
>> >If you meant to imply that I made such a statement then you have
>> >misunderstood my words -- I merely stated that "faith isn't necessary
>> >for existence by those who are unconscious," which clearly doesn't
>> >exclude other possibilities such as existing with faith.
>>
>> The funny thing is that it takes gigantic leaps of faith to be an
>> atheist.

>According to you then, babies and animals are all actively taking
>gigantic leaps of faith. I challenge you to prove your assertion.

Nope. Neither babies nor animals have the ability to discern the presence of
God in their lives.

[duke]

What makeup? No makeup. You are the poster child of the ng.

>Let us all know when you have something of value to contribute to the
>discussion, moron.

Right after you.

[Dreamer In Colore]

On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 16:31:01 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

>On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 13:49:41 -0400, Dreamer In Colore
><dreamer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 12:16:02 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:57:09 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist
>>>goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 07:41:22 -0400
>>>>raven1 <quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 05:10:39 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >On Thu, 13 Jun 2013 12:47:05 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >>>Krishna says:
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>Honestl y who gives a fuck what santa claus and his pals have to say
>>>>> >
>>>>> >People with brains.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jesper, the only people with brains you ever interact with are the
>>>>> atheists here.
>>>>
>>>>I would like to nominate Quoth The Raven for the above reply to Jahnu.
>>>
>>>I would like to nominate the following:
>>>*****
>>>Jesper, the only people with brains you ever interact with are the
>>>atheists here who have no more brains than you to.
>>>*****
>
>>Nice try, liar. It's ridiculous for you to just make stuff up, but
>>that's par for your miniature golf course.
>
>What makeup? No makeup. You are the poster child of the ng.
>

You lied about what Jesper said, moron. Stop making stuff up. You're
an embarrassment.

>>Let us all know when you have something of value to contribute to the
>>discussion, moron.
>
>Right after you.
>

Why? You're the one who's been posting endless tripe for more than a
decade... perhaps you should show a little dignity for a change,
troglodyte.

[Jahnu]

On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:50:35 -0400, raven1 went:

<squawk squawk>

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5886366060949851922

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 16:19:19 -0500
duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 19:30:50 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
> atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
> >On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 12:07:35 +0530
> >Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:51:53 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the
> >> non-existent atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Indeed, that is an assertion which could qualify as a "leap of
> >> >faith."
> >> >
> >> >If you meant to imply that I made such a statement then you have
> >> >misunderstood my words -- I merely stated that "faith isn't
> >> >necessary for existence by those who are unconscious," which
> >> >clearly doesn't exclude other possibilities such as existing with
> >> >faith.
> >>
> >> The funny thing is that it takes gigantic leaps of faith to be an
> >> atheist.
>
> >According to you then, babies and animals are all actively taking
> >gigantic leaps of faith. I challenge you to prove your assertion.
>
> Nope. Neither babies nor animals have the ability to discern the
> presence of God in their lives.

That classifies them as atheists. I've just added that to my
quotations file, by the way.

--
Fidem Turbāre, the non-existent atheist goddess

"Science: Questions that can be answered (falsifiability) and answers
that can be questioned (peer review)."
-- Erik Hogan

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:58:01 +0530
Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 19:30:50 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
> atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>
> >According to you then, babies and animals are all actively taking
> >gigantic leaps of faith. I challenge you to prove your assertion.
>
> Why would I want to prove anything to you? You wouldn't know proof if
> it fell on your head. You are like a fool who whines - prove to me
> honey is sweet - but who has no intention of tasting honey herself in
> order to understand the proof.
>
> Besides, that you can even question or dispute the presence of faith
> in human existence, by your silly example above, shows that you are
> not worth my while.

Your refusal to satisfy your burden of proof is noted.

--
Fidem Turbāre, the non-existent atheist goddess

"Neither babies nor animals have the ability to discern the presence of
God in their lives."

-- Duke Earl J. Weber Lebourgeois, American-American (June 16, 2013)

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:10:54 +0530
Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:50:35 -0400, raven1 went:
>
> <squawk squawk>

One of the many character flaws that Quoth The Raven didn't highly was
your occasional passive-aggressiveness.

--
Fidem Turbāre, the non-existent atheist goddess

"This world has many crazy people. Their right to post [messages] does
not indicate they can write something sensible."
-- H. H. Yapster (May 22, 2013)

[Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess]

Have you considered that Jahnu might be responding metaphorically with
an implication that you are his god? If this is the case, then his
apparent lack of respect for his god could also be a challenge to them.

--
Fidem Turbāre, the non-existent atheist goddess

"Think of the safety. Think of the sense of well-being. At last, your
family can be protected from the heartbreak of gorilla invasion."
-- Dr. Bunsen Honeydew (1976)

[%]

Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 16:19:19 -0500
> duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 19:30:50 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
>> atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 12:07:35 +0530
>>> Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:51:53 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the
>>>> non-existent atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Indeed, that is an assertion which could qualify as a "leap of
>>>>> faith."
>>>>>
>>>>> If you meant to imply that I made such a statement then you have
>>>>> misunderstood my words -- I merely stated that "faith isn't
>>>>> necessary for existence by those who are unconscious," which
>>>>> clearly doesn't exclude other possibilities such as existing with
>>>>> faith.
>>>>
>>>> The funny thing is that it takes gigantic leaps of faith to be an
>>>> atheist.
>>
>>> According to you then, babies and animals are all actively taking
>>> gigantic leaps of faith. I challenge you to prove your assertion.
>>
>> Nope. Neither babies nor animals have the ability to discern the
>> presence of God in their lives.
>
> That classifies them as atheists. I've just added that to my
> quotations file, by the way.

did you add yourself as a zachy troll ,
i saw you trolling pretty good today

[%]

Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:58:01 +0530
> Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 19:30:50 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
>> atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>>
>>> According to you then, babies and animals are all actively taking
>>> gigantic leaps of faith. I challenge you to prove your assertion.
>>
>> Why would I want to prove anything to you? You wouldn't know proof if
>> it fell on your head. You are like a fool who whines - prove to me
>> honey is sweet - but who has no intention of tasting honey herself in
>> order to understand the proof.
>>
>> Besides, that you can even question or dispute the presence of faith
>> in human existence, by your silly example above, shows that you are
>> not worth my while.
>
> Your refusal to satisfy your burden of proof is noted.

the noting of the noted note was noted by the noter as is was noted

[%]

Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:10:54 +0530
> Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:50:35 -0400, raven1 went:
>>
>> <squawk squawk>
>
> One of the many character flaws that Quoth The Raven didn't highly was
> your occasional passive-aggressiveness.

no it wasn't

[Jahnu]

On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 22:35:41 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent

atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:58:01 +0530
>Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 15 Jun 2013 19:30:50 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
>> atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>>
>> >According to you then, babies and animals are all actively taking
>> >gigantic leaps of faith. I challenge you to prove your assertion.
>>
>> Why would I want to prove anything to you? You wouldn't know proof if
>> it fell on your head. You are like a fool who whines - prove to me
>> honey is sweet - but who has no intention of tasting honey herself in
>> order to understand the proof.
>>
>> Besides, that you can even question or dispute the presence of faith
>> in human existence, by your silly example above, shows that you are
>> not worth my while.
>
>Your refusal to satisfy your burden of proof is noted.

[Jahnu]

On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 22:35:41 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

>Your refusal to satisfy your burden of proof is noted.

Note away :)

The experience of what is tangible and real in the world, is different
from person to person. For me, God is totally tangible and real,
whereas for others He is intangible and no more real than Santa Claus
or the Toothfairy.

But the joy that is experienced by adding Krishna to one's life is
completely real and tangible.. to one who does it, that is.

To add Krishna to one's life, to make Him a tangible reality, doesn't
require one to follow a lot of rules, shave one's head, dress in
sheets, and move into the tample. One doesn't have to think about
that, at all. All one has to think about, is to add Krishna to
whatever one is doing. But that is a difficult task for many. Very few
people want to spend even 10 minutes a day chanting the Hare Krishna
mantra.

So let it come to a test - a test anyone can do.

Just think of Krishna 3 times a day - morning, noon, and evening. Just
think of the name KRISH-NA. Pronounce it in your mind - KRISH-NA -
just remember this word three times a day, and see where it takes you.
I can guarantee that it will improve your life-performance.

My spiritual master used to tell us that material life (ie. life in a
material body) is like a string of zeros. No matter how many zeros you
add to it, it is still zero, it still comes out to nothing. But by
adding the ONE of Krishna, all the zeros suddenly increse their value.

So why not try it? Remember Krishna's name three times a day, and see
where it takes you. What have you got to lose? There is everything to
gain and nothing to lose.

Krishna says:

In this endeavor there is no loss or diminution, and a little
advancement on this path can protect one from the most dangerous type
of fear. (Bg 2.40)

[%]

Jahnu wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 22:35:41 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
> atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>
>> Your refusal to satisfy your burden of proof is noted.
>
> Note away :)
>

do you feel noted

[Jahnu]

On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 23:23:28 -0700, "%" <per...@gmail.com> wrote:

>do you feel noted

Not at all :) A statement like that has about the same significance
for me as that of autum leaves rattling in the wind...

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5886255004234392050

[bil...@m.nu]

On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 11:40:59 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 22:35:41 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
>atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>
>>Your refusal to satisfy your burden of proof is noted.
>
>Note away :)
>
>The experience of what is tangible and real in the world, is different
>from person to person. For me, God is totally tangible and real,
>whereas for others He is intangible and no more real than Santa Claus
>or the Toothfairy.

oh that is where you are messing up you need to say that god is just
as real as santa and the tooth fairy they are both in the same class
of existense. If you believe in one you must believe in the other.
devils demons gods ghosts gouls goblins jesus santa the easter bunny
frodo tinkerbell THEY AREA ALL THE SAME. If you believe in one you
must believe in the other. if you dont believe in all of them then you
have to say you dont believe in any of them. They are all one in the
same.

>
>But the joy that is experienced by adding Krishna to one's life is
>completely real and tangible.. to one who does it, that is.

yeah exactly what I said. santa does the exact same thing for
children. Thanks for making my point that all make believe creatures
are exactly the same. Only problem is you can not realize it

>
>To add Krishna to one's life, to make Him a tangible reality, doesn't
>require one to follow a lot of rules, shave one's head, dress in
>sheets, and move into the tample. One doesn't have to think about
>that, at all. All one has to think about,

and again same with santa

>whatever one is doing. But that is a difficult task for many. Very few
>people want to spend even 10 minutes a day chanting the Hare Krishna
>mantra.

anytime you have to chant something you can consider yourself in a
cult

>So let it come to a test - a test anyone can do.
>
>Just think of Krishna 3 times a day - morning, noon, and evening. Just
>think of the name KRISH-NA. Pronounce it in your mind - KRISH-NA -
>just remember this word three times a day, and see where it takes you.
>I can guarantee that it will improve your life-performance.

why not just say santa three times a day hell do it 34 times a day.
you may even get more presants at christmas go ahead try it I
guarantee you that your christmas will be more and more merry

>
>My spiritual master used to tell us that material life (ie. life in a
>material body) is like a string of zeros. No matter how many zeros you
>add to it, it is still zero, it still comes out to nothing. But by
>adding the ONE of Krishna, all the zeros suddenly increse their value.

you spiritual master would have told you anything as long as you kept
givimg him money idiot

[bil...@m.nu]

On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 22:51:03 -0700, "%" <per...@gmail.com> wrote:


>
>did you add yourself as a zachy troll ,
>i saw you trolling pretty good today

lame dood so lame

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:25:34 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:

>On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 11:40:59 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 22:35:41 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
>>atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Your refusal to satisfy your burden of proof is noted.
>>
>>Note away :)
>>
>>The experience of what is tangible and real in the world, is different
>>from person to person. For me, God is totally tangible and real,
>>whereas for others He is intangible and no more real than Santa Claus
>>or the Toothfairy.
>
>oh that is where you are messing up you need to say that god is just
>as real as santa and the tooth fairy they are both in the same class
>of existense. If you believe in one you must believe in the other.
>devils demons gods ghosts gouls goblins jesus santa the easter bunny
>frodo tinkerbell THEY AREA ALL THE SAME. If you believe in one you
>must believe in the other. if you dont believe in all of them then you
>have to say you dont believe in any of them. They are all one in the
>same.

The deluded who live in a fantasy world imagine normal people have the
problem.

[Jahnu]

On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:25:34 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:

>oh that is where you are messing up you need to say that god is just
>as real as santa and the tooth fairy they are both in the same class
>of existense. If you believe in one you must believe in the other.
>devils demons gods ghosts gouls goblins jesus santa the easter bunny
>frodo tinkerbell THEY AREA ALL THE SAME. If you believe in one you
>must believe in the other. if you dont believe in all of them then you
>have to say you dont believe in any of them. They are all one in the
>same.

Only a complete fool would equate God with Santa Claus. The most
intelligent and thoughtful people - famous philosphers and great
thinkers - throughout history have discussed God and transcendence.
Have you ever heard about philosophers discussing Santa Claus? hahaha
:) See, how atheism has damaged your brain and made you into a
complete idiot?

Look, you are predicted in the Bhagavad Gita - Krishna says:

Those miscreants who are grossly foolish, who are lowest among
mankind, whose knowledge is stolen by illusion, and who partake of the
atheistic nature of demons do not surrender unto Me. (Bg 7.15)

[raven1]

On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:10:54 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:50:35 -0400, raven1 went:
>
><squawk squawk>

Brave Sir Jesper ran away, bravely ran away, away...

[raven1]

On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 22:44:57 -0700, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess" <god...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:10:54 +0530
>Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 10:50:35 -0400, raven1 went:
>>
>> <squawk squawk>
>
>One of the many character flaws that Quoth The Raven didn't highly was
>your occasional passive-aggressiveness.

Jesper inevitably flees when he knows he's had his ass handed to him.
Even he figures it out, eventually.

[Jahnu]

On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 09:06:34 -0400, raven1 squawked:

>Jesper inevitably flees when he knows he's had his ass handed to him.
>Even he figures it out, eventually.

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5885959100102430402

[bil...@m.nu]

On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 06:40:33 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 09:06:34 -0400, raven1 squawked:
>
>>Jesper inevitably flees when he knows he's had his ass handed to him.
>>Even he figures it out, eventually.
>
>https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5885959100102430402
>

dude you are such a damn poser. you dont give a shit about god or the
lack there of. you just want to promote your gay art. Fucking poser
faggot

[Jahnu]

On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 17:39:26 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:

>dude you are such a damn poser. you dont give a shit about god or the
>lack there of. you just want to promote your gay art. Fucking poser
>faggot

Hey dude, it's perfectly alright to be gay. You don't have to pose as
homofobic in order to hide the fact you are gay. Trust me, you'll feel
much better once you come out of the closet.

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5859297241772548994

[raven1]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 05:41:18 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 17:39:26 -0500, bil...@m.nu wrote:
>
>>dude you are such a damn poser. you dont give a shit about god or the
>>lack there of. you just want to promote your gay art. Fucking poser
>>faggot
>
>Hey dude, it's perfectly alright to be gay.

Do I hear robes rustling in that closet?

[Jahnu]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 09:15:16 -0400, raven1
<quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:

>Do I hear robes rustling in that closet?

You wish... :)

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5886544143554052306

[duke]

On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 17:33:03 -0400, Dreamer In Colore

I just clarified what Jesper said. It's sort of like 1 = 1.

>>>Let us all know when you have something of value to contribute to the
>>>discussion, moron.
>>Right after you.
>Why? You're the one who's been posting endless tripe for more than a
>decade... perhaps you should show a little dignity for a change,
>troglodyte.

I'm the one that has been spot on day after day after day. Remember,
intelligence is not a strength of an atheist wannabe, so I must help you losers.

[Tim]

"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:uk24s856ra1jcj4dn...@4ax.com...

> I'm the one that has been spot on day after day after day. Remember,
> intelligence is not a strength of an atheist wannabe, so I must help you
> losers.

We all know that intelligence and you don't get along, so go back and whine
to your diddler priesty.

[Les]

According to Ramsey we are Polar opposites (which we call Christospeak
where love really means hate and so on) so what you just said is
that you could not have been more wrong and intelligence is our
strength that you need.

So, being charitable folk with concern for those without the
mental strength to help themselves I would suggest you take you
first step back to sanity by taking a look at this web site:
http://www.theistsanonymous.com/

Here is hoping the therapy will help you recover your wits



--
Les Hellawell
Greeting from:
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County

"In our more diverse and secular society, the place of religion has
come to be a matter of lively discussion. It is rightly acknowledged
that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue and that the wellbeing
and prosperity of the nation depend on the contribution of individuals
and groups of all faiths and of none. "

- Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II
- from a speech to the Synond of the Church of England in 2010

[raven1]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 19:22:39 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 09:15:16 -0400, raven1
><quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:
>
>>Do I hear robes rustling in that closet?
>
>You wish... :)

Jesper, I've seen your picture. Absolutely NO ONE of any sexual
orientation would be interested.

---
raven1
aa # 1096
EAC Vice President (President in charge of vice)
BAAWA Knight

[Jahnu]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:49:06 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:

>I'm the one that has been spot on day after day after day. Remember,
>intelligence is not a strength of an atheist wannabe, so I must help you losers.

Welsome to Anonymous Sense-enjoyers - AS

Sense-gratification is the addiction of the soul. We often talk about
drug addictions. An addiction to heroin, for instance, is almost
impossible to conquer. So just like a person is addicted to heroin, so
the soul is addicted to sense-gratification.

In AA people get help overcoming their addiction to alcohol. At the
first meeting you attend, you are supposed to state your name and
recognize that you are an alcoholic. You go, hello, my name is Michael
and I am an alcoholic. Hello Michael, the assembly answers.

Similarly, in AS you go, Hare Krishna, my name is Jiva, and I am a
sense-enjoyer. Hare Krishna Jiva, the assembled devotees greet you.

The addiction the soul has to sense-enjoyment is exactly as severe and
as difficult to overcome, as a person's addiction to heroin.

In AA they teach you, that the only way to overcome your addiction
alcohol, is to petition a higher power for help. You have to recognize
a higher power outside yourself, and get help from that. And this
metod works. It is a statistical fact.

In AS we are so fortunate, that by the mercy of Srila Prabhupada we
know Who that higher power is, and we know how to contact Him.

So by petitioning Krishna by constantly chanting his name loudly in
song og quietly in meditation, He will help us overcone our addiction
to sense-gratification. And it is a scientific fact that can be
investigated and verified by anyone who may so desire.

If we refuse to accept that we are sense-enjoyment-addicts, in fact,
if, in stead, we make it the goal of life, the result will be the
disease of repeated birth and death.

Krishna says:

After attaining Me, the great souls, who are yogis in devotion, never
return to this temporary world, which is full of miseries, because
they have attained the highest perfection. (Bg. 8.15)

[Jahnu]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:27:41 -0400, raven1
<quotht...@nevermore.com> wrote:

>Jesper, I've seen your picture. Absolutely NO ONE of any sexual
>orientation would be interested.

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5886987333871053186

[Christopher A. Lee]

He gets on his knees because otherwide it would be diddley squat.

[Jahnu]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:11:48 -0700, Christopher A. Lee
<ca...@optonline.net> wrote:

>He gets on his knees because otherwide it would be diddley squat.

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5886719777940182850

[kni...@baawa.com]

On Thu, 20 Jun 2013 06:41:46 +0530, Jahnu <jahn...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:11:48 -0700, Christopher A. Lee
><ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>He gets on his knees because otherwide it would be diddley squat.
>
>https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5886719777940182850

Jesper, your art is cut and paste garbage. You photoshop images.
There is nothing original and that means you plagiarize images and
call it your own.

Shame on you! Where is attribution for the images you use?

Maybe you should try finger painting.

I have to admit, the kid trying to eat the 'smiling' cow is
classic.

Warlord Steve
BAAWA

[Jahnu]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 20:39:44 -0700, kni...@baawa.com wrote:

> Jesper, your art is cut and paste garbage. You photoshop images.
>There is nothing original and that means you plagiarize images and
>call it your own.
>
> Shame on you! Where is attribution for the images you use?
>
> Maybe you should try finger painting.
>
> I have to admit, the kid trying to eat the 'smiling' cow is
>classic.

https://picasaweb.google.com/113672947796865733014/Jahnu#5885959108799551106

[Arindam Banerjee]

>
> A skeptic, on the other hand, ultimately disclaims all manners of faith
>
> because they value fact.

Why should that let them disclaim faiths? Faiths worth following are built upon all known facts, ignoring none. Then on top of that they have imagination which leads to inspiration, and from that the construction of a higher plane of reality (metaphysics) which becomes for them the source of values in the real plane.

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee
Author of "The Son of Hiranyaksh"