Baptists, Bullets & Bunkum
NoGodHere
The tragedy in Texas illustrates the total non-existence of this loving
Creator so many Christians speak of. The very same people who claim that
God worked in their lives, gave them guidance, even performed miracles for
them, are some of the very same ones now lying on cold slabs in a Texas
morgue. Now, those of us on the rational side of the fence have always
realized that this imaginary God can't intervene in the material world,
can't love, can't hate, because it doesn't exist. The world, in all its
hateful and violent glory, shows us this fact everyday. A bunch of
worshippers gun down in cold blood in the very house of their God is a
horrific event but it will hopefully open some eyes to the problems of
society that CANNOT be dealt with through placing faith in childish beliefs
in an invisible man in the sky. Its time to wake the hell up and GROW UP!
Man must control his own destiny, make his OWN laws based on human morality
and enforce those laws through HUMAN intervention. Give up these religious
charades and sophomoric ideas about a God who loves you. God didn't love
those killed in that Texas rampage, He didn't care about those in Littleton,
Colorado, and he never cared about ANY of those killed in senseless acts of
violence, wars or killed by disease. Its all BUNK.
Grow up and face reality so we can move out of this technological stone-age
we're still living in. Instead of sitting there on your knees kissing the
holy rear-end, get up and show some human dignity and make something good
happen in this world. Show this imaginary God of yours that humankind CAN
and WILL control his own fate through our highly evolved and intelligent
minds. Stop waiting for salvation when its right in the palm of your own
hand!
John P. Boatwright
> The tragedy in Texas illustrates the total non-existence
> of this loving Creator so many Christians speak of.
Nope, it shows there's people still believing God so much,
that they are willing to die for him:
From CNN.com:
'One youth stood up and confronted the intruder:
"I know what you need, sir, you need Jesus in
your life," according to another witness. The
gunman then shot the boy repeatedly."
The boy said the truth, and died for it.
In doing so, the boy let his light shine and now the
whole world sees it.
That's the light you try to cover over.
You can't, the entire world saw the boy's unbeatable
faith.
That's 100% faith when facing death.
> The very same people who claim that God worked in their
> lives, gave them guidance, even performed miracles for
> them, are some of the very same ones now lying on cold
> slabs in a Texas morgue.
Everybody dies.
But unlike you, the boy did something incredible,
he stood up for God, the creator of the universe,
the most powerful being in existance, he stood up
and told the atheist who his creator is and that he
needed to find him.
That's what it's all about, who will believe God
and who will reject him.
> Now, those of us on the rational side of the fence
> have always realized that this imaginary God can't
> intervene in the material world, can't love, can't
> hate, because it doesn't exist. The world, in all
> its hateful and violent glory, shows us this fact
> everyday.
The world shows you death.
God shows you life, eternal life through Jesus's
sacrifice.
What you're missing is that God is a SPIRIT, and that
God gives LIFE.
The boy told the guy what he needed for LIFE, the guy
didn't want it, he wanted death and rejected God's
SPIRIT.
> A bunch of worshippers gun down in cold blood in the
> very house of their God is a horrific event but it
> will hopefully open some eyes to the problems of society
> that CANNOT be dealt with through placing faith in
> childish beliefs in an invisible man in the sky.
Funny how God said the EXACT requirements for creating
our solar system.
The SAME requirements that science is currently stumped on.
> Its time to wake the hell up and GROW UP!
Exactly, you need to realize that God is THE TRUTH.
> Man must control his own destiny, make his OWN laws
> based on human morality and enforce those laws through
> HUMAN intervention.
You're grasping.
God is RIGHT, exactly right.
God was always right, he said the right stuff THOUSANDS
of years ago.
God is the source of creation.
> Give up these religious charades and sophomoric
> ideas about a God who loves you. God didn't love
> those killed in that Texas rampage, He didn't
> care about those in Littleton, Colorado, and he
> never cared about ANY of those killed in senseless
> acts of violence, wars or killed by disease.
> Its all BUNK.
Your thinking is flawed in that you want the SPIRIT
of God to not shine around the world.
To you, the boy had failed by telling the guy to
find Jesus.
But MANY, MANY others now >>> KNOW <<< that the boy
was right. That's the light shining over the world
that you can't put out.
> Grow up and face reality so we can move out of this
> technological stone-age we're still living in. Instead
> of sitting there on your knees kissing the holy rear-end,
> get up and show some human dignity and make something
> good happen in this world. Show this imaginary God of
> yours that humankind CAN and WILL control his own fate
> through our highly evolved and intelligent minds. Stop
> waiting for salvation when its right in the palm of
> your own hand!
God can wipe out the entire world just as easily as
making it.
God PROVED he made what he said he made.
God also said he gave his OWN ARM (Jesus) to die
for the sins of OTHERS.
The boy KNEW that Jesus is the answer, he's now
told the entire world, and the world can't ignore it.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
Proof God described the planet density profile
BEFORE science did:
http://www.teleport.com/~salad/4god/density.htm
(see the 2 graphs, obviously God was right in Genesis)
Rune Boersjoe
>> of this loving Creator so many Christians speak of.
>
>Nope, it shows there's people still believing God so much,
>that they are willing to die for him:
Praise the lord and pass the ammo.
--
Top fact to piss off conservatives:
Jesus was black, a jew, and came from poor conditions in the ghetto.
#1460
EAC Space Program Director
ICQ UIN: 1104409
Reply by mail to jb...@jancomulti.com
Ezekiel J. Krahlin
<sa...@teleport.com> wrote:
>Nope, it shows there's people still believing God so much,
>that they are willing to die for him:
Hogwash. Because someone dies as a result for standing up for his
beliefs, does not make his belief the absolute truth. Many atheists
have died in the action of saving lives...likewise for many Jews,
Muslims, agnostics, gays, etc.
Just because someone who dies for his Christian God does not mean he
has a handle on any truth. Those non-Christians who died for their
beliefs are every bit as heroic, honored, and truth-speaking.
In fact, much of this insane violent was born from ignorant, dogmatic
attitudes by large branches of KKKristian cults...which also include
child neglect and abuse. So much hatred is being channeled through
KKKristian churches, in the name of a supposedly superior belief, that
the gov't will soon have no choice but to outlaw all these extremist
churches, in order to maintain a reasonably sane society.
And you'll have noone to blame but yourselves.
---
The Final Testament, a Bible for gays only:
http://surf.to/gaybible
---
Allah is gay, Allah is good!
http://surf.to/gayislam
Brandon J. Freels
gun.
NoGodHere <myo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:7rsa99$bcg$1...@birch.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> The tragedy in Texas illustrates the total non-existence of this loving
> Creator so many Christians speak of. The very same people who claim that
> God worked in their lives, gave them guidance, even performed miracles for
> them, are some of the very same ones now lying on cold slabs in a Texas
> morgue. Now, those of us on the rational side of the fence have always
> realized that this imaginary God can't intervene in the material world,
> can't love, can't hate, because it doesn't exist. The world, in all its
> hateful and violent glory, shows us this fact everyday. A bunch of
> worshippers gun down in cold blood in the very house of their God is a
> horrific event but it will hopefully open some eyes to the problems of
> society that CANNOT be dealt with through placing faith in childish
beliefs
> in an invisible man in the sky. Its time to wake the hell up and GROW UP!
> Man must control his own destiny, make his OWN laws based on human
morality
> and enforce those laws through HUMAN intervention. Give up these
religious
> charades and sophomoric ideas about a God who loves you. God didn't love
> those killed in that Texas rampage, He didn't care about those in
Littleton,
> Colorado, and he never cared about ANY of those killed in senseless acts
of
> violence, wars or killed by disease. Its all BUNK.
>
Yns
>
> NoGodHere wrote:
>
> > The tragedy in Texas illustrates the total non-existence
> > of this loving Creator so many Christians speak of.
>
> that they are willing to die for him:
>
>
> 'One youth stood up and confronted the intruder:
> "I know what you need, sir, you need Jesus in
> your life," according to another witness. The
> gunman then shot the boy repeatedly."
>
I think the boy should have said:
"I know what you need, sir, you need a damn
good thrashing."
TEW
underage girls, smoking crack and stealing cars? Luck? Or confused divine
intervention?
Mike Dahlke
personal agenda won't you? You truly make me sick. You are nothing more than
a leech and a true detriment to a reasonable society.
md
aa #1600
John P. Boatwright <sa...@teleport.com> wrote in message
news:37E1E8...@teleport.com...
>
> > A bunch of worshippers gun down in cold blood in the
> > very house of their God is a horrific event but it
> > will hopefully open some eyes to the problems of society
> > that CANNOT be dealt with through placing faith in
> > childish beliefs in an invisible man in the sky.
>
YodelFish
Mike Dahlke <mda...@nortelnetworks.com> wrote in message
news:37e23...@godzilla.perftech.com...
> Boatwright, you fucking asshole, you'll use any excuse to push your
dumbass
> personal agenda won't you? You truly make me sick. You are nothing more
than
> a leech and a true detriment to a reasonable society.
>
> md
> aa #1600
With that said, I don't have to say anything.
--
Yodel
______
# 1645
Matthias Weiss
>
> NoGodHere wrote:
>
> > The tragedy in Texas illustrates the total non-existence
> > of this loving Creator so many Christians speak of.
>
> Nope, it shows there's people still believing God so much,
> that they are willing to die for him:
>
> From CNN.com:
>
> 'One youth stood up and confronted the intruder:
> "I know what you need, sir, you need Jesus in
> your life," according to another witness. The
> gunman then shot the boy repeatedly."
>
Showing again that there is no such thing as an atheist not diving into
a foxhole.
No, seriously, I find it quite pathetic how this latest example of
mixing an unstable mind with readily available deadly weapons is used
for finger pointing and silly generalizations. Baptists, catholics,
jews, whatever -- if they do their thingy in their homes and churches,
they have the absolute right to do so in peace and safety.
Atheists' beef (well, at least mine) is with religious groups with
political ambitions trying to impose their particular flavour of belief
onto the whole of a pluralistic society. Nothing more, nothing else,
nothing less. I don't want ANYONE to give up their beliefs if those do
not interfer with my own...shall we say...pursuit of happiness.
A sane mind, athiest, Muslim, Christian, Jewish or whatever, does not
commit acts of random violence. Moral, social behaviour is in no way
causally related to a philosophical worldview. Otherwise we'd see
religious gang wars between various denominations on a regular basis,
and all cars with Darwin fishes on them would be vandalized.
Gee whiz, stop it already...this doesn't help anybody!!
Matthias.
Cyberia
Boatwright is just another Brian Pickrell. Together the two of them
start more shit...
--
SeeYa !
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello... Is this thing on ?
Mike Dahlke <mda...@nortelnetworks.com> wrote in message
news:37e23...@godzilla.perftech.com...
> Boatwright, you fucking asshole, you'll use any excuse to push your
dumbass
> personal agenda won't you? You truly make me sick. You are nothing
more than
> a leech and a true detriment to a reasonable society.
>
> md
> aa #1600
>
Nicholas Wren
<sa...@teleport.com> wrote:
>From CNN.com:
>
> 'One youth stood up and confronted the intruder:
> "I know what you need, sir, you need Jesus in
> your life," according to another witness. The
> gunman then shot the boy repeatedly."
>
>The boy said the truth, and died for it.
Take a second to visualize that exchange.
Assuming the surviving religiots who claimed this actually happened
would have had no reason to lie (after all, why would they just invent
a selfless Christian martyr like that?), this looks to me like a
completely irrational reaction to a gunman blowing people away.
Attack, run away, or play dead. This is no time to proselytize.
If this happened, I'd be interested to know if this boy being nuts and
his being devoutly religious were somehow causally related -- and in
which direction the causaility ran.
Nick
Athemyst
...snipped for editorial reasons...
>A sane mind, athiest, Muslim, Christian, Jewish or whatever, does not
>commit acts of random violence.
Yes, but this was NOT a random act of violence. A random act of violence
would be one in which the shooter shot people at random. Shooting all
Southern Baptists is NOT at all random.
The man intended to and did shoot a very non-random group of people.
DarkAngel
> NoGodHere wrote:
>
> > The tragedy in Texas illustrates the total non-existence
> > of this loving Creator so many Christians speak of.
>
> Nope, it shows there's people still believing God so much,
> that they are willing to die for him:
Or kill for him.
From
http://www.star-telegram.com/news/doc/1047/1:99FWSHOOT107/1:99FWSHOOT107091799.html
--
Gunman boasted of ties to Phineas Priests, author says, report shows
<snip>
Craig told the newspaper he attempted to notify Fort Worth police of
Ashbrook's racist connections immediately after the shooting, but his
telephone calls were not returned.
An Internet site set up by the Los Angeles County Sheriff Department
said the group, which excludes women, fosters terrorism as it follows
its own interpretation of "God's law."
Experts said the group gets its name from an Old Testament Book of
Numbers story involving a man named Phineas who kills a mixed-race
couple to appease God.
<snip>
--
It is a tragedy, whether the man was an atheist, a Christian, or
anything else.
--
a.a atheist #1172 sXe BAAWA
Smash the State NRK4U
"No one is free when others are oppressed"
DarkAngel
He was a Phineas Priest, a group of Christian white supremacists. The reason
he shot Southern Baptists was because he was pissed at them for praying for
the Jews to convert.
Carl Christensen
wrote:
>On Fri, 17 Sep 1999 00:07:28 -0700, "John P. Boatwright"
><sa...@teleport.com> wrote:
>>From CNN.com:
>> 'One youth stood up and confronted the intruder:
>> "I know what you need, sir, you need Jesus in
>> your life," according to another witness. The
>> gunman then shot the boy repeatedly."
>>
>>The boy said the truth, and died for it.
>
>Take a second to visualize that exchange.
>
>Assuming the surviving religiots who claimed this actually happened
>would have had no reason to lie (after all, why would they just invent
It seems to be more urban legends for Christ; this sounds too much
like the pablum they tried to pass off in Columbine as "testifyin'
teens who get shot."
Medieval Knievel
John P. Boatwright <sa...@teleport.com> wrote in message
news:37E1E8...@teleport.com...
> NoGodHere wrote:
>
> > The tragedy in Texas illustrates the total non-existence
> > of this loving Creator so many Christians speak of.
>
> Nope, it shows there's people still believing God so much,
> that they are willing to die for him:
It's that survival of the fittest at work, Boaty.
>
> From CNN.com:
>
> 'One youth stood up and confronted the intruder:
> "I know what you need, sir, you need Jesus in
> your life," according to another witness. The
> gunman then shot the boy repeatedly."
>
> The boy said the truth, and died for it.
what a fucking idiot. He should have crawled his babdist ass under a table.
His testimony tells me that he was an moron, thinking his mythology was a
match for a weapon.
> Funny how God said the EXACT requirements for creating
> our solar system.
How is it that you always have to put this crap in EVERY post you make?
> The boy KNEW that Jesus is the answer, he's now
> told the entire world, and the world can't ignore it.
Yup, he sure showed everyone the power of Jesus, didn't he? That is is
impotent.
--
May the Peace of Medieval Knievel Be Unto You
remove NOSPAM from the e-mail address to reply
aa# 1554 ICQ # 26667824 ULC ordained minister
Michael Spencer
Matthias Weiss <mms...@math.lsa.umich.edu> wrote in message
news:37E2528C...@math.lsa.umich.edu...
> John P. Boatwright wrote:
> >
> > NoGodHere wrote:
> >
> > > The tragedy in Texas illustrates the total non-existence
> > > of this loving Creator so many Christians speak of.
> >
> > Nope, it shows there's people still believing God so much,
> > that they are willing to die for him:
> >
> > From CNN.com:
> >
> > 'One youth stood up and confronted the intruder:
> > "I know what you need, sir, you need Jesus in
> > your life," according to another witness. The
> > gunman then shot the boy repeatedly."
> >
> > The boy said the truth, and died for it.
>
> Showing again that there is no such thing as an atheist not diving into
> a foxhole.
>
> No, seriously, I find it quite pathetic how this latest example of
> mixing an unstable mind with readily available deadly weapons is used
> for finger pointing and silly generalizations. Baptists, catholics,
> jews, whatever -- if they do their thingy in their homes and churches,
> they have the absolute right to do so in peace and safety.
>
> Atheists' beef (well, at least mine) is with religious groups with
> political ambitions trying to impose their particular flavour of belief
> onto the whole of a pluralistic society. Nothing more, nothing else,
> nothing less. I don't want ANYONE to give up their beliefs if those do
> not interfer with my own...shall we say...pursuit of happiness.
>
> A sane mind, athiest, Muslim, Christian, Jewish or whatever, does not
erikc
"Athemyst" <athe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
-- origin: alt.atheism:
>|
>|...snipped for editorial reasons...
>|>A sane mind, athiest, Muslim, Christian, Jewish or whatever, does not
>|>commit acts of random violence.
>|
>|would be one in which the shooter shot people at random. Shooting all
>|Southern Baptists is NOT at all random.
>|
>|The man intended to and did shoot a very non-random group of people.
The man just wanted to shoot a bunch of people and the church was a
handy target.
Erikc (alt.atheist #002) | "An Fhirinne in aghaidh an tSaoil."
BAAWA Knight | "The Truth against the World."
ICQ 26776011 | -- Bardic Motto
If we don't believe in freedom of expression for
people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.
---- Noam Chomsky
"The only truly intuitive user interface is the
nipple. Everything else has to be learned."
--- unknown
Stefan Danyluc
firewevr...@insync.net (erikc) wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Sep 1999 12:46:10 -0700
> "Athemyst" <athe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> -- origin: alt.atheism:
> >|
> >|...snipped for editorial reasons...
> >|>A sane mind, athiest, Muslim, Christian, Jewish or whatever, does
not
> >|>commit acts of random violence.
> >|
> >|Yes, but this was NOT a random act of violence. A random act of
violence
> >|would be one in which the shooter shot people at random. Shooting
all
> >|Southern Baptists is NOT at all random.
> >|
> >|The man intended to and did shoot a very non-random group of people.
>
> The man just wanted to shoot a bunch of people and the church was a
> handy target.
The President called it "gun-violence" The Christian-hating gunman
walked into the church shouting obsenities and mocking religion and
proceeded to kill seven Christians.
> http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/texas990917.html <
What does it take to rate this as a so called "hate-crime" ?
steven
..."If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.
If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye
are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore
the world hateth you."
...(word of Christ, The Gospel of John 15:18,19) ...
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ><> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
> Erikc (alt.atheist #002) | "An Fhirinne in aghaidh an tSaoil."
> BAAWA Knight | "The Truth against the World."
> ICQ 26776011 | -- Bardic Motto
> If we don't believe in freedom of expression for
> people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.
> ---- Noam Chomsky
>
> "The only truly intuitive user interface is the
> nipple. Everything else has to be learned."
> --- unknown
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Bateau
<sa...@teleport.com> wrote:
>God can wipe out the entire world just as easily as
>making it.
Them's fighting words.
--
.. "Man, once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard ..
''. against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship ..''
..' without a rudder, is the sport of every wind. With such ''..
persons, gullibility, which they call faith, takes the helm of
.. reason, and the mind becomes a wreck." - Thoman Jefferson '..
''..''..' ICQ UIN:11367619 Email:smeggus at hotmail.com ..''..''
John P. Boatwright
> Boatwright, you fucking asshole, you'll use any excuse
> to push your dumbass personal agenda won't you? You truly
> make me sick. You are nothing more than a leech and a
> true detriment to a reasonable society.
<notices header>
Nortel Networks eh?
Look Mikey boy, if you're dialing in on daddy's spare laptop,
you might want to swap out the company name he works for.
Believe me, your daddy don't want Nortel having their
name spewed all over the planet and attached to such a
reply.
(Not that that anyone else would care. Though IIRC,
there was a report about IBM shutting down newsgroup
access for some unknown reason...)
erikc
Stefan Danyluc <stefan_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
-- origin: alt.atheism:
>|I read this post in <alt.talk.creationism>
>|
>|
>| firewevr...@insync.net (erikc) wrote:
>|> On Fri, 17 Sep 1999 12:46:10 -0700
>|> "Athemyst" <athe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>|> -- origin: alt.atheism:
>|> >|
>|> >|...snipped for editorial reasons...
>|> >|>A sane mind, athiest, Muslim, Christian, Jewish or whatever, does
>|not
>|> >|>commit acts of random violence.
>|> >|
>|> >|Yes, but this was NOT a random act of violence. A random act of
>|violence
>|> >|would be one in which the shooter shot people at random. Shooting
>|all
>|> >|Southern Baptists is NOT at all random.
>|> >|
>|> >|The man intended to and did shoot a very non-random group of people.
>|>
>|> The man just wanted to shoot a bunch of people and the church was a
>|> handy target.
>|
>|
>|The President called it "gun-violence" The Christian-hating gunman
>|walked into the church shouting obsenities and mocking religion and
>|proceeded to kill seven Christians.
>|
>|> http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/texas990917.html <
>|
>|What does it take to rate this as a so called "hate-crime" ?
Motivation: If it can be shown that the shooter's actions were a
direct result of his hatred of Baptists, it would be classified as a
hate crime. Otherwise, it is just another senseless random shooting.
The incidents in Jasper, Texas are a classic example of a "hate
crime". There, three rednecks in a pickup dragged a mentally impaired
black man to his death. One has already been tried, gound guilty, and
sentenced to death. The other two are on trial.
Stefan Danyluc
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hatred, murder, and mockery of Christians is nothing new;
..."Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on
a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace.
Christus, from whom the name had it's origin, suffered the extreme
penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our
procurators, Pontius Pilate, and a most mischevous superstition, thus
checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first
source of the evil, but even in Rome...."
..."Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty:
then upom their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so
much of the crime of firing the city, as of their hatred against
mankind."
..."Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the
skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to
crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly
illumination, when daylight had expired."
...(from Tacitus' "Annals" chapter 15)...
> http://classics.mit.edu/Tacitus/annals.11.xv.html <
========================================================================
>
> The incidents in Jasper, Texas are a classic example of a "hate
> crime". There, three rednecks in a pickup dragged a mentally impaired
> black man to his death. One has already been tried, gound guilty, and
> sentenced to death. The other two are on trial.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
But since the victims were seven Christians, it is only classified as
random "gun-violence"???
As a Baptist with family members and brothers and sisters in Christ to
consider, I'm sure you'll understand if we don't just take your word for
it.
steven
..."Then he said unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take
it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his
garment and buy one."
... (Word of Christ, The Gospel of Luke 22:36) ...
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ><> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Erikc (alt.atheist #002) | "An Fhirinne in aghaidh an tSaoil."
> BAAWA Knight | "The Truth against the World."
> ICQ 26776011 | -- Bardic Motto
> If we don't believe in freedom of expression for
> people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.
> ---- Noam Chomsky
>
> "The only truly intuitive user interface is the
> nipple. Everything else has to be learned."
> --- unknown
>
stoney
[>I read this post in <alt.talk.creationism>
[>
[>
[> (erikc) wrote:
[>> "Athemyst" <athe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[>> -- origin: alt.atheism:
[>> >|
[>> >|...snipped for editorial reasons...
[>> >|>A sane mind, athiest, Muslim, Christian, Jewish or whatever, does
[>not
[>> >|>commit acts of random violence.
[>> >|
[>> >|Yes, but this was NOT a random act of violence. A random act of
[>violence
[>> >|would be one in which the shooter shot people at random. Shooting
[>all
[>> >|Southern Baptists is NOT at all random.
[>> >|
[>> >|The man intended to and did shoot a very non-random group of people.
[>>
[>> The man just wanted to shoot a bunch of people and the church was a
[>> handy target.
[>
[>
[>The President called it "gun-violence" The Christian-hating gunman
[>walked into the church shouting obsenities and mocking religion and
[>proceeded to kill seven Christians.
*Christian* hating? The gunman was the son of a preacher, according
to the Texas newspaper. Further the individual specified *Baptist* belief
as being full of shit.
The paper also indicates the person has ties to some radical Christian
group I've never heard of-Pappas Priest? Something like that.
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/texas990917.html
... Three adults and four teen-agers were killed when
[>Ashbrook — shouting anti-Baptist rhetoric — opened fire
[ in Wedgwood Baptist Church during a Christian music
[> concert. Seven others were wounded before he killed himself.
[>> http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/texas990917.html <
[>
[>What does it take to rate this as a so called "hate-crime" ?
The person wasn't playing with a full deck.
[snip]
Stoney
stoney
[>Stefan Danyluc < wrote:
[snip]
[>>|What does it take to rate this as a so called "hate-crime" ?
[>
[>Motivation: If it can be shown that the shooter's actions were a
[>direct result of his hatred of Baptists, it would be classified as a
[>hate crime. Otherwise, it is just another senseless random shooting.
[>
[>The incidents in Jasper, Texas are a classic example of a "hate
[>crime". There, three rednecks in a pickup dragged a mentally impaired
[>black man to his death. One has already been tried, gound guilty, and
[>sentenced to death. The other two are on trial.
I wasn't aware one trial had concluded. [shudder] dragging someone
to death,,,,[mega shudder] from recalling the reports of sacrificing limbs.
Stoney
Medieval Knievel
Stefan Danyluc <stefan_...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> What does it take to rate this as a so called "hate-crime" ?
Southern Baptists have been spewing hate everywhere for over 100 years.
What happened last week is a pittance in comparison to the violence they
have supported and instigated against people of color, other religions, and
lands throughout history.
Chickens coming home to roost, people.
Stefan Danyluc
I am posting from <alt.talk.creationism>
sto...@stoney.net (stoney) wrote:
> Stefan Danyluc wrote:
>
> [> (erikc) wrote:
>
> [>> "Athemyst" <athe...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> [>> -- origin: alt.atheism:
> [>> >|
> [>> >|...snipped for editorial reasons...
> [>> >|>A sane mind, athiest, Muslim, Christian, Jewish or whatever,
does
> [>not
> [>> >|>commit acts of random violence.
> [>> >|
> [>> >|Yes, but this was NOT a random act of violence. A random act of
> [>violence
> [>> >|would be one in which the shooter shot people at random.
Shooting
> [>all
> [>> >|Southern Baptists is NOT at all random.
> [>> >|
> [>> >|The man intended to and did shoot a very non-random group of
people.
> [>>
> [>> The man just wanted to shoot a bunch of people and the church was
a
> [>> handy target.
> [>
> [>
> [>The President called it "gun-violence" The Christian-hating gunman
> [>walked into the church shouting obsenities and mocking religion and
> [>proceeded to kill seven Christians.
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *Christian* hating? The gunman was the son of a preacher, according
> to the Texas newspaper. Further the individual specified *Baptist*
belief
> as being full of shit.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This article from USA TODAY says Larry Gene Ashbrook's father, Jack D.
Ashbrook, who died two months ago, was a longtime "member" of Pleasant
Ridge Church of Christ (hardly a Baptist mortal enemy, except in
intramural softball)
It also says his son did not attend. Larry abused his Christian father.
> http://www.usatoday.com/news/ndsthu09.htm <
========================================================================
> The paper also indicates the person has ties to some radical Christian
> group I've never heard of-Pappas Priest? Something like that.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phineas Priest? The above USA TODAY URL says Larry Gene Ashbrook was a
jobless loner. It says the same in an ABC NEWS article;
..."Texas Man Who Killed 7, Self, Was Troubled Loner"
> http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/reuters19990916_2444.html <
This article also said he shouted "anti-religious" curses, but didn't
mention any specific Baptist curses, although, I would imagine he might,
being in a Baptist Church and all.
(the only Baptist curse I've ever heard is How come Baptists don't
smile... :8>( )
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ABC NEWS says, "Police also said they have no evidence so far to back up
a newspaper report linking Ashbrook, described as a troubled loner, to
white supremacy group named the "Phineas Priesthood""
> http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/reuters19990918_10.html <
========================================================================
========================================================================
> http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/texas990917.html
> ... Three adults and four teen-agers were killed when
> [>Ashbrook — shouting anti-Baptist rhetoric — opened fire
> [ in Wedgwood Baptist Church during a Christian music
> [> concert. Seven others were wounded before he killed himself.
>
> [>> http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/texas990917.html <
> [>
> [>What does it take to rate this as a so called "hate-crime" ?
>
> The person wasn't playing with a full deck.
>
> Stoney
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, he certainly does fit the typical "atheist profile" ...misfit,
rebelling against a Christian Dad, mad at Christians in general, etc.
steven
..."THIS know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come."
..."For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters,
proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, "
..."Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers,
incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,..."
... ( The 2nd Epistle of Paul to Timothy 3:1-3 ) ...
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- ><> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Medieval Knievel
Stefan Danyluc <stefan_...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
>
> Yes, he certainly does fit the typical "atheist profile" ...misfit,
> rebelling against a Christian Dad, mad at Christians in general, etc.
Yet, I imagine at some point he fit the typical xian profile...unthinking
conformist, patriarchical, unable to see the flaws in xianity in general,
etc.
stoney
[>I am posting from <alt.talk.creationism>
Did you bother to read my post? Why did you ignore what was below
and babble onward? I''ll bring it forward so you don't miss it.
----------
[>> http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/texas990917.html
[>> ... Three adults and four teen-agers were killed when
[>> [>Ashbrook — shouting anti-Baptist rhetoric — opened fire
[>> [ in Wedgwood Baptist Church during a Christian music
[>> [> concert. Seven others were wounded before he killed himself.
-----------------
[>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[>ABC NEWS says, "Police also said they have no evidence so far to back up
[>a newspaper report linking Ashbrook, described as a troubled loner, to
[>white supremacy group named the "Phineas Priesthood""
[>
[>> http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/reuters19990918_10.html <
[>
[>========================================================================
[>
[>
[>========================================================================
[>
[>
[>> http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/texas990917.html
[>> ... Three adults and four teen-agers were killed when
[>> [>Ashbrook — shouting anti-Baptist rhetoric — opened fire
[>> [ in Wedgwood Baptist Church during a Christian music
[>> [> concert. Seven others were wounded before he killed himself.
[>>
[>> [>> http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/texas990917.html <
[>> [>
[>> [>What does it take to rate this as a so called "hate-crime" ?
[>>
[>> The person wasn't playing with a full deck.
[>>
[>> Stoney
[>
[>------------------------------------------------------------------------
[>
[>Yes, he certainly does fit the typical "atheist profile" ...misfit,
[>rebelling against a Christian Dad, mad at Christians in general, etc.
Well, you just shattered the injunction against bearing false witness.
What is it with you fundamentalist christians and a lack of honesty?
[>steven
[>
[>..."THIS know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come."
[>..."For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters,
[>proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, "
[>..."Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers,
[>incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,..."
[> ... ( The 2nd Epistle of Paul to Timothy 3:1-3 ) ...
Well, you certainly aren't good.
Stoney
Dr. Monkey
Medieval Knievel <smell_...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> babbled incoherently
news:ru5svd...@corp.supernews.com...
> snip <
> what a fucking idiot. He should have crawled his babdist ass under a
table.
> His testimony tells me that he was an moron, thinking his mythology was a
> match for a weapon.
Only an atheist would cower under a table. This young man knew where he
was going and did not fear death.
Brandon J. Freels
Dr. Monkey wrote
Stefan Danyluc
sto...@stoney.net (stoney) wrote:
This URL ^ stated that Ashbrook did not attend his father's Church of
Christ, and in fact, Bill Pullin, a senior minister had never met him.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
What's the difference? I already conceded the possibility that it
might be (see above)
Let's go closer to the scene of the crime, and see what they have to say
about it, "Fort Worth Star-Telegram"
> http://www.star-telegram.com/specials/99fwshoot/ <
*click "Gunman kills seven in Fort Worth church; massacre believed to be
city's deadliest, and it says, "who witnesses said was spouting
obscenities and demeaning worshippers' beliefs" and a visitor "said
the gunman came through the sanctuary, cursing and saying that "religion
is b-------.""
also *click* "Tape traces killer's steps"
"Witnesses have said he spouted obscenities and denounced their
religious beliefs"
In the "Dallas Morning News"
"Experts doubt linking gunman, racist views" ..."Monitors find no
evidence killer had ties to hate groups"
> http://www.dallasnews.com/metro/churchshooting/0918church6adl.htm <
========================================================================
> -----------------
>
> [>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> [>ABC NEWS says, "Police also said they have no evidence so far to
back up
> [>a newspaper report linking Ashbrook, described as a troubled loner,
to
> [>white supremacy group named the "Phineas Priesthood""
> [>
> [>> http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/reuters19990918_10.html <
> [>
>
> [>
>
[>======================================================================
==
> [>
> [>
> [>> http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/texas990917.html
> [>> ... Three adults and four teen-agers were killed when
> [>> [>Ashbrook — shouting anti-Baptist rhetoric — opened fire
> [>> [ in Wedgwood Baptist Church during a Christian music
> [>> [> concert. Seven others were wounded before he killed himself.
> [>>
> [>> [>> http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/texas990917.html <
> [>> [>
> [>> [>What does it take to rate this as a so called "hate-crime" ?
> [>>
> [>> The person wasn't playing with a full deck.
> [>>
> [>> Stoney
> [>
>
[>----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> [>
> [>Yes, he certainly does fit the typical "atheist profile" ...misfit,
> [>rebelling against a Christian Dad, mad at Christians in general,
etc.
>
> Well, you just shattered the injunction against bearing false witness.
> What is it with you fundamentalist christians and a lack of honesty?
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe me. I don't believe you. ...sorry.
========================================================================
> [>..."THIS know also, that in the last days perilous times shall
come."
> [>..."For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters,
> [>proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, "
> [>..."Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers,
> [>incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,..."
> [> ... ( The 2nd Epistle of Paul to Timothy 3:1-3 ) ...
>
> Well, you certainly aren't good.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
None of us are good, not me, not you.
..."But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousness are as
filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the
wind, have taken us away."
... ( The Book of ISAIAH 64:6 ) ...
..."They are all gone aside, they are altogether become filthy: there is
none that doeth good, no, not one."
... ( The Book of Psalms 14:3 ) ...
..."As it is written, There is none righteous, no not one."
... ( Paul's Epistle to the Romans 3:10 ) ...
..."For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God."
... ( Paul's Epistle to the Romans 3:23 ) ...
..."If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is
not in us."
... ( The First Epistle of John 1:10 ) ... (not the Gospel of John)
..."If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not
in us." "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive
us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."
... ( The First Epistle of John 1:8,9 ) ...
..."As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our
transgressions from us."
... ( The Book of Psalms 103:12 ) ...
..."The Lord is not slack concerning his promises, as some men count
slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should
perish, but that all should come to repentance."
... ( The Second epistle of Peter 3:9 ) ...
..."Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from
before mine eyes; cease to do evil."
... ( The book of ISAIAH 1:16 ) ...
..."Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am
God, and there is none else."
...( The Book of ISAIAH 45:22 ) ...
..."I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour."
... ( The Book of ISAIAH 43:11 ) ...
..."That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt
believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou
shalt be saved."
... ( Paul's Epistle to the Romans 10:9 ) ...
..."For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."
... ( Paul's Epistle to the Romans 10:13 ) ...
..."Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your
sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as snow; though they be red like
crimson, they shall be as wool."
..."If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land."
..."But if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword: for
the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it."
... ( The Book of ISAIAH 1:18-20 ) ...
..."But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet
sinners, Christ died for us."
..."Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved
from wrath through him."
... ( Paul's Epistle to the Romans 5:8,9 ) ...
..."For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the
world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away
sin by the sacrifice of himself."
... ( The Book of Hebrews 9:26 ) ...
..."And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the
judgement."
... ( The Book of Hebrews 9:27 ) ...
..."For there is one God, and one mediator between god and men, the man
Christ Jesus."
..."Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time."
... ( The First Epistle of Paul to Timothy 2:5,6 ) ...
steven
..."Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man
cometh unto the father but by me."
.... ( The Gospel of John 14:6 ) ....
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ><> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>
> Stoney
Dr. Monkey
beyond the Universe? Have you been there? Yet you claim to know that
there is no God. Is that knowledge, or ignorance?
Anyway, you didn't argue that an atheist wouldn't be cowering under the
table. When you don't know where you are going when you die, its scary
looking death in its face.
Brandon J. Freels <fre...@teleport.com> wrote in message
news:poDF3.50729$FG4.2...@news1.teleport.com...
Medieval Knievel
Stefan Danyluc <stefan_...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> ..."Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man
> cometh unto the father but by me."
He sure was one egotistical SOB, wasn't he?
Rod Monsees
>
> No, that's an atheists view point. How can you claim to know what lies
> beyond the Universe? Have you been there? Yet you claim to know that
> there is no God. Is that knowledge, or ignorance?
It's your misunderstanding. Apply that exact same reasoning to claims to
knowledge of a God's existence and characteristics, and you'll better understand
what the atheist position is.
> Anyway, you didn't argue that an atheist wouldn't be cowering under the
> table. When you don't know where you are going when you die, its scary
> looking death in its face.
Not speaking for all atheists, but I don't fear the state of death. You might
say I fear the process of dying, due to suffering that might be endured. I was
non-existent for an infinite amount of time before I was born, why should I fear
an infinite amount of non-existence after my death? Not that I want to die,
there's plenty I'd like to do first.
Rod
Matt
>
> No, that's an atheists view point. How can you claim to know what lies
> beyond the Universe? Have you been there? Yet you claim to know that
> there is no God. Is that knowledge, or ignorance?
I can just tell you're a regular visitor to heaven. You must have
accumulated hundreds of frequent-ascender miles in all your trips to the
afterlife and back. Next time you go, it would be very helpful of you to
send a postcard back to us atheists. After all, you seem pretty intent
on 'wishing we were there' even when youre still on this planet.
For the slightly slower-on-the-uptake, what Im trying to say is: Has Dr
Monkey been beyond the universe? Does he know whats out there? He claims
that there is a god, yet he has never so much as told us what it's like.
Is that gullibility or insecurity?
> Anyway, you didn't argue that an atheist wouldn't be cowering under the
> table. When you don't know where you are going when you die, its scary
> looking death in its face.
Id be under the table, if I hadnt been rooted to the spot in fear with
squidgy brown muck running down my trouser-leg. I have no desire to get
shot by a maniac and am quite happy that so far I havent had the chance
to be. Are you seriously trying to tell me you wouldnt be scared at all
if some nutter with a gun pointed it you? Wouldnt you rather live just a
few decades longer?
Matt.
Dr. Monkey
But, I've never been there. So, maybe I should doubt that Poland exists, I
haven't been there to confirm it for myself.
For that matter, I've never seen your brain, but I'll take your word for it
that you have one.
Living another decade is not important to me. So I can see what? Another
war? Another invention? Must see T.V.? Elizabeth Taylor wed and
divorced again?
Ok, I would like to see CART and IRL come together so I can see the best
racing at Indy. :-) But, that'll happen soon. Then I'm free to leave.
I'm sorry you are cowardice. Only having faith in this life tends to make
one so. I'm not looking for death. But, I know where I am going, and I'm
not afraid to go.
No, I have not been out side our atmosphere. But, I'm not the one
proclaiming that it is impossible for God to exist, without any factual
knowledge to back it up.
Look around you! Do you really believe that a big explosion and 12 billion
years of evolution made all of the wonderous plants, animals, planets,
etc...? Thats gullibility, as you put it.
Just look at the way the earth, not only rotates around the sun, but changes
so the Northern hemisphere can recieve summer, then so the southern
hemisphere recieves it. You believe this was by accident? I have never
seen an accident make anything. Even the 'you got peanut butter on my
chocolate' was made up, it didn't happen that way. Someone, put peanut
butter and chocolate together to make Reeses peanut butter cups. Just as
God, put all the pieces of the universe to make it like it is.
I have faith in God, you have faith in yourself. I'll take God, anyday,
anytime. As you stated, you'd hide under table.
stoney
[>I read this reply in <alt.talk.creationism>
[>
[> sto...@stoney.net (stoney) wrote:
[snip]
I read some of the links. Thank you for listing them.
Stefan;
[>> [>Yes, he certainly does fit the typical "atheist profile" ...misfit,
[>> [>rebelling against a Christian Dad, mad at Christians in general,
[>etc.
[>> Well, you just shattered the injunction against bearing false witness.
[>> What is it with you fundamentalist christians and a lack of honesty?
[>>
[>------------------------------------------------------------------------
[>
[>I believe me. I don't believe you. ...sorry.
[sigh] What part of lack of belief don't you understand?
[>========================================================================
[>> [>..."THIS know also, that in the last days perilous times shall
[>come."
[>> [>..."For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters,
[>> [>proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, "
[>> [>..."Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers,
[>> [>incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,..."
[>> [> ... ( The 2nd Epistle of Paul to Timothy 3:1-3 ) ...
[>>
[>> Well, you certainly aren't good.
[>
[>------------------------------------------------------------------------
[>None of us are good, not me, not you.
[snip bible drek]
Such only has meaning to a person inside the superstition.
Stoney
Bennet...@mindspring.com
Dr. Monkey wrote in message <7s6pmf$9...@chronicle.concentric.net>...
>
>Medieval Knievel <smell_...@NOSPAMhotmail.com> babbled incoherently
>news:ru5svd...@corp.supernews.com...
>> snip <
>> what a fucking idiot. He should have crawled his babdist ass under a
>table.
>> His testimony tells me that he was an moron, thinking his mythology was a
>> match for a weapon.
>
>was going and did not fear death.
>
>
It sure seems a whole bunch of Christians were hiding under tables. I'd
change my tactics depending on where I was. If I was really close to him
and not hurt (yet), odds are I would snap and charge him. A 300 lb. guy is
the last thing you want bearing down on you. A 300 lb. lineman and a wall
behind you would mean possible internal bleeding and some ruptured organs.
(~5000 ft/lb*sec and normal force means you take lots of hurt, no padding,
and wall means no blow through of force exerted) Besides, if you're going
to die, you might as well take the other guy with you. BTW, I'm not that
heroic, I'm that unbalanced. Otherwise, I'd hit the ground and get out as
soon as possible. I don't do martyrdom.
Ciao,
Paul
Dr. Monkey
Abner Mintz <a...@clark.net> wrote in message
news:01bf0490$2d596be0$7c168fa8@amaterasu...
> snip <
> "Nope. I just claim not to believe in any gods. You're
> trying to use the claims of one subtype of atheist
> for all atheists, and it just doesn't work."
Ok, you lost me. A sub-type of atheists doesn't beleive in ANY gods, and
another sub-type doesn't beleive IN God. Is that what you just stated?
> snip <
> > Anyway, you didn't argue that an atheist wouldn't be cowering under the
> > table. When you don't know where you are going when you die, its scary
> > looking death in its face.
>
> "Yep - on the other hand, many theists seem scared of death
> too, and many atheists overcome their fear of death, so you
> don't seem to be any better off than we are. Despite the
> 'no atheists in foxholes' myth, there have been any number
> of atheists in foxholes, in firefighting, in police work, ..."
I started by defending a 16 year old boy, who stood up and wasn't afraid to
die for his beliefs. He wasn't a fireman, or policeman, or soldier, he was
a BOY. And he wasn't cowering under a table as another atheist claimed he
would be doing. Yet, the brave atheists that visit here, where attacking
him as , and I quote, "a moron". Does civil behavior depart with the
disbelief in God? It seems it has.
Abner Mintz
> No, that's an atheists view point. How can you claim to know what lies
> beyond the Universe?
"I don't."
> Have you been there?
"Nope."
> Yet you claim to know that there is no God.
"Nope. I just claim not to believe in any gods. You're
trying to use the claims of one subtype of atheist
for all atheists, and it just doesn't work."
> Is that knowledge, or ignorance?
"Ignorance on your part of what many (as far as I
can tell, most) atheists actually say."
Jim Cowling
>
>Abner Mintz <a...@clark.net> wrote in message
>news:01bf0490$2d596be0$7c168fa8@amaterasu...
>> snip <
>> trying to use the claims of one subtype of atheist
>> for all atheists, and it just doesn't work."
>
>another sub-type doesn't beleive IN God. Is that what you just stated?
A subset of atheists have a positive belief in the lack of existence of gods
-- that is, that there definitely are no gods and that it is impossible for
there ever to have been gods.
-------
Jim Cowling, Unaligned Merchant of Menace/Writer/Atheist/Geek
The Plains of Amaterasu: more original Clan War stuff than you could ever use at
http://members.home.com/scowling -- scow...@home.com
-------
Matti Kaikkonen
"Dr. Monkey" wrote:
> When you don't know where you are going when you die, its scary looking
> death in its face.
I think approaching an massacering lunatic is practically committing suicide.
It is still suicide, even though one quotes the bible or tries to convert the
murderer.
No one has real knowledge about hypothetical afterlife. Moreover, I have
understood that at least some christian sects do not think this afterlife is
granted for people having undergone suicide.
There have been numerous non-christian cult members, though, who are so sure
about an afterlife, that they are ready to kill themselves. For some reason
christians do not call them heroes.
Abner Mintz
> > "Nope. I just claim not to believe in any gods. You're
> > trying to use the claims of one subtype of atheist
> > for all atheists, and it just doesn't work."
Dr. Monkey <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
> Ok, you lost me. A sub-type of atheists doesn't beleive in ANY gods,
and
> another sub-type doesn't beleive IN God. Is that what you just stated?
"Nope. Rather, all atheists do not believe in any gods.
One subtype has the property that, in addition, they
believe that no gods exist. The ones who do not have
that additional property (do not claim that gods do not
exist) are weak atheists; the ones that do (claim that
gods do not exist) are strong atheists."
"Your comment applies only to strong atheists; most of us
do not make any such claim."
Dr. Monkey <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
> > > Anyway, you didn't argue that an atheist wouldn't be cowering under
the
> > > table. When you don't know where you are going when you die, its
scary
> > > looking death in its face.
> > "Yep - on the other hand, many theists seem scared of death
> > too, and many atheists overcome their fear of death, so you
> > don't seem to be any better off than we are. Despite the
> > 'no atheists in foxholes' myth, there have been any number
> > of atheists in foxholes, in firefighting, in police work, ..."
> I started by defending a 16 year old boy, who stood up and wasn't afraid
to
> die for his beliefs. He wasn't a fireman, or policeman, or soldier, he
was
> a BOY.
"Surely you could have defended the boy without attacking
atheists in general? It's bad enough that you don't turn
the other cheek, but if you must attack people, why not
just attack the people who called the boy a moron, not
everyone who doesn't believe in gods?"
> And he wasn't cowering under a table as another atheist claimed he
> would be doing. Yet, the brave atheists that visit here, where
attacking
> him as , and I quote, "a moron".
"That is untrue - I said no such thing. You need to stop
attacking *all* atheists for the actions of a few atheists,
IMO. We've had Christians come in and tell us they
were going to be glad to look over the rim of Heaven and
watch us writhe in agony in Hell; would I be justified
in attacking you for the statements of these other
Christians? And yet you keep on attacking me for
the actions of other atheists."
> Does civil behavior depart with the
> disbelief in God? It seems it has.
"See? What have I done to earn such a statement? Have
I been uncivil to you? And yet you repeatedly attack me
..."
Antoon Pardon
: Abner Mintz <a...@clark.net> wrote:
: > > "Nope. I just claim not to believe in any gods. You're
: > > trying to use the claims of one subtype of atheist
: > > for all atheists, and it just doesn't work."
: Dr. Monkey <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
: > Ok, you lost me. A sub-type of atheists doesn't beleive in ANY gods,
: and
: > another sub-type doesn't beleive IN God. Is that what you just stated?
: "Nope. Rather, all atheists do not believe in any gods.
: One subtype has the property that, in addition, they
: believe that no gods exist. The ones who do not have
: that additional property (do not claim that gods do not
: exist) are weak atheists; the ones that do (claim that
: gods do not exist) are strong atheists."
: "Your comment applies only to strong atheists; most of us
: do not make any such claim."
Aren't you muddying things up a bit by using "believing" and
"claiming" interchangably?
Can't one believe god(s) not to exist, wiyjout making the claim?
--
All opinions expressed herein are currently under revision
==========================================================
Antoon Pardon Brussels Free University Computing Centre
==========================================================
Dr. Monkey
> snip <
>
> > I started by defending a 16 year old boy, who stood up and wasn't afraid
> to
> > die for his beliefs. He wasn't a fireman, or policeman, or soldier, he
> was
> > a BOY.
>
> "Surely you could have defended the boy without attacking
> atheists in general? It's bad enough that you don't turn
> the other cheek, but if you must attack people, why not
> just attack the people who called the boy a moron, not
> everyone who doesn't believe in gods?"
>
You are right Mr. Mintz. I responded to a moron, who claimed to be an
atheist, and in so doing, painted a broad stroke.
It seems, that there is at least one civil atheist in this group.
> > And he wasn't cowering under a table as another atheist claimed he
> > would be doing. Yet, the brave atheists that visit here, where
> attacking
> > him as , and I quote, "a moron".
>
> "That is untrue - I said no such thing. You need to stop
> attacking *all* atheists for the actions of a few atheists,
> IMO. We've had Christians come in and tell us they
> were going to be glad to look over the rim of Heaven and
> watch us writhe in agony in Hell; would I be justified
> in attacking you for the statements of these other
> Christians? And yet you keep on attacking me for
> the actions of other atheists."
>
Again, you are right.
> > Does civil behavior depart with the
> > disbelief in God? It seems it has.
>
> "See? What have I done to earn such a statement? Have
> I been uncivil to you? And yet you repeatedly attack me
> ..."
I do differ with you on me repeatedly attacking you. In what manner have I
done so?
Dr. Monkey
Jim Cowling <scow...@home.com> wrote in message
news:VOWF3.91$_b1....@news1.gvcl1.bc.home.com...
> snip <
> A subset of atheists have a positive belief in the lack of existence of
gods
> -- that is, that there definitely are no gods and that it is impossible
for
> there ever to have been gods.
>
And it was to this view point I wrote, "How can you claim to know what lies
beyond the Universe? Have you been there? Yet you claim to know that
there is no God. Is that knowledge, or ignorance?"
This was in response to me being called ignorant for having faith that God
exists. I was not the one to claim to know that something, WAY beyond my
ability to travel to, does not exist.
The difference here is knowledge and belief. There is no way one can know
this positively. You can believe it, yes. But to claim to know it is
false knowledge, there is no way to know it.
I'll call mine faith, you do the same.
Therion Ware
in alt.atheism:
>
>Matti Kaikkonen <matti.k...@helsinki.fi> wrote in message
>news:37E86E6C...@helsinki.fi...
>>
>> I think approaching an massacering lunatic is practically committing
>suicide.
>> It is still suicide, even though one quotes the bible or tries to convert
>the
>> murderer.
>>
>
>Then, in your logic, Police Officers, Firemen, Soldiers, Sailors and many
>many others commit suicide on a daily basis. Only, they call it doing
>their duty.
>
>But, since you think standing up to it is suicide, then these fine men are
>breaking the law, daily. Suicide is against the law.
>
>>
>> No one has real knowledge about hypothetical afterlife. Moreover, I have
>> understood that at least some christian sects do not think this afterlife
>is
>> granted for people having undergone suicide.
>>
>> There have been numerous non-christian cult members, though, who are so
>sure
>> about an afterlife, that they are ready to kill themselves. For some
>reason
>> christians do not call them heroes.
>
>That a boy or anyone, would stand up to stop a killer, and you attack him
>for this, calling it suicide, is pathetic on your part.
>
>Yes, Muslims in the name of Allah, blow themselves (and many victims) up
>thinking they are going to heaven. To equate this, with what this young
>boy did, trying to stop people from being killed is, well, sick.
>
>Ok, those who will attack me. Should I extend this guy love, for being
>twisted in his thinking? Are should I slam him for his idiotic theories?
>Does he speak for ALL atheists? Or is he a fringe lunatic who might have a
>gun and go to a Church to vent his anger?
>
>I still have not seen ONE atheist who has said he would lay down his life
>for others. Thats the whole sticking point here. My God died for you.
>You find this strange? Why would anyone die for another? Why would
>anyone put themselves in harms way to save others? Why wouldn't they
>preserve themselves first?
>
>The answer is LOVE. Love is not self centered.
Then why are you prepared to abandon most of humanity to eternal
damnation?
--
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
- attrib: Pauline Reage.
------ <http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/6671/entry/hell.html>
ICQ: 29168081
--
Video2CD? An inexpensive video To MPEG-1 conversion service!
Details? See <http://www.video2cd.co.uk>
Dr. Monkey
Dr. Monkey
Therion Ware <tw...@video2cd.co.uk> wrote in message
news:37f5025f...@news.freenetname.co.uk...
> Then why are you prepared to abandon most of humanity to eternal
> damnation?
And I stated that when?
I love all the cliches that are thrown out. But, can you all please read
the posts first and stick to the topic?
Therion Ware
in alt.atheism:
>
>Therion Ware <tw...@video2cd.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:37f5025f...@news.freenetname.co.uk...
>> Then why are you prepared to abandon most of humanity to eternal
>> damnation?
>
>And I stated that when?
You are a Christian, are you not?
>I love all the cliches that are thrown out. But, can you all please read
>the posts first and stick to the topic?
You wrote:
>>The answer is LOVE. Love is not self centered.
One presumes that you claim to love. I'm merely curious as to how that
fits in with the final turning away.
- ----- ------
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
- attrib: Pauline Reage.
------ <http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/6671/entry/hell.html>
ICQ: 29168081
---
drop the "the.eac" for mail, because the EAC doesn't exist.
Carl Rooker
Therion Ware wrote in message <37ea1415...@news.freenetname.co.uk>...
>On 22 Sep 1999 10:15:49 PDT, "Dr. Monkey" <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote
>in alt.atheism:
>
>>
>>Therion Ware <tw...@video2cd.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:37f5025f...@news.freenetname.co.uk...
>>> Then why are you prepared to abandon most of humanity to eternal
>>> damnation?
>>
>>And I stated that when?
>
>You are a Christian, are you not?
>
>>I love all the cliches that are thrown out. But, can you all please read
>>the posts first and stick to the topic?
>
>You wrote:
>
>>>The answer is LOVE. Love is not self centered.
>
>One presumes that you claim to love. I'm merely curious as to how that
>fits in with the final turning away.
What would you have us do? Make laws that require belief? Wouldn't work.
Force all to believe or die? Might convince some to say that they believe,
but would make no genuine change, and is against the precepts of the Gospel.
"...He does not want anyone to perish, so he is giving more time for
everyone to repent. " 2 Peter 3:9.
Not we christians, nor our God are willing to abandon any to damnation. He
sent His Son to die for us. The only avenue we have to prevent this is to
try to convince others of this fact. It is up to each individual to decide
whether to believe or not, and that alone will determine who is abandoned to
damnation.
God Bless
Carl
Keith Doyle
Carl Rooker <roo...@dnx.net> wrote:
>
>Not we christians, nor our God are willing to abandon any to damnation. He
>sent His Son to die for us. The only avenue we have to prevent this is to
>try to convince others of this fact. It is up to each individual to decide
>whether to believe or not, and that alone will determine who is abandoned to
>damnation.
Except for one thing. There is another avenue you have to prevent this, and
that is to try to convince God that we unbelievers are worth saving anyway.
So I have a proposition for you.
Rather than praying for me or trying to convince me that God exists or
anything like that, here's what I'd like you to do. When you finally get
your eternal life and subsequently get an audience with God, I'd like for
you to plead our case to Him. That is, that there were many good people
who's only unforgivable crime was they did not believe in Him. Perhaps
someone close to you also is not a believer. Perhaps in heaven, you would
like to experience the company of this person, despite the fact that they
did not have faith in God. So, you would like God to consider granting His
gift of eternal life even to those who did not believe in Him.
If He says no, I am perfectly willing to accept that, and thank you and
respect you for trying. I absolutely refuse to cowtow to fear or hope for
reward, and this is the only way *you* will ever be able to do anything
that could possibly contribute to my salvation.
Note that when I say that the unbeliever's "only unforgivable crime"
was that they did not believe in Him, that is true, because it is the
only crime that is punishable by the witholding of eternal life. An
unbeliever may very well be a "sinner" as you Christians are fond of
pointing out, but according to Christian philosophy, apparently the
sin that is punishable by witholding salvation here is "unbelief."
So in effect, I am putting my faith in *you* to present a good case to
God. My "eternal life" is in your hands, not dependent on your ability
to convert me, but on your ability to plead a case for me and others like
me to God. I prefer to put my faith in you, instead of in God, despite the
fact you are imperfect and fallible. I do this for several reasons, not the
least of which is the fact that I know for certain that you exist.
And I do this because I don't want to let you off the hook so easy as to simply
"believe," expouse a few evangelical words and then consider you have met your
self proclaimed obligations to attempt to prevent my damnation. If you really
want to make a contribution to my salvation then here's your chance to put
your money where your mouth is. If you really want me "saved" as you claim
you do, then you will have to be a little more inventive by arguing my case
directly to God rather than arguing God's case to me.
--
Keith Doyle
(remove underbars in reply address for E-mail)
"The hands that help are better than the lips that pray."
-- Robert G. Ingersoll
Dr. Monkey
Therion Ware <tw...@eac.video2cd.co.uk> wrote in message
news:37ea1415...@news.freenetname.co.uk...
> snip <
> You are a Christian, are you not?
>
> >I love all the cliches that are thrown out. But, can you all please
read
> >the posts first and stick to the topic?
>
> You wrote:
>
> >>The answer is LOVE. Love is not self centered.
>
> One presumes that you claim to love. I'm merely curious as to how that
> fits in with the final turning away.
>
Have you ever been in love with a woman that didn't love you back? No
matter how much you loved her, she wouldn't love you. Were you supposed to
buy her diamond ring anyway? And write her into your life insurance
policy? And give her ownership of your house and car?
If she doesn't love you, you let her go her way. You hope that someday she
comes around. But, a shotgun to the head, is not love, its coercion.
If I invite you to a party and tell you that all you have to do is wear a
black tie and you decide you don't want to wear a black tie. Am I to be at
fault for not letting you in?
He will not turn any away. They will have chosen to walk away. God is
pro-choice. You are free to make good and bad decisions. And you can't
blame your mothers over protection or your fathers insistence you play
tennis. It's all up to you. Personal responsibility is what life is all
about, despite what 'Ricky Sally Winfrey' may say.
Dr. Monkey
Keith Doyle <ke_ith_d@ne_tco_m.com> wrote in message
news:7sbf3d$k...@dfw-ixnews21.ix.netcom.com...
Is that what you do in life? I don't like the price of gasoline, so, I
know everyone else pays what is asked of them, but can you make an exception
for me? I'm special.
I understand I need a certain score to be accepted into your school, but,
just for me, can you bend the rules a little? I'm special.
Yea, I know killing is wrong, but, just let me slide this time. I'm
special.
Life is black and white. You are not negotiating for a car here. Its for
eternal life. And the rules for acceptance have been set forth. Everyone
will be accepted by those rules, no exceptions.
Besides, you already have one pleading for your admittance, Jesus Christ.
You think it was free? He paid the price that, so far, no atheist has come
forward to pay, he died for you.
Because of love. Hard to understand isn't it? Why does he love us?
Look at the darkness inside. And yet, he does.
stoney
[>No, that's an atheists view point. How can you claim to know what lies
[>beyond the Universe?
Wow..I classify that as a force 3 straw storm.
And such a claim has been made where?
[> Have you been there? Yet you claim to know that
[>there is no God. Is that knowledge, or ignorance?
The fact is there is no objective supportive evidence for deity.
On your part it's ignorance. Your words can be reflected back to you.
"How can you claim to know what lies beyond the Universe?
Have you been there? Yet you claim to know that there is a god."
[>Anyway, you didn't argue that an atheist wouldn't be cowering under the
[>table.
[> When you don't know where you are going when you die, its scary
[>looking death in its face.
When you die, your rotting corpse will be disposed of in one way or another.
Of course you won't know how it was disposed of.
Is it scary looking death in the face? It wasn't for me. I was angry.
For you? You won't know until the time comes.
Stoney
[>Brandon J. Freels <fre...@teleport.com> wrote in message
[>news:poDF3.50729$FG4.2...@news1.teleport.com...
[>> Perhaps you are mistaking knowledge for ignorance.
[>>
[>> Dr. Monkey wrote
[>> > Only an atheist would cower under a table. This young man knew where
[>>
[>>
[>>
[>
[>
stoney
[>Stefan Danyluc wrote in message
[>
[>> ..."Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man
[>> cometh unto the father but by me."
[>
[>
[>He sure was one egotistical SOB, wasn't he?
Why no...that's christian humility...
Stoney
Dr. Monkey
stoney <sto...@stoney.net> wrote in message
news:37e95caf...@news.meganews.com...
> "Dr. Monkey" <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
>
> [>No, that's an atheists view point. How can you claim to know what lies
> [>beyond the Universe?
>
> Wow..I classify that as a force 3 straw storm.
> And such a claim has been made where?
>
Uh, here Beavis.
> [> Have you been there? Yet you claim to know that
> [>there is no God. Is that knowledge, or ignorance?
>
> The fact is there is no objective supportive evidence for deity.
>
I will except that you must take the claims of the bible on faith. And
there is no objective supportive evidence against there being a diety, as
you call him, either.
So let's stop calling our faith knowledge, shall we? I choose to put my
faith in God? You choose to put you faith in nothing.
> On your part it's ignorance. Your words can be reflected back to you.
> "How can you claim to know what lies beyond the Universe?
> Have you been there? Yet you claim to know that there is a god."
>
I didn't claim to know that something did not exist in a place where I can't
possibly travel to in order to substantiate my claims, did I?
I look at the creation around me, and see that it took a creator to make it.
A big giant explosion and 12 billion years could never have orchastrated
such wonderful things.
> [>Anyway, you didn't argue that an atheist wouldn't be cowering under the
> [>table.
>
> [> When you don't know where you are going when you die, its scary
> [>looking death in its face.
>
> When you die, your rotting corpse will be disposed of in one way or
another.
> Of course you won't know how it was disposed of.
>
> Is it scary looking death in the face? It wasn't for me. I was angry.
> For you? You won't know until the time comes.
>
I was not angry, I was scared, I didn't want to die. Yet, I gave it all to
God, and told him, I die, or you get me out of it. Cocaine OD. I
survived by the grace of God.
Dr. Monkey
> snip <
> "True - lack of evidence is not evidence of lack, after all.
> However, I tend to think that, in the lack of supporting
> evidence, it is best for me to reserve judgement on
> the issue. Thus, I neither believe that any deities exist
> nor that no deities exist."
>
> > So let's stop calling our faith knowledge, shall we? I choose to put
my
> > faith in God? You choose to put you faith in nothing.
>
> quite a bit of supporting evidence there, so perhaps it doesn't
> qualify as faith ..." :)
>
Yes, but I've never seen you. I've only read your writings. Should I
beleive you exist? I have no way, at this point in time, to substantiate
your claim to exist.
Now, you could send me your son, to tell me you exist. And I could kill
him, and claim that you still don't exist. Does that make you cease to
exist?
> > I didn't claim to know that something did not exist in a place where I
> can't
> > possibly travel to in order to substantiate my claims, did I?
>
> "Neither did I. Who are you claiming did this?"
>
Earlier post, guy said he 'knew' that God did not exist.
> > I look at the creation around me, and see that it took a creator to make
> it.
> > A big giant explosion and 12 billion years could never have orchastrated
> > such wonderful things.
>
> "You are free to have faith in this - and we are free to
> not agree with your faith."
>
And you are free to beleive that all matter, living and otherwise happened
in a giant explosion, some 12 billion years ago. That all life forms on
earth evolved from a single cell, that somehow came about in this explosion.
What could have caused this explosion? There was nothing. All of a
sudden nothing blew up? If nothing blows up, then it blows apart nothing,
so nothing happens.
Yea, I think I'll stick to God created the universe and all its majesty.
It's the more plausable theory.
> "Out of curiousity, how many classes have you taken
> (college level or above) in physics? cosmology? chemistry?
> biology? Are you sure you know enough to know that 'a big
> explosion and 12 billion years could never' ..."
>
Ok, so I would have to take 'big bang' 101? Then, I will understand?
Maybe I should have taken better notes, then I would have been fully
indoctrinated in that faith system.
Aren't these the guys who said eggs are bad. Then came back and said no
wait, they are good?
Let me ask you this? Is math a science or a random occurance? If I throw
a bunch of numbers up in the air, what are the chances that they will land
in an equation?
> > I was not angry, I was scared, I didn't want to die. Yet, I gave it
all
> to
> > God, and told him, I die, or you get me out of it. Cocaine OD. I
> > survived by the grace of God.
>
> "Or perhaps by luck, or the skill of a good doctor, or ..."
...God. I didn't call the paramedics. I was afraid of what my parents
would do. I left it in his hands. Anyone else with heart stoppage would
have died. I was in cardiac arrest.
That's how I know God is real. I called on him, while I was dying and
asked for his mercy. He gave it to me. I never turned back. That's not
luck, its love.
Yellowback
"NoGodHere" <myo...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Grow up and face reality so we can move out of this technological
stone-age we're still living in. Instead of sitting there on your
knees kissing the holy rear-end, get up and show some human dignity and
make something good happen in this world. Show this imaginary God of
yours that humankind CAN and WILL control his own fate through our
highly evolved and intelligent minds. Stop waiting for salvation when
its right in the palm of your own hand!
Hmmmm...... Maybe the Christians are right, along with the Greeks.
Hubris/pride is the bane of humanity.
If the wonder of the creation and the many blessings you have in life
move you to say "Thank you God," why not? God certainly can do quite
well, thank you, without our praise. In fact, man has probably been
nothing but a pain in the divine posterior since day one when
Australeopithecus emerged to set us on the road to true humanity.
Hardly merits all the work God went through creating the "apex" of
creation.
It is indeed weak Christians who think we exist to strum harp strings
and bolster the fragile ego of God who oft is thought by non too smart
Christians to want blood more than "holy, holies" raised
to heaven by cowardly syncophants bent on appeasing the divine humor.
The Christians seeing that the sex drive is 6 times what
it needs to be to perpetuate the race, has sublimated
some of that energy in connecting to God and at the same
time used their high intelligence and planning capacity
to solve the problems of the world. And doing it with
dignity and determination at the same time.
And many modern theologians, like the atheists, want Christians
to move beyond literal understandings of Bible truths and
Church doctrine to indeed face reality. However, all that
will change really is how the truth/reality of the faith
is expressed. Thus, the resurrection of Christ will not
be in terms of a physical body hopping up from death to
walk from what becomes the "empty" tomb. It will be
it terms of spiritual reality - God has raised Jesus of
Nazareth to eternity = Christ is at the right hand of God
almighty. And the Virgin Birth will cease to be mentioned
for it is definitely not the way Jesus was actually born.
And the New TEstament never even got the place right on
his birth certificate right. It was Nazareth not Bethlehem.
That is the modern hard reality adopted by Christians.
In fact Christianity has never been totally divorced
from hard reality. After all the central symbol of the
faith is a CROSS. Pretty hard reality. Hard reality that
defines the Messiah as a suffering servant and not a nationalistic
slayer of millions of God's enemies. Also a good reminder
that following God and serving his kingdom is not without
it own price and share of suffering. Hard reality but
nevertheless REALITY. Also a reminded that reality is not
simple but has both its spiritual as well as physical component.
So goes the witness of millions of folk who adhere to Islam,
Judaism and Christianity.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Dr. Monkeyspank
"Dr. Monkey" <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
> Have you ever been in love with a woman that didn't love you back?
> No matter how much you loved her, she wouldn't love you. Were you
> supposed to buy her diamond ring anyway? And write her into your
> life insurance policy? And give her ownership of your house and car?
>
> If she doesn't love you, you let her go her way. You hope that
> someday she comes around. But, a shotgun to the head, is not love,
> its coercion.
>
> If I invite you to a party and tell you that all you have to do is
> wear a black tie and you decide you don't want to wear a black tie.
> Am I to be at fault for not letting you in?
And if you decide not to wear that black tie, your party host Yahweh
will cast your sorry ass into an eternal burning torment. He's the Holy
Host with the Most.
> He will not turn any away. They will have chosen to walk away. God
> is pro-choice. You are free to make good and bad decisions.
Not if you'll burn in eternal agony for making the wrong decision. Why
does this god have such a bloodlust?
If this god had any sense of decency and humanity, he'd simply zap out
of existence the souls that don't cut the mustard for him. Instead, he
chooses to torture them. Since this god is subject to no power over him,
the only conclusion to draw is that he gets pleasure out of this.
Some Christians do say that these poor souls really are zapped out of
existence, but these Christians are few in number. At least they are
recognizing the barbarism of this theology and trying to rectify it.
--
------------------------ Dr. Monkeyspank ---------------------------
Simian Disciplinary | Sam Lopez: This is a Christian? -->
Systems Institute | http://come.to/SamLopez
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Abner Mintz
> : "Nope. Rather, all atheists do not believe in any gods.
> : One subtype has the property that, in addition, they
> : believe that no gods exist. The ones who do not have
> : that additional property (do not claim that gods do not
> : exist) are weak atheists; the ones that do (claim that
> : gods do not exist) are strong atheists."
> : "Your comment applies only to strong atheists; most of us
> : do not make any such claim."
Antoon Pardon <apa...@rc4.vub.ac.be> wrote:
> Aren't you muddying things up a bit by using "believing" and
> "claiming" interchangably?
"Quite possibly, and sorry about that. The important part
is what people believe, not what they claim."
Abner Mintz
> And
> there is no objective supportive evidence against there being a diety, as
> you call him, either.
"True - lack of evidence is not evidence of lack, after all.
However, I tend to think that, in the lack of supporting
evidence, it is best for me to reserve judgement on
the issue. Thus, I neither believe that any deities exist
nor that no deities exist."
> So let's stop calling our faith knowledge, shall we? I choose to put my
> faith in God? You choose to put you faith in nothing.
"Nope. I have faith in my own existance. Of course, I have
quite a bit of supporting evidence there, so perhaps it doesn't
qualify as faith ..." :)
> I didn't claim to know that something did not exist in a place where I
can't
> possibly travel to in order to substantiate my claims, did I?
"Neither did I. Who are you claiming did this?"
> I look at the creation around me, and see that it took a creator to make
it.
> A big giant explosion and 12 billion years could never have orchastrated
> such wonderful things.
"You are free to have faith in this - and we are free to
not agree with your faith."
"Out of curiousity, how many classes have you taken
(college level or above) in physics? cosmology? chemistry?
biology? Are you sure you know enough to know that 'a big
explosion and 12 billion years could never' ..."
> I was not angry, I was scared, I didn't want to die. Yet, I gave it all
Matti Kaikkonen
"Dr. Monkey" wrote:
> Then, in your logic, Police Officers, Firemen, Soldiers, Sailors and many
> many others commit suicide on a daily basis. Only, they call it doing
> their duty.
They are prepared to do their duty: training, bullet-proof vests, protective
helmets, life-vests etc. etc. If someone from the street would just join the
police force and on the same day approach an armed lunatic without a gun and
without any other protection, then yes, I would call it practical suicide. I
have not heard that the police departments encourage their officers in this kind
of behaviour.
> That a boy or anyone, would stand up to stop a killer, and you attack him
> for this, calling it suicide, is pathetic on your part.
There are smart ways to stop a killer and stupid ways to stop a killer. Trying
to take the attention of the killer to save others is a noble deed, I agree with
you. However approaching a lunatic with quotes from bible is stupid, imho.
Such an easy target is rapidly taken care of, and the killer is soon free to
continue on others.
> I still have not seen ONE atheist who has said he would lay down his life
> for others.
Well, parents do incredible acts for their children without any religious
thoughts. I guess it is somehow in the genes. I have also heard, that in very
close-knit communities (army etc.) people sacrifice themselves for others
irrespective of their religious beliefs.
Basically, people risking their lives on the behalf of others have my highest
respect. Getting intentionally killed for nothing does not fill this criterion,
imho.
Keith Doyle
Dr. Monkey <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
>
>Keith Doyle <ke_ith_d@ne_tco_m.com> wrote in message
>news:7sbf3d$k...@dfw-ixnews21.ix.netcom.com...
>Is that what you do in life? I don't like the price of gasoline, so, I
>know everyone else pays what is asked of them, but can you make an exception
>for me? I'm special.
>
>I understand I need a certain score to be accepted into your school, but,
>just for me, can you bend the rules a little? I'm special.
>
>Yea, I know killing is wrong, but, just let me slide this time. I'm
>special.
If I think the price of gasoline is unfair, or the acceptable school entry
score is unfair, I will ask to make an exception for EVERYONE, not just me,
which is what I'm doing here. I'm just making the same kind of claim for the
price of salvation, as I think that belief is an unfair price for salvation.
>Life is black and white. You are not negotiating for a car here. Its for
>eternal life. And the rules for acceptance have been set forth. Everyone
>will be accepted by those rules, no exceptions.
Except that I'm not the one who believes this, you are. I believe the rules
you are referring to are unfair and am willing to accept the consequences by
standing up for that belief. I'm just saying that if your compassion is really
what you seem to imply it is, you might consider that there are unbelievers
worth saving despite their disbelief to the extent that you could raise the issue
with God when you get the chance. You could perhaps point out the contributions
to humanity made by famous non-christians perhaps, and the fact that there
are some non-believers that *you personally* may miss being able to visit with
when you're in Heaven.
>Besides, you already have one pleading for your admittance, Jesus Christ.
>You think it was free? He paid the price that, so far, no atheist has come
>forward to pay, he died for you.
But I'm saying exactly that-- here I am, I'll pay. I'm willing to risk my
salvation in order that other unbelievers may be saved. That's something
that apparently even Jesus didn't do-- sacrifice himself even for those who
don't believe. Not only that, Jesus had no real fear of death knowing that
he was God and his afterlife was guaranteed-- I don't have that guarantee and
I'm willing to risk that afterlife for the benefit of other unbelievers.
I'm willing to go to Hell in an attempt to improve how God treats unbelievers.
But I guess you aren't even willing to go so far as to bring up the issue.
>Because of love. Hard to understand isn't it? Why does he love us?
>Look at the darkness inside. And yet, he does.
I don't have any trouble loving most people in that sense, believers or no.
What about you? Do *you* not have any love for mankind except for other
believers? Can *you* not "love" nonbelievers unless they become believers?
And do people have to believe in *you* before you can care about them?
Don't tell me how God thinks about unbelievers, tell me how YOU think about
unbelievers. Are we all so without value that you won't ask God to save
us? Are our sins so much more unpardonable *to you* merely because we
don't believe God exists?
--
Keith Doyle
(remove underbars in reply address for E-mail)
"If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope
for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed." - Albert Einstein
Antoon Pardon
: Dr. Monkey <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
: > And
: > there is no objective supportive evidence against there being a diety, as
: > you call him, either.
: "True - lack of evidence is not evidence of lack, after all.
I disagree, it depend on wether one has searched for evidence or
not. If a search was conducted and turned up nothing, then that
IMO is evidence of lack.
And, still IMO, it seems people have been searching for over
2000 years for all kind of gods.
Abner Mintz
> > > So let's stop calling our faith knowledge, shall we? I choose to
put
> > > my
> > > faith in God? You choose to put you faith in nothing.
Abner Mintz <a...@clark.net> wrote:
> > "Nope. I have faith in my own existance. Of course, I have
> > quite a bit of supporting evidence there, so perhaps it doesn't
> > qualify as faith ..." :)
Dr. Monkey <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
> Yes, but I've never seen you. I've only read your writings.
"Interactive writings are pretty good evidence that *somebody*
calling himself Abner Mintz exists. I certainly hope that you
don't think these words are appearing on your screen with
no-one typing them." :)
> Should I beleive you exist?
"Nope - the evidence isn't conclusive."
> I have no way, at this point in time, to substantiate
> your claim to exist.
"True enough - so don't believe that I exist. It won't bother
me one bit as long as you don't start ignoring my posts." *grins*
> Now, you could send me your son, to tell me you exist.
"Actually, no, I can't. That's impossible at this point in time."
"Nor, if I had a son, would him telling you that be any greater
evidence than my interactive writings - in fact, it would be less,
since the person claiming to be my son could be lying about
having ever met me, while the interactive writings were written
by *someone*. (And before you go all woogly on this one,
I agree that the Bible was written by someone - just not who.)"
> And I could kill
> him, and claim that you still don't exist. Does that make you cease to
> exist?
"Nope. Of course, the guy showing up and claiming to be my
son doesn't make me exist, either. The matter is still indeterminate."
> > > I didn't claim to know that something did not exist in a place where
I
> > > can't
> > > possibly travel to in order to substantiate my claims, did I?
> > "Neither did I. Who are you claiming did this?"
> Earlier post, guy said he 'knew' that God did not exist.
"OK, I must have missed that. So this statement is addressed
only to strong atheists, I take it?"
> > > I look at the creation around me, and see that it took a creator to
make
> > > it.
> > > A big giant explosion and 12 billion years could never have
orchastrated
> > > such wonderful things.
> > "You are free to have faith in this - and we are free to
> > not agree with your faith."
> And you are free to beleive that all matter, living and otherwise
happened
> in a giant explosion, some 12 billion years ago. That all life forms on
> earth evolved from a single cell, that somehow came about in this
explosion.
"Who said I believe this? I don't. However, based on the evidence,
and ignoring your misrepresentations of the theory (there is at least
one, and possibly two, major misunderstandings of scientific theory
in the above sentence), IMO the scientific explanations of cosmology
and of biology are the best theories we currently have. Do you see
the difference between this and belief?"
> What could have caused this explosion? There was nothing. All of a
> sudden nothing blew up? If nothing blows up, then it blows apart
nothing,
> so nothing happens.
"Do you know anything about virtual particle pairs? Inflationary forces?
The net energy of the universe when both positive and negative
contributions are considered?"
"Oddly enough, the more you know about science, the less strange
its conclusions seem - because now you understand what they are
actually saying. Your statement above is an extremely poor
description of the Big Bang. No wonder you find it so unbelievable,
when you don't even know what the scientists are saying!"
"You are currently in the position of a person who rejects the
Bible without even reading it. Do you think such behavior is
wise?"
> Yea, I think I'll stick to God created the universe and all its majesty.
> It's the more plausable theory.
"If you know all about option A, and know virtually nothing about
option B (as is obvious from your writings), is it really surprising
that you choose option A."
> > "Out of curiousity, how many classes have you taken
> > (college level or above) in physics? cosmology? chemistry?
> > biology? Are you sure you know enough to know that 'a big
> > explosion and 12 billion years could never' ..."
> Ok, so I would have to take 'big bang' 101? Then, I will understand?
> Maybe I should have taken better notes, then I would have been fully
> indoctrinated in that faith system.
"So I guess people shouldn't try to understand something
before rejecting it. The theory of relativity sounds ridiculous
to someone who hasn't studied it and the evidence supporting
it - so just ignore it. Quantum mechanics sounds like
something you get from taking large doses of acid to someone
who hasn't studied it in detail - it must be wrong, reject it.
And so on."
"Fair enough - ridicule that which you don't understand. But
don't expect us to take your objections seriously when you
can't even state what the theories actually say."
> Let me ask you this? Is math a science or a random occurance?
"Nope. It's an attempt to describe the way the universe works."
> If I throw
> a bunch of numbers up in the air, what are the chances that they will
land
> in an equation?
"Let me guess - you're about to say that the Big Bang therefore
couldn't give a universe with rules. Do you know anything about
symmetry breaking or phase transitions?"
> > > I was not angry, I was scared, I didn't want to die. Yet, I gave it
> > > all to
> > > God, and told him, I die, or you get me out of it. Cocaine OD. I
> > > survived by the grace of God.
> > "Or perhaps by luck, or the skill of a good doctor, or ..."
> ...God. I didn't call the paramedics. I was afraid of what my parents
> would do. I left it in his hands. Anyone else with heart stoppage
would
> have died. I was in cardiac arrest.
"1) How do you know that no one can survive cardiac arrest
naturally. 2) How do you know you were in cardiac arrest?"
> That's how I know God is real. I called on him, while I was dying and
> asked for his mercy. He gave it to me. I never turned back. That's
not
> luck, its love.
"So you believe."
Abner Mintz
> : "True - lack of evidence is not evidence of lack, after all.
Antoon Pardon <apa...@rc4.vub.ac.be> wrote:
> I disagree, it depend on wether one has searched for evidence or
> not. If a search was conducted and turned up nothing, then that
> IMO is evidence of lack.
"We may just have to disagree on this one. IMO, if
something doesn't show up, that isn't evidence of
universal lack - just evidence of lack in the areas
you searched. Do you see where I am going with this?"
"On the other hand, IMO the default position is lack
of belief in the face of lack of evidence, so I end up
a weak atheist. Do you end up as a strong atheist?"
> And, still IMO, it seems people have been searching for over
> 2000 years for all kind of gods.
"Not a very impressive result, I agree." :)
Dr. Monkey
>
> If I think the price of gasoline is unfair, or the acceptable school entry
> score is unfair, I will ask to make an exception for EVERYONE, not just
me,
> which is what I'm doing here. I'm just making the same kind of claim for
the
> price of salvation, as I think that belief is an unfair price for
salvation.
>
So, you beleive that the price of salvation is unfair? All you have to do,
is beleive that Jesus Christ, came and died for you. If anything is unfair
in this, it's that he had to die in your place.
If you were convicted of a crime, and sentenced to life in prison, and
someone stepped forward and said, I'll take his place. Would that be
unfair to you?
Thats what you are saying to me now.
> >Life is black and white. You are not negotiating for a car here. Its
for
> >eternal life. And the rules for acceptance have been set forth.
Everyone
> >will be accepted by those rules, no exceptions.
>
> Except that I'm not the one who believes this, you are. I believe the
rules
> you are referring to are unfair and am willing to accept the consequences
by
> standing up for that belief. I'm just saying that if your compassion is
really
> what you seem to imply it is, you might consider that there are
unbelievers
> worth saving despite their disbelief to the extent that you could raise
the issue
> with God when you get the chance. You could perhaps point out the
contributions
> to humanity made by famous non-christians perhaps, and the fact that there
> are some non-believers that *you personally* may miss being able to visit
with
> when you're in Heaven.
>
Uh, lets see...everyone, with the exception of some rightous Jews, were
condemend to eternal death. But, God so loved the earth, that he gave his
only begotten son, that YOU may live. I wasn't a beleiver then, nor were
ANY of those that have come to beleive in Christ since his death.
So, what you are asking of God, was already done. How much more compassion
do you require?
> >Besides, you already have one pleading for your admittance, Jesus Christ.
> >You think it was free? He paid the price that, so far, no atheist has
come
> >forward to pay, he died for you.
>
> But I'm saying exactly that-- here I am, I'll pay. I'm willing to risk my
> salvation in order that other unbelievers may be saved. That's something
> that apparently even Jesus didn't do-- sacrifice himself even for those
who
> don't believe. Not only that, Jesus had no real fear of death knowing
that
> he was God and his afterlife was guaranteed-- I don't have that guarantee
and
> I'm willing to risk that afterlife for the benefit of other unbelievers.
> I'm willing to go to Hell in an attempt to improve how God treats
unbelievers.
> But I guess you aren't even willing to go so far as to bring up the issue.
>
Jesus did exactly that, he died so we unrightous people could live.
You can have the same, no fear of death, that Jesus had. Beleive in him,
and you have a guaruntee of where you are going.
The entry to heaven has been paid. There is only one requirement.
Beleive in Jesus. You don't have to pay $7.50 and buy the popcorn. You
don't have to give blood. You don't have to be a saint! Just beleive in
Jesus. Thats is the BIG stumbling block.
> >Because of love. Hard to understand isn't it? Why does he love us?
> >Look at the darkness inside. And yet, he does.
>
> I don't have any trouble loving most people in that sense, believers or
no.
> What about you? Do *you* not have any love for mankind except for other
> believers? Can *you* not "love" nonbelievers unless they become
believers?
> And do people have to believe in *you* before you can care about them?
> Don't tell me how God thinks about unbelievers, tell me how YOU think
about
> unbelievers. Are we all so without value that you won't ask God to save
> us? Are our sins so much more unpardonable *to you* merely because we
> don't believe God exists?
>
What am I here for, if I didn't love mankind? I pray to God daily to reach
those who do not know him. Why, not because I hate them. Love.
ALL of us our sinners. But, there is one, and only one sin that will not
be forgiven. Unbelief.
Haven't you ever tried to convince someone that you saw so and so at the
airport and they spoke to you? And all you got was, yea right, were is the
autograph. But, I didn't get one. Then I don't believe you saw him.
But I did! Yea, ok.
At a certain point, you give up. My point of giving up is when I cross
over to the afterlife. Till then, I will attempt to convey the message set
forth in the gospel. And that is, God loves you so much, he came down in
human form and died in your place so that you may live eternally and all you
have to do is believe in the name of Jesus.
Dr. Monkey
Dr. Monkeyspank <drmonk...@my-deja.com> banged out with his monkey paws
in message news:7sd7t8$37u$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
>
> And if you decide not to wear that black tie, your party host Yahweh
> will cast your sorry ass into an eternal burning torment. He's the Holy
> Host with the Most.
>
>
> Not if you'll burn in eternal agony for making the wrong decision. Why
> does this god have such a bloodlust?
>
> If this god had any sense of decency and humanity, he'd simply zap out
> of existence the souls that don't cut the mustard for him. Instead, he
> chooses to torture them. Since this god is subject to no power over him,
> the only conclusion to draw is that he gets pleasure out of this.
>
> Some Christians do say that these poor souls really are zapped out of
> existence, but these Christians are few in number. At least they are
> recognizing the barbarism of this theology and trying to rectify it.
>
You had your soap box. I'll leave your statements out there, hanging.
Your not interested in discourse.
Dr. Monkey
> Dr. Monkey <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
> snip <
> > And you are free to beleive that all matter, living and otherwise
> happened
> > in a giant explosion, some 12 billion years ago. That all life forms
on
> > earth evolved from a single cell, that somehow came about in this
> explosion.
>
> "Who said I believe this? I don't. However, based on the evidence,
> and ignoring your misrepresentations of the theory (there is at least
> one, and possibly two, major misunderstandings of scientific theory
> in the above sentence), IMO the scientific explanations of cosmology
> and of biology are the best theories we currently have. Do you see
> the difference between this and belief?"
>
The difference between theory and belief? A theory is a speculative idea
and beleif is an acceptance that something is true.
So, we have 2 or more specualtive ideas on the table. I choose to beleive
the one that says God made it. You choose not to beleive that.
> snip <
>
> "Do you know anything about virtual particle pairs? Inflationary forces?
> The net energy of the universe when both positive and negative
> contributions are considered?"
>
> "Oddly enough, the more you know about science, the less strange
> its conclusions seem - because now you understand what they are
> actually saying. Your statement above is an extremely poor
> description of the Big Bang. No wonder you find it so unbelievable,
> when you don't even know what the scientists are saying!"
>
> "You are currently in the position of a person who rejects the
> Bible without even reading it. Do you think such behavior is
> wise?"
>
Fair enough. I will go out this weekend and pick up some books to freshen
up on my evolutionary science. Do I really have to learn all of these
mathmatical theories though? I hate math!
Will you find a creation scientist to read up on? You have rejected the
theory of creation without any reading as well. And I'm not talking about
the claims in the bible. I'm talking about scientists who have looked at
the evidence and have seen a different view than yours.
Lets take the Grand Canyon. How was it formed, in a secular scientists
view point? Ice? Millions of years of the Colorado river? Do the
sedimentary layers support this?
Then we can come back and have a better discussion.
And, out of cuiosity. Is it fair that a theory, and only one theory, is
taught in our schools as scientific fact? When, another theory exists that
has scientists, though not a majority, that can give evidence for the
claims?
> snip <
> > > "Or perhaps by luck, or the skill of a good doctor, or ..."
>
> > ...God. I didn't call the paramedics. I was afraid of what my
parents
> > would do. I left it in his hands. Anyone else with heart stoppage
> would
> > have died. I was in cardiac arrest.
>
> "1) How do you know that no one can survive cardiac arrest
> naturally. 2) How do you know you were in cardiac arrest?"
>
1 and 2, I told a doctor of my symptoms at the time. And the chances of
survival are nearly nil, I don't recall his exact percentage.
What else is the stoppage of your heart called? Of coarse, you have to
beleive me that my heart was stopped. No pulse. Then it would race at
very high rate, then stop again. For, 30 seconds to a minute. This
happened for over an hour.
>
> > That's how I know God is real. I called on him, while I was dying and
> > asked for his mercy. He gave it to me. I never turned back. That's
> not
> > luck, its love.
>
> "So you believe."
Just remember that, when all else fails, you CAN call on the creator of the
universe to intervene.
Therion Ware
wrote in alt.atheism:
>
>Therion Ware wrote in message <37ea1415...@news.freenetname.co.uk>...
>>On 22 Sep 1999 10:15:49 PDT, "Dr. Monkey" <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote
>>in alt.atheism:
>>
>>>
>>>Therion Ware <tw...@video2cd.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>news:37f5025f...@news.freenetname.co.uk...
>>>> Then why are you prepared to abandon most of humanity to eternal
>>>> damnation?
>>>
>>>And I stated that when?
>>
>>You are a Christian, are you not?
>>
>>>I love all the cliches that are thrown out. But, can you all please read
>>>the posts first and stick to the topic?
>>
>>You wrote:
>>
>>>>The answer is LOVE. Love is not self centered.
>>
>>One presumes that you claim to love. I'm merely curious as to how that
>>fits in with the final turning away.
>
>
>What would you have us do? Make laws that require belief? Wouldn't work.
Of course it would, if you're prepared to go far enough. Simply ban
all completing doctrines. After a generation or two few people would
have the mental tools to "not believe".
Why, after all, do you think there were so few atheists in the Middle
Ages?
>Force all to believe or die? Might convince some to say that they believe,
>but would make no genuine change, and is against the precepts of the Gospel.
Well, that opinion has varied somewhat over the last 1,600 years or
so, and seems to depend more on who has the power, than any ethical
consideration.
Of course, the ethics of the situation must be a little left of field
for a Christian. Since there is nothing worse than Hell, since we are
told it is better not to have been born than to go there, one presumes
that any means of persuasion are morally justified to keep people out
of it.
>"...He does not want anyone to perish, so he is giving more time for
>everyone to repent. " 2 Peter 3:9.
>
>Not we christians, nor our God are willing to abandon any to damnation.
But, never-the-less you do.
>He
>sent His Son to die for us. The only avenue we have to prevent this is to
>try to convince others of this fact. It is up to each individual to decide
>whether to believe or not, and that alone will determine who is abandoned to
>damnation.
"It is up to each individual to decide whether to believe or not" - !
Believing in something is a "choice"? You can "choose" to believe the
sky is green?
Baldly stating that one can "choose" to believe, flatly contradicts
your earlier assertion that making laws that require belief "wouldn't
work". If people can "choose to believe" why not use every means at
your disposal to persuade them to choose rightly, including the law?
--
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
- attrib: Pauline Reage.
------ <http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/6671/entry/hell.html>
ICQ: 29168081
Therion Ware
in alt.atheism:
>
>Therion Ware <tw...@eac.video2cd.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:37ea1415...@news.freenetname.co.uk...
>> snip <
>> You are a Christian, are you not?
>>
>> >I love all the cliches that are thrown out. But, can you all please
>read
>> >the posts first and stick to the topic?
>>
>> You wrote:
>>
>> >>The answer is LOVE. Love is not self centered.
>>
>> One presumes that you claim to love. I'm merely curious as to how that
>> fits in with the final turning away.
>>
>
>Have you ever been in love with a woman that didn't love you back? No
>matter how much you loved her, she wouldn't love you. Were you supposed to
>buy her diamond ring anyway? And write her into your life insurance
>policy? And give her ownership of your house and car?
>
>If she doesn't love you, you let her go her way. You hope that someday she
>comes around. But, a shotgun to the head, is not love, its coercion.
And setting her on fire while using advanced medical technology to
keep her living in perpetuity while on fire, is?
>If I invite you to a party and tell you that all you have to do is wear a
>black tie and you decide you don't want to wear a black tie. Am I to be at
>fault for not letting you in?
No, but chucking a gallon of petrol over me and following it up with a
lighted match would be going a bit too far, wouldn't you say?
>He will not turn any away. They will have chosen to walk away. God is
>pro-choice. You are free to make good and bad decisions. And you can't
>blame your mothers over protection or your fathers insistence you play
>tennis. It's all up to you. Personal responsibility is what life is all
>about, despite what 'Ricky Sally Winfrey' may say.
Well,.were you telling the whole story, that might be a legit
position. But you're leaving out the promised infliction of unending
agony for those who, for whatever reason, don't believe.
On June 14, 1940 a member of the Totenkopfverbände SS said to one who
expressed some disquiet at the construction of Auschwitz 1, "Join us,
or join those in the camp" - perhaps you could explain how your offer
differs from his, and how your Einäscherungsöfen, your cremation
ovens, are more moral than those of Adolph Hitler.
John Hattan
>So, you beleive that the price of salvation is unfair? All you have to do,
>is beleive that Jesus Christ, came and died for you.
And if you don't buy into the whole notion, the same Jesus Christ is
completely willing to make you suffer forever.
>If anything is unfair
>in this, it's that he had to die in your place.
You cannot "die in someone's place".
>If you were convicted of a crime, and sentenced to life in prison, and
>someone stepped forward and said, I'll take his place.
Of course it's a pretty lousy analogy because I have committed no crime.
There is only the Christian assertion that I have somehow committed a
crime by the very act of existing.
>Would that be unfair to you?
Absolutely. Somebody going to prison in place of a criminal, allowing
the criminal to walk the streets while an innocent man languishes in
prison is a miscarriage of justice to all involved.
You are equating "fair" with "in my favor".
---
John Hattan Grand High UberPope - First Church of Shatnerology
john-...@bigfoot.com http://www.bitsmart.com/shatner
Jeff Heidman
"Dr. Monkey" wrote:
> Keith Doyle <ke_ith_d@ne_tco_m.com> wrote in message
> news:7scrnt$g...@dfw-ixnews21.ix.netcom.com...
> >
> > If I think the price of gasoline is unfair, or the acceptable school entry
> > score is unfair, I will ask to make an exception for EVERYONE, not just
> me,
> > which is what I'm doing here. I'm just making the same kind of claim for
> the
> > price of salvation, as I think that belief is an unfair price for
> salvation.
> >
>
> So, you beleive that the price of salvation is unfair? All you have to do,
> is beleive that Jesus Christ, came and died for you. If anything is unfair
> in this, it's that he had to die in your place.
>
I've always wondered about this. How did Christ getting killed somehow atone for
the sins of man? Where is the connection between these things?
We have a condition, right? Basically, man in sinful and cannot go to heaven
because he is such a bastard.
WE have an action. God impregnates a human who has a child who is the son of
God. Now that child gets killed.
How do those two circumstances equal to humans now getting to go to heaven? It
seems completely arbitrary at best.
Its like me complaining that I have a flat tire and someone telling me the
solution is to brush my teeth.
If God made all the rules, why did he make the rule that evil humans=my son gets
nailed to a tree?
Can some Xian explain this to me *without* resorting to a bunch of existential
mumbo-jumbo?
Jeff Heidman
Keith Doyle
Dr. Monkey <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
>
>Keith Doyle <ke_ith_d@ne_tco_m.com> wrote in message
>news:7scrnt$g...@dfw-ixnews21.ix.netcom.com...
>>
>> If I think the price of gasoline is unfair, or the acceptable school entry
>> score is unfair, I will ask to make an exception for EVERYONE, not just
>me,
>> which is what I'm doing here. I'm just making the same kind of claim for
>the
>> price of salvation, as I think that belief is an unfair price for
>salvation.
>
>So, you beleive that the price of salvation is unfair? All you have to do,
>is beleive that Jesus Christ, came and died for you. If anything is unfair
>in this, it's that he had to die in your place.
A person cannot just *choose* to believe something. I don't find the case
for Christianity at all credible. Can you "choose" to believe that if
you drop an apple it falls up instead of down? That's the equivalent of
what I'm being asked to do.
>If you were convicted of a crime, and sentenced to life in prison, and
>someone stepped forward and said, I'll take his place. Would that be
>unfair to you?
It would be if he said that such a prize only applies to those who
truly believe the moon is made of green cheese. Not only is there
no way I'm likely to ever believe that, whether or not the moon is
made of green cheese is completely irrelevant to any of the issues
at hand, in my estimation.
>Uh, lets see...everyone, with the exception of some rightous Jews, were
>condemend to eternal death. But, God so loved the earth, that he gave his
>only begotten son, that YOU may live. I wasn't a beleiver then, nor were
>ANY of those that have come to beleive in Christ since his death.
>
>So, what you are asking of God, was already done. How much more compassion
>do you require?
That belief is not important to Him. Why should He care what I believe
about Him? If I see Him face to face I suppose I'll believe He exists
then, why shouldn't that be good enough? Why is that any different than
if I believe in Him now? Is my belief now somehow more valuable than the
belief I would have if I meet Him in person? I would say that such
immediate unsuported belief would only be of value to a charlatan.
>Jesus did exactly that, he died so we unrightous people could live.
Except for those who find his arguments unbelievable.
>You can have the same, no fear of death, that Jesus had. Beleive in him,
>and you have a guaruntee of where you are going.
I can't choose that any more than I can choose to believe I can walk on
the ceiling in my office without any special considerations.
>The entry to heaven has been paid. There is only one requirement.
>Beleive in Jesus. You don't have to pay $7.50 and buy the popcorn. You
>don't have to give blood. You don't have to be a saint! Just beleive in
>Jesus. Thats is the BIG stumbling block.
Yep. Too big for me.
>What am I here for, if I didn't love mankind? I pray to God daily to reach
>those who do not know him. Why, not because I hate them. Love.
I'm just asking that you might try a different tactic for some of us.
>ALL of us our sinners. But, there is one, and only one sin that will not
>be forgiven. Unbelief.
And you think that is reasonable, apparently. I don't.
>Haven't you ever tried to convince someone that you saw so and so at the
>airport and they spoke to you? And all you got was, yea right, were is the
>autograph. But, I didn't get one. Then I don't believe you saw him.
>But I did! Yea, ok.
Perhaps, but so what. I didn't penalize the person for not buying my story.
>At a certain point, you give up. My point of giving up is when I cross
>over to the afterlife. Till then, I will attempt to convey the message set
>forth in the gospel. And that is, God loves you so much, he came down in
>human form and died in your place so that you may live eternally and all you
>have to do is believe in the name of Jesus.
"all you have to do" for me is to turn my brain to jelly . Maybe if I get
alzheimers or get in a car accident and have a serious brain injury it'll
happen-- does that count?
--
Keith Doyle
(remove underbars in reply address for E-mail)
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God
who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect
has intended us to forgo their use." --Galileo Galilei
Keith Doyle
Dr. Monkey <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
>
>Just remember that, when all else fails, you CAN call on the creator of the
>universe to intervene.
What about all the Christians who called on the creator to intervene but
died anyway? Or the Muslims who called on Allah to intervene and recovered?
Or the atheists who didn't call on anyone and recovered?
John Hattan
>"Dr. Monkey" wrote:
>
>> So, you beleive that the price of salvation is unfair? All you have to do,
>> is beleive that Jesus Christ, came and died for you. If anything is unfair
>> in this, it's that he had to die in your place.
>
>I've always wondered about this. How did Christ getting killed somehow atone for
>the sins of man? Where is the connection between these things?
It's just another relic of a time gone by. In older times, people
thought that sacrifices could make their wrongdoings go away. The only
way that the Bible writers could impress folks that Jesus was real was
by making him a sacrifice.
In the more enlightened cultures that realize that sacrifice is
pointless, though, it makes as much sense as claiming "Mickey Mouse wore
red pants for your sins".
Jeff Heidman
"Dr. Monkey" wrote:
> Just remember that, when all else fails, you CAN call on the creator of the
> universe to intervene.
I tried this Monday night during our flag football game. We just could not seem
to stop the other team. They were pretty good. Anyway, I asked God to help us
win, but to no avail. Apparently the other team was more spiritual than we were,
since they won.
Jeff
Therion Ware
<je...@webfxREMOVETHIS2k.com> wrote in alt.atheism:
"I can call spirits from the vasty deep"
"Why so can I, so can any man, but will they come when they are
called?". (from memory, so sorry if I offend purists).
Which is to say that the only advantage cats have over spirits is that
cats exist.
- ----- ------
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
- attrib: Pauline Reage.
------ <http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/6671/entry/hell.html>
ICQ: 29168081
---
drop the "the.eac" for mail, because the EAC doesn't exist.
stoney
[>
[>stoney <sto...@stoney.net> wrote
[>> "Dr. Monkey" <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
[>>
[>> [>No, that's an atheists view point. How can you claim to know what lies
[>> [>beyond the Universe?
[>>
[>> Wow..I classify that as a force 3 straw storm.
[>> And such a claim has been made where?
[>Uh, here Beavis.
I see. A theist telling an atheist what the atheist's viewpoint is.
Not surprising. As usual, the theist gets it wrong. What also isn't surprising
is the lame ad hom. It isn't surprising, but it is very sad.
[>> [> Have you been there? Yet you claim to know that
[>> [>there is no God. Is that knowledge, or ignorance?
[>>
[>> The fact is there is no objective supportive evidence for deity.
[>I will except that you must take the claims of the bible on faith. And
[>there is no objective supportive evidence against there being a diety, as
[>you call him, either.
As there is no objective evidence against, leprechans, fire giants, elves,
talking snakes, or anything else out of man's fertile imagination. Does this
mean they exist also?
As there is no objective supporting evidence for any of these entities, like
your god, there is no reason to believe they exist.
[>So let's stop calling our faith knowledge, shall we?
The lack of belief due to the absence of objective supporting evidence for
deity(s) is just that a lack of belief. It is not a faith. It is a statement.
[> I choose to put my
[>faith in God? You choose to put you faith in nothing.
And what faith is that?
[>> On your part it's ignorance. Your words can be reflected back to you.
[>> "How can you claim to know what lies beyond the Universe?
[>> Have you been there? Yet you claim to know that there is a god."
[>I didn't claim to know that something did not exist in a place where I can't
[>possibly travel to in order to substantiate my claims, did I?
You claim there is a god. In order to support your claim there is a god, and
that your particular one created everything you would have had to travel the
universe, and beyond, to do so.
I mirrored your statement back to you.
[>I look at the creation around me, and see that it took a creator to make it.
And the objective supporting evidence for that is?
Now if a person were to grant your unsupported assertion for the sake of
discussion; what created your creator? And its creator? And its creator?
[>A big giant explosion and 12 billion years could never have orchastrated
[>such wonderful things.
Erroneous statement. The current universe exists and there is no sign of your
imaginary buddy.
[>> [>Anyway, you didn't argue that an atheist wouldn't be cowering under the
[>> [>table.
[>>
[>> [> When you don't know where you are going when you die, its scary
[>> [>looking death in its face.
[>>
[>> When you die, your rotting corpse will be disposed of in one way or
[>another.
[>> Of course you won't know how it was disposed of.
[>>
[>> Is it scary looking death in the face? It wasn't for me. I was angry.
[>> For you? You won't know until the time comes.
[>I was not angry, I was scared, I didn't want to die. Yet, I gave it all to
[>God, and told him, I die, or you get me out of it. Cocaine OD. I
[>survived by the grace of God.
You are free to think so.
Stoney
erikc
tw...@video2cd.co.uk (Therion Ware) wrote:
-- origin: alt.atheism:
Even though derived from historical sources, this would make an
excellent AQOTM.
Erikc (alt.atheist #002) | "An Fhirinne in aghaidh an tSaoil."
BAAWA Knight | "The Truth against the World."
ICQ 26776011 | -- Bardic Motto
If we don't believe in freedom of expression for
people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.
---- Noam Chomsky
"The only truly intuitive user interface is the
nipple. Everything else has to be learned."
--- unknown
Dr. Monkeyspank
"Dr. Monkey" <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
>
> Dr. Monkeyspank <drmonk...@my-deja.com> banged out with his monkey
> paws in message news:7sd7t8$37u$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> >
> > And if you decide not to wear that black tie, your party host Yahweh
> > will cast your sorry ass into an eternal burning torment. He's the
> > Holy Host with the Most.
> >
> > snip <
> >
> > Not if you'll burn in eternal agony for making the wrong decision.
> > Why does this god have such a bloodlust?
> >
> > If this god had any sense of decency and humanity, he'd simply zap
> > out of existence the souls that don't cut the mustard for him.
> > Instead, he chooses to torture them. Since this god is subject to no
> > power over him, the only conclusion to draw is that he gets pleasure
> > out of this.
> >
> > Some Christians do say that these poor souls really are zapped out
> > of existence, but these Christians are few in number. At least they
> > it.
> >
>
> You had your soap box. I'll leave your statements out there,
> hanging. Your not interested in discourse.
Are you saying that because you are hesitant to address one of the most
cogent arguments against this biblical god? That argument being that a
god of love cannot act like such a barbaric monster and cast his
creation into eternal torment. Or can he?
You can make all the free will arguments you want, and draw those gentle
analogies. But the fact remains that your party host orders some hired
thugs to take the guests who refuse to wear black ties out back behind
the house and has them manacled and tortured -- forever. That, Dr.
Monkey, is the rest of the analogy that you're leaving out.
--
------------------------ Dr. Monkeyspank ---------------------------
Simian Disciplinary | Sam Lopez: This is a Christian? -->
Systems Institute | http://come.to/SamLopez
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Vandar
"Dr. Monkey" wrote:
> Ok, I would like to see CART and IRL come together so I can see the best
> racing at Indy. :-) But, that'll happen soon. Then I'm free to leave.
The best racing at Indy is in July (the Brickyard 400). But that is another
topic..
Abner Mintz
> > "Who said I believe this? I don't. However, based on the evidence,
> > and ignoring your misrepresentations of the theory (there is at least
> > one, and possibly two, major misunderstandings of scientific theory
> > in the above sentence), IMO the scientific explanations of cosmology
> > and of biology are the best theories we currently have. Do you see
> > the difference between this and belief?"
Dr. Monkey <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
> The difference between theory and belief? A theory is a speculative
idea
> and beleif is an acceptance that something is true.
"That is not what the word 'theory' means in science.
In science, a theory is an idea that makes testable
predictions and has passed those tests. In science,
theory is as good as it gets. The idea that the earth
is not flat is a scientific theory - would you call that
a 'speculative idea'."
> So, we have 2 or more specualtive ideas on the table. I choose to
beleive
> the one that says God made it. You choose not to beleive that.
"To put a religious belief on the same footing as a
scientific theory is an insult and an injury to both, IMO.
I don't think it is good to treat science as a religion,
or religion as a science."
> > "Oddly enough, the more you know about science, the less strange
> > its conclusions seem - because now you understand what they are
> > actually saying. Your statement above is an extremely poor
> > description of the Big Bang. No wonder you find it so unbelievable,
> > when you don't even know what the scientists are saying!"
> > "You are currently in the position of a person who rejects the
> > Bible without even reading it. Do you think such behavior is
> > wise?"
> Fair enough. I will go out this weekend and pick up some books to
freshen
> up on my evolutionary science.
"You might want to start with cosmology, physics, and chemistry
instead. You're more likely to be able to learn things from them
that aren't fundamentally incompatible with your worldview."
> Do I really have to learn all of these
> mathmatical theories though? I hate math!
"Sorry, math is a large part of it. If you can't do the math, at
best you're going to have to take a lot of the things the
scientists are saying on faith - and if you were willing to do
that, then you wouldn't be making the arguments you've been
doing ..." ;)
> Will you find a creation scientist to read up on?
"Already have quite a few. I even have a section of creationist
literature in my house, near my section of apologetics."
> You have rejected the
> theory of creation without any reading as well.
"What makes you think that? In any case, you are incorrect.
I've quite possibly read more creationist literature than you have."
> And I'm not talking about
> the claims in the bible. I'm talking about scientists who have looked
at
> the evidence and have seen a different view than yours.
"The problem is that science isn't 'whatever scientists do', it's
a specific method. A 'nonscientist' who follows the scientific
method is doing science; a 'scientist' who doesn't follow it
isn't doing science at the time. The creationist 'scientists', in
my experience, are not doing science - their work does not
follow the scientific method, since they generally assume
their conclusion and edit the data rather than measuring the
data and coming to their conclusion. The ICR is a prime
example of this."
> Lets take the Grand Canyon. How was it formed, in a secular scientists
> view point? Ice? Millions of years of the Colorado river? Do the
> sedimentary layers support this?
"Millions of years of the Colorado river, and yes, as far as my
reading goes."
> Then we can come back and have a better discussion.
"I've done quite a bit of reading. Let me know when you are
ready."
> And, out of cuiosity. Is it fair that a theory, and only one theory, is
> taught in our schools as scientific fact? When, another theory exists
that
> has scientists, though not a majority, that can give evidence for the
> claims?
"To be taught in science class, the theory has to be a
*scientific* theory - one arrived at by following the
scientific method, not faith."
"The creationists have yet to present a testable
hypothesis for the earth's formation. Care to show
a test that would support that the earth was formed
by a god? Until they do so, they haven't even
*started* doing science."
> > "1) How do you know that no one can survive cardiac arrest
> > naturally. 2) How do you know you were in cardiac arrest?"
> 1 and 2, I told a doctor of my symptoms at the time. And the chances of
> survival are nearly nil, I don't recall his exact percentage.
"Nearly nil is not nil. Thus, you fail test one - you could have
survived naturally. It's just like with a lottery - some people
will occasionally win even if the odds are stacked against
you to the nth degree."
"Too bad you don't recall the exact percentage - but even so,
an unlikely event and the hand of God may well be different things."
> > > That's how I know God is real. I called on him, while I was dying
and
> > > asked for his mercy. He gave it to me. I never turned back.
That's
> > > not luck, its love.
> > "So you believe."
> Just remember that, when all else fails, you CAN call on the creator of
the
> universe to intervene.
"Too bad he won't respond when I try to talk to him, hear
him, or otherwise interact with him. Until he does, I'm
not going to believe in your God's existance."
Abner Mintz
> You are right Mr. Mintz. I responded to a moron, who claimed to be an
> atheist, and in so doing, painted a broad stroke.
> It seems, that there is at least one civil atheist in this group.
"Thank you."
> > > Does civil behavior depart with the
> > > disbelief in God? It seems it has.
> > "See? What have I done to earn such a statement? Have
> > I been uncivil to you? And yet you repeatedly attack me
> > ..."
> I do differ with you on me repeatedly attacking you. In what manner
have I
> done so?
"When you paint with broad strokes making attacks on
all atheists, you attack me ... among others. It would
be like if I said all Christians were violent because of
the Christian who assaulted me years ago - if I call
all Christians violent, I am calling *you* violent (assuming
you are a Christian here - please correct me if I am wrong);
if I confine myself to calling that one guy violent, I'm not
attacking you at all."
"Note, for instance, that when you said (see above)
' I responded to a moron, who claimed to be an atheist'
addressing one person, I didn't object at all. Your
saying that is between you and him/her. But if you
say 'I responded to the morons who claim to be atheists',
then I do object to a broad stroke."
"Similarly, if you had said 'it seems that you civility left
with your belief in God' to that person you were arguing
with, I wouldn't have objected; again, that's between you
and him. But when you say 'Does civil behavior depart
with the disbelief in God?' I feel a need to comment, because
your brush tarred myself and a number of others who had
done nothing to offend you."
"Now do you see my point? Please confine your attacks
on an individual atheist to the person who offended you,
rather than attacking all atheists on the basis of one
(or a few) atheists offending you."
Abner Mintz
> I still have not seen ONE atheist who has said he would lay down his life
> for others. Thats the whole sticking point here.
"I didn't see you explicitly ask if any atheists here would lay
down their lives for others. If that was your sticking point,
I wish you had been more specific in saying it."
"I would lay down my life for the people I love. I would
probably risk it for a stranger (depending on the relative
odds, of course)."
> My God died for you.
> You find this strange?
"I find it strange that he had himself killed in order to allow
himself to forgive us for the flaws he created for us, according
to the story."
> Why would anyone die for another?
"I imagine to save them. Now, the real question is, why would
anyone die for another when they didn't have to - they could
save the other person by just snapping their fingers."
"That's what omnipotent implies, BTW - if your God is
omnipotent, he could have saved us just by willing us
to be saved. No death required. So why die for another
when you don't have to?"
> Why would
> anyone put themselves in harms way to save others?
"Why would anyone put themselves in harms way to
save others when all it would take for saving others
is a trivial act of will. An omnipotent being wills it,
and ta-dah, they're saved."
> Why wouldn't they
> preserve themselves first?
> The answer is LOVE. Love is not self centered.
"But why the masochism? Why get born, tortured,
die, come back, when all you had to do was will
the results you wanted?"
Mohit Ahuja
Why save those who would serve the devil?
What better way to show those who you want to trust in you than by showing them
the ultimate sacrifice?
Antoon Pardon
: Abner Mintz wrote:
: > : "True - lack of evidence is not evidence of lack, after all.
: Antoon Pardon <apa...@rc4.vub.ac.be> wrote:
: > I disagree, it depend on wether one has searched for evidence or
: > not. If a search was conducted and turned up nothing, then that
: > IMO is evidence of lack.
: "We may just have to disagree on this one. IMO, if
: something doesn't show up, that isn't evidence of
: universal lack - just evidence of lack in the areas
: you searched. Do you see where I am going with this?"
Sure, does that mean you just lack belief in aether. The experi-
ment set up to show its presence and which failed was just evi-
dence of lack where they conducted the experiment. It could be
hidden anywhere else?
IMO a concept carries with it the idea where it is likely to
leave evidence. Then if no evidence is found where one thought
it would be likely, we have indeed evidence for the lack of the
concept as originally thought off.
I would like you to explain, how the excuse: not in that place,
would differ from the excuse: not exactly that kind of X. If I
claim there is a mouse in your house and you go in search for the
usual evidence and don't find any, I could simply say, that this
is a mouse that doesn't leave the usual kind of evidence. So you
shouldn't believe there is no mouse in the house, but only have
lack of believe, because you just lack evidence for the usual
kind of mouse.
: "On the other hand, IMO the default position is lack
: of belief in the face of lack of evidence, so I end up
: a weak atheist. Do you end up as a strong atheist?"
I depends, I have given the question some thought and depending
from which view I start I end up seeing myself as a weak atheist
or as a strong atheist. But I think strong atheist is the best
suited label for me.
Dave Haas
says...
> In article <7sdet5$i...@chronicle.concentric.net>,
> Dr. Monkey <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
> >
> >Keith Doyle <ke_ith_d@ne_tco_m.com> wrote in message
> >news:7scrnt$g...@dfw-ixnews21.ix.netcom.com...
> >>
> >> If I think the price of gasoline is unfair, or the acceptable school entry
> >> score is unfair, I will ask to make an exception for EVERYONE, not just
> >me,
> >> which is what I'm doing here. I'm just making the same kind of claim for
> >the
> >> price of salvation, as I think that belief is an unfair price for
> >salvation.
> >
> >is beleive that Jesus Christ, came and died for you. If anything is unfair
> >in this, it's that he had to die in your place.
>
You can't argue with someone who is convinced he is right and everyone
else is wrong. Well....... You can... but you might as well try teach a
frog to do calculus.
D. Haas
Stefan Danyluc
Dr. Monkeyspank <drmonk...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <7sdfo7$i...@chronicle.concentric.net>,
> "Dr. Monkey" <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
> >
> > Dr. Monkeyspank <drmonk...@my-deja.com> banged out with his
monkey
> > paws in message news:7sd7t8$37u$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > >
> > > And if you decide not to wear that black tie, your party host
Yahweh
> > > will cast your sorry ass into an eternal burning torment. He's the
> > > Holy Host with the Most.
> > >
> > > snip <
> > >
> > > Not if you'll burn in eternal agony for making the wrong decision.
> > > Why does this god have such a bloodlust?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not blood!
A sin has been committed and somebody has been wronged!
Even humans when cut off on the freeway get a quick hopeful vision of
catastrophe for the offending driver, or when they get ripped off in
some insignificant transaction secretly harbor fantasies of some
dreadful payback.
The payment must be blood!
What should He accept? ...pansies? ...sunflowers? ...soybeans?
========================================================================
> > > If this god had any sense of decency and humanity, he'd simply zap
> > > out of existence the souls that don't cut the mustard for him.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
zap 'em outta existence? that's downright permanent and cruel.
========================================================================
> > > Instead, he chooses to torture them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ma'-lar-key. They choose it. Where does it say He tortures them.
They just get left behind. Why would he have to stick around and
torture them. They'll have enough torture as it is.
========================================================================
Since this god is subject to
no
> > > power over him, the only conclusion to draw is that he gets
pleasure
> > > out of this.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well you got the wrong conclusion, there, Doctor.
..."For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the
LORD GOD: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye"
..."Say unto them, As I live, saith the LORD GOD, I have no pleasure in
the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live:
turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of
Israel?"
... ( The Book of EZEKIEL, 18:32, and 33:11 ) ...
He wants you to repent and turn to Him and live.
It's your choice.
========================================================================
> > > Some Christians do say that these poor souls really are zapped out
> > > of existence, but these Christians are few in number.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those Christians know less of the Bible than atheists.
..."And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that
have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither
shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all
flesh."
... ( The Book of ISAIAH 66:24 ) ...
And in The Gospel of Mark, Jesus says the same thing three times in the
same speech, "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched"
... ( The Gospel of Mark 9:44 and 46 and 48 ) ...
And then in The Gospel of Matthew, Jesus brings it up some more times.
( EVERLASTING FIRE )
..."And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate
them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats."
..."And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the
left."
..."Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me,
ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his
angels:"
..."And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the
righteous unto life eternal."
... ( The Gospel of Matthew 25:32,33 and 25:41 and 25:46 ) ...
Jesus also mentioned the permanency of hell in Matthew 23:33,
..."Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the
damnation of hell?"
So, I believe it's safe to say, I think He meant it.
========================================================================
At least
they
> > > are recognizing the barbarism of this theology and trying to
rectify
> > > it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
They are compromising the truth. They should know better. People are
following their precepts thinking they will be "zapped" out of their
miserable existance, only to find themselves in a permanent eternity of
hell.
========================================================================
> > You had your soap box. I'll leave your statements out there,
> > hanging. Your not interested in discourse.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Are you saying that because you are hesitant to address one of the
most
> cogent arguments against this biblical god?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll address it.
========================================================================
That argument being that
a
> god of love cannot act like such a barbaric monster and cast his
> creation into eternal torment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not?
========================================================================
Or can he?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If it's His creation He can do whatever wants.
========================================================================
>
> You can make all the free will arguments you want,
------------------------------------------------------------------------
why bother.
========================================================================
and draw those
gentle
> analogies. But the fact remains that your party host orders some
hired
> thugs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
what? WTH are you talking about?
========================================================================
to take the guests who refuse to wear black ties
------------------------------------------------------------------------
black ties? WTH are you talking about?
========================================================================
out back behind
> the house and has them manacled and tortured
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean the devil? It's only for a thousand years. *sheesh*
========================================================================
-- forever. That, Dr.
> Monkey, is the rest of the analogy that you're leaving out.
>
> --
> ------------------------ Dr. Monkeyspank ---------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not like you don't have a choice. Besides, if you don't believe
it's true anyway, then "WTH" ...(w.t.h.) are you worried about anyway?
Why do atheests keep claiming the Bible god doesn't exist, then turn
around and call the non-existent entity a "barbaric monster"
They need not worry about whether their name will be written in the book
of life, since they think it is all a myth anyway.
steven
..."And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the
books were opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged
out of those things which were written in the books, according to their
works."
..."And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell
delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man
according to their works."
..."And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the
second death."
..."And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast
into the lake of fire."
... ( THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE 20:12-15 ) ...
========================================================================
DarkAngel
> You can't argue with someone who is convinced he is right and everyone
> else is wrong. Well....... You can... but you might as well try teach a
> frog to do calculus.
At least the frog might learn something, which will be infinitely more productive.
--
a.a atheist #1172 sXe BAAWA
Smash the State NRK4U
"No one is free when others are oppressed"
"Religion is regarded by the common people
as true, by the wise as false, and by the
rulers as useful."
- Seneca (4 bce - 65 ce)
Sasha
Dr. Monkey <dr.m...@jungle.org>
> Yes, but I've never seen you. I've only read your writings. Should I
> beleive you exist? I have no way, at this point in time, to substantiate
> your claim to exist
An average adult human being, with a thinking not clouded by mind-altering
chemicals, or bible-induced dogmatism, will make a reasonable assumption
that people do exist in reality when their letters are read. If, after
reading someone's message, a letter, or a book, you still do not think the
author exists, you are simply a brain-dead moron.
B. Richardson
> Dr. Monkey <dr.m...@jungle.org> wrote:
> > I still have not seen ONE atheist who has said he would lay down his life
> > for others. Thats the whole sticking point here.
Well, I'd surely die to save my wife and if I had children I'd do the same for
them and I don't believe in your God.
And my job as a Secret Service agent requires me to ensure the safety of our
protectees-- with my life if necessary. I hope it never comes to that, but if
it does, so be it.
So here you have it-- an atheist who meets your criteria. Now what?
Dr. Monkey
> snip <
>
> "When you paint with broad strokes making attacks on
> all atheists, you attack me ... among others. It would
> be like if I said all Christians were violent because of
> the Christian who assaulted me years ago - if I call
> all Christians violent, I am calling *you* violent (assuming
> you are a Christian here - please correct me if I am wrong);
> if I confine myself to calling that one guy violent, I'm not
> attacking you at all."
>
Point taken. And I'm sorry for the moron, claiming to be a Christian was
violent towards you.
> snip <
> "Similarly, if you had said 'it seems that you civility left
> with your belief in God' to that person you were arguing
> with, I wouldn't have objected; again, that's between you
> and him. But when you say 'Does civil behavior depart
> with the disbelief in God?' I feel a need to comment, because
> your brush tarred myself and a number of others who had
> done nothing to offend you."
>
I agree that you, and maybe a couple of others have been civil. But, look
at many of those that claim to be atheists who have responded to my posts.
The majority are making personal attacks on me, rather than making any
factual arguments.
It seems many do not even know why they don't beleive in God. They are
just here to attack a Christian and I have given them ammunition to do so.
No complaints, they show their true colors when they do so.
So, in my attempt to be civil, I will not respond to those in your ranks who
do so. This way I will restrain myself from calling all atheists morons,
just because of the actions of others.
It was to this seemingly common practice amongst many of your fellow
atheists this was directed.
> "Now do you see my point? Please confine your attacks
> on an individual atheist to the person who offended you,
> rather than attacking all atheists on the basis of one
> (or a few) atheists offending you."
Done.
Dr. Monkey
Sasha <Sash...@zdnetmail.com> wrote in message
news:Y0MG3.835$Lh.153741@pm02news...
> snip <
> An average adult human being, with a thinking not clouded by mind-altering
> chemicals, or bible-induced dogmatism, will make a reasonable assumption
> that people do exist in reality when their letters are read. If, after
> reading someone's message, a letter, or a book, you still do not think the
> author exists, you are simply a brain-dead moron.
>
Ok, you have a book full of letters from God, yet you say he doesn't exist.
So, in your own words, "If, after reading someone's message, a letter, or a
book, you still do not think the author exists, you are simply a brain-dead
moron."
Note: No personal attacks were made against this author. I simply turned
the cheek and the words.
Keith Doyle
Mohit Ahuja <mah...@olemiss.edu> wrote:
>For separation and to show love.
>Why save those who would serve the devil?
>What better way to show those who you want to trust in you than by showing them
>the ultimate sacrifice?
Except it was not an ultimate sacrifice for Jesus if he in fact was
God-- what's human life to an immortal? Now if he suffered eternal
damnation in our place, that would be more consistent with your point.
A Jesus who's God risked nothing. He could come back today as human
all over again if he wanted-- where's the sacrifice if you can do that?
I'd say someone who wants us to buy something grandiose but completely
sight unseen and without any evidence is some kind of charlatan or con
man. So the question in my mind is-- which devil are you serving?
--
Keith Doyle
(remove underbars in reply address for E-mail)
"Of learned men, the clergy shows the lowest development of professional
ethics. Any pastor is free to cadge customers from the divines of
rival sects, and to denounce the divines themselves as theological quacks."
- H. L. Mencken
Dr. Monkey
Vandar <vand...@aol.com> wrote in message news:37EB0CD5...@aol.com...
>
> The best racing at Indy is in July (the Brickyard 400). But that is
another
> topic..
>
Dr. Monkey
Dr. Monkeyspank <drmonk...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:7sfrmo$vke$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> >
> > You had your soap box. I'll leave your statements out there,
> > hanging. Your not interested in discourse.
>
> god of love cannot act like such a barbaric monster and cast his
>
> You can make all the free will arguments you want, and draw those gentle
> analogies. But the fact remains that your party host orders some hired
> the house and has them manacled and tortured -- forever. That, Dr.
> Monkey, is the rest of the analogy that you're leaving out.
No, I said that because I didn't like your attitude, or your language.
(which I deleted, because I won't have certain word's associated with my
posts)
Using your analogy, we are a barbaric society because we gas those that
committed murder. How indecent of us to punish them that way. They only
killed someone.
If, I tell you, don't touch the stove, you'll get burned and you touch the
stove, a
am I at fault for making the stove?
Ok, in this society, yes, I could be sued. I guess that is what we
'enlightened' people have become. We won't take responsibility for our
actions, we want to blame others.
You are blaming God, for making and sending to hell those that rebel against
him. He said, you don't have to go, just accept my son. You said no, I
don't want to, you barbarian.
Name calling doesn't get you anywhere in life, or the after life. Someday
you will learn this.
And I never stated my God is gentle. One who is at war is not gentle.
You surrender or face the consequences. Thats Gods position.